The NYT has the story here:
Alison Davis-Blake, dean of the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, said these findings “clearly conform to what I see on the ground every day,” adding that “the extra year for men just disadvantages women.”
The problem, said Ms. Davis-Blake, is that “giving birth is not a gender-neutral event,” recalling that during her pregnancy, “I threw up every day.” She argued, “Policies that are neutral in the eyes of a lawyer are not neutral in fact.”
Yup. That’s exactly how it goes. Add in total absence of extended family in town – since academics move cross country for their job – and you got it: it’s way harder to be a mom while being an academic. No help from anybody, ever – check.
Does this hurt women who choose not to split themselves between a career and motherhood?
Indirectly, yes, because they don’t get the extra year dads do while mom does most of the work. How many men faculty do you know who choose not to “split themselves” between a career and fatherhood?
I read the study behind the headlines and was not persuaded. I wrote up a critique here: https://hardsci.wordpress.com/2016/06/28/dont-change-your-family-friendly-tenure-extension-policy-just-yet/
UO has its work cut out for it addressing pay equity, childcare, parental and family leave, etc. I’m sure it seems attractive to think we could strike a blow for equality on the cheap by rolling back a benefit, but I don’t think it will be that easy.