When academic schedules do not fit in with the rhythms of life

The growing adoption of flexible working arrangements with adapted schedules and workloads could suggest that the traditional model of the 'ideal worker', associated with long hours and constant availability, is changing. In practice, however, many institutions continue to organise themselves around permanent availability and linear career paths — a model that does not reflect the realities of a significant proportion of the workforce, particularly women.

In a university setting, motherhood, caregiving responsibilities and processes related to menstruation and reproductive health can introduce non-linear work rhythms and productivity. Nevertheless, academic evaluation systems remain based on the concept of a neutral, consistent and perpetually accessible workforce. Merit is mainly measured by quantitative indicators such as publications, citations and project acquisition, which influence opportunities, visibility and career progression.

Evidence shows that these metrics are not neutral. Orkestra's Equality Plan reveals that women are less visible and participate less in key academic activities, such as publications and conferences, a pattern also observed in other contexts.

One of the mechanisms contributing to this inequality is the emphasis placed on early and consistent productivity, which disadvantages interruptions related to motherhood and caregiving. While many female researchers experience a temporary decline in scientific output following the birth of their children, which is then followed by a recovery, the emphasis placed on early achievements reduces their chances of promotion and job security (Kim & Moeser, 2025).

This pattern, known as the 'motherhood effect' and widely documented in the labour market, is also evident in economics, which is one of Orkestra's core areas of expertise. Alaitz Ayarza and Nagore Iriberri's (EHU) analysis, based on the publication trajectories of individuals in 36 high-impact economics journals, reveals that, despite an increased presence of women in recent cohorts, production gaps persist throughout their careers, primarily due to shorter trajectories and greater challenges in maintaining a career in the field.

However, these results highlight a wider issue that extends beyond motherhood. Responsibilities such as childcare, caring for elderly or dependent persons, and managing domestic work act as structural factors of inequality in women's academic careers. This 'second shift' reduces the time available, and mental energy required, for competitive research activity, which has a persistent effect on the continuity of academic careers.

Added to this burden is the organisation of university work itself. Evaluation systems prioritise quantifiable research output over other essential institutional tasks. All too often, female academics find themselves taking on what is known as 'university domestic work', such as intensive teaching, administrative tasks, tutoring, providing student support, and community building. These tasks are essential, yet they are rarely recognised in accreditation and promotion processes. As our colleagues Miren Estensoro and Edurne Magro point out, this contributes to the maintenance of a 'false meritocracy'. Similarly, Lorea Romero Gutiérrez, another researcher at our university, emphasises the impact of these time- and energy-intensive tasks, which are not reflected in performance indicators, on women's physical and mental health and their professional development in academia.

Another frequently overlooked issue is the impact of symptoms and disorders associated with the menstrual cycle. The stigma and fear of being perceived as unprofessional, coupled with inadequate infrastructure and institutional policies for managing pain or functional changes, hinder the recognition of this issue. Even in contexts where legal frameworks for menstrual leave exist, they are rarely used (for example, in Spain, fewer than 5% of potential beneficiaries use the system). Premenstrual disorders, dysmenorrhoea and heavy menstrual flow reduce concentration and efficiency and generate dynamics of presenteeism. This occurs when women remain at their posts despite performing below their capacity. The result is invisible and cumulative productivity losses (Schoep et al., 2019).

In a system that assumes continuous, uninterrupted trajectories, breaks or fluctuations are often seen as a lack of commitment rather than a result of societal conditions. This mismatch contributes to the well-known 'leaky pipeline' effect, whereby women progressively drop out of academia throughout their careers.

Through these lines, we aim to challenge the apparent neutrality of scientific evaluation systems and open up a discussion about the academic career model they promote. Therefore, our aspirations are as follows:

1. Contribute to the development of discourses on devoting oneself to academia that recognise our emotions, desires and bodies.
2. Highlight that an institutional model presupposing a neutral, stable and always available body conflicts with women's realities, forcing them to compensate for these demands through overexertion.
3. Move towards systems that are more in line with the nature of academic activity, which we understand to be creative, relational and dependent on the rhythms of life.