Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

AIBU?

to think I should be able to go part time even though I don't have children

111 replies

suziepra · 02/08/2014 07:43

Hi,

I worked really hard when I was younger, paid off most of my mortgage so my outgoings are small now.

I requested to go part time but they just fobbed be off with its not suitable with my job, even though other people doing similar jobs with kids got this approved.

I feel peeved as its generally the rule that children is the only valid reason to go part time, I just want to enjoy my life more.

When I signed on the job centre threatened to stop the JSA because I was only applying for part time and as someone without children im expected to only look for full time work!

OP posts:

Report

BlackDaisies · 02/08/2014 07:47

I hadn't really thought about it before, but agree that you should be able to go part time. Maybe you need a good reason to convince them, such as you're trying to get a qualification in your own time. Or else find someone who would be prepared to job share with you.

angelos02 · 02/08/2014 07:48

YANBU I'm in a similar situation. I want to drop a day a week but because I don't happen to have children, management won't even consider it.

angelos02 · 02/08/2014 07:48

YANBU I'm in a similar situation. I want to drop a day a week but because I don't happen to have children, management won't even consider it.

freezation · 02/08/2014 07:50

What happened to your job (why are you now signing on)? If you're claiming JSA you can't really be choosy about the type of job/hours you do unless you have a really good reason such as caring responsibilities you just have to take what you can get.

Iffy2014 · 02/08/2014 07:54

That's a real shame on the part of your management. In my department, several staff are part-time/job sharing, and only three of them have children. As you say, some of them worked extremely hard when younger, and now they're a couple of decades in, they want to take the time to enjoy themselves.

One of them sorted her hours so she works long weekends- she spends nearly every weekend somewhere on the continent! Another has a bit of land in her village, so has taken up raising turkeys, chickens and sheep... perhaps you could give this as a reason to go part-time?!

dozily · 02/08/2014 07:54

I agree your work shouldn't discriminate against you because you have no children, which is effectively what they are doing. However I don't think you should get JSA when you are refusing to consider full time jobs.

spookyskeleton · 02/08/2014 07:56

Legislation now is such that anyone can apply for flexible working regardless of whether they have children or not.

Companies have to have a valid business reason to refuse requests and people with childcare would not be given priority - the recommendation is to consider requests an a first come first served basis.

Shardlakelover · 02/08/2014 07:57

Can you get JSA when you own a house? Incidentally, I think people without children should also be given the opportunity to work part time.

indigo18 · 02/08/2014 07:58

Seems you are being discriminated against for not having children, which doesn't sound right, especially as you have evidence that it is possible to do the job. I suppose the company don't want too many part-timers but have a look at employment law, maybe ask at Citizens' Advice?

Lunaballoon · 02/08/2014 08:00

I think the law has recently changed to give all employees the right to request flexible working regardless of whether they have children. But I guess ultimately it's still up to your employer.

suziepra · 02/08/2014 08:00

I'm not claiming JSA now, it was last year. But I had to stop signing on as I was only interested in part time work, as I didn't have children I had to apply full time. Felt this was unfair as I have paid a lot of tax in the past and I'm very clearly s net contributor.

OP posts:

suziepra · 02/08/2014 08:01

The law has changed, I applied on the day it changed but still management don't really give a toss. It should be irrelevant why I want to work part time.

OP posts:

KoalaDownUnder · 02/08/2014 08:01

What dozily said.

suziepra · 02/08/2014 08:03

Why is it OK for the job centre to discriminate if I don't have children? But not my employer?

OP posts:

Munchmallow · 02/08/2014 08:04

Of course you can claim JSA if you own a house, you still have to eat.

freezation · 02/08/2014 08:10

The job centre aren't really discriminating though are they? You can't be picky when you're on JSA. In the same way that you can't be too restrictive about the type of work you apply for, you can't be restrictive about the hours either. As long as you had applied for the requisite number of full time jobs you could apply for part time too. But the point of the job centre and JSA is to get people back in work ASAP which is less likely if you're being restrictive.

suziepra · 02/08/2014 08:14

IThe point of the job centre is not to get people back into work asap!!! Its to get people into long term employment or to help with training.

Its stupid to push people into jobs they dont want as they won't last long . shortnermism will be the end of the human race.

Me as a highly skilled professional should not be pushed into doing blue collar work, at to be fair to them they didn't and I had an agreement to only look for jobs that matched my skill set.

OP posts:

ViviPru · 02/08/2014 08:16

Companies have to have a valid business reason to refuse requests and people with childcare would not be given priority - the recommendation is to consider requests an a first come first served basis.

Exactly. And your colleagues who already have secured the arrangement came first. Whether they have children or not is now largely irrelevant legally speaking, although it's likely your company had more fear of potential legal bother from them (because they had DC) back when their request was granted, and this influenced their decision.

From an employment law perspective, you would have more of a case if in future your company agrees to a colleague going part time after your request was refused. But even then it would be hard to prove that you and your colleague are entirely equal even if you have the same job description.

Basically, your company has weighed up that it would rather take the risk of losing you as an employee altogether than grant you working hours that it feels are not convenient for it. Irrespective of YOUR reasons for wanting part time hours. Lousy for you, but entirely fair from a purely legal perspective

DurhamDurham · 02/08/2014 08:17

You can only sign on at the Job Centre if you are looking for full time work, that is the case whether you have children or not. You were not discriminated against there, you were treated exactly the same as everyone else.

freezation · 02/08/2014 08:19

Realistically it is I'm afraid. There is little help with training unless you are long term unemployed. Why shouldn't you do "blue collar work" just because you're a highly skilled professional? Isn't it better to be earning? Then you can continue to apply for the jobs you want.

Iffy2014 · 02/08/2014 08:22

Agreed with freezation, "blue collar work" should be perfectly fine whilst you continue to search for prospective employment that better suits. Gosh, nothing wrong with it at all, to have any job is better than no job, IMO.

Fairylea · 02/08/2014 08:22

Durham that's not the case. As a single parent on income support that became changed to jsa I was permitted to apply only for part time jobs for 16 hours as I had my daughter to look after. I didn't have to apply for full time work.

I think you have every right to be able to request part time hours where you work now but I don't think jsa should be changed. If you don't have children it is far easier for you to work any hours than someone who has to find childcare to fit around a job.

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

KoalaDownUnder · 02/08/2014 08:22

It's two completely different situations, though.

JSA is a payment of money from the government to keep people off the street. You're expected to take any job for which you're suitably skilled and available. As a person without children, you are available to work full-time, you just don't want to. Unlike parents who have children to care for.

Your employer needs someone to do X hours of work per week. If you and another employee are both willing and able to do those X hours, it shouldn't matter to them what you do with the rest of your time - caring for children or otherwise.

It does not seem unfairly discriminatory to me at all, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding JSA, as I'm not from the UK.

Glasshammer · 02/08/2014 08:23

I think new legislation was passed recently so that people without kids also had flexible working rights etc.

longjane · 02/08/2014 08:23

When you sign on all you have to apply for certain number of job s and go to any interviews you have.
That is all you do have to do arbout those jobs just apply for them.
When you get a job you want you stop signing on.
if you want to apply for part time jobs you can just don't tell the job centre.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.