Snow: another reason for small business not to employ mothers?(135 Posts)
OK, let me just say from the start this is probably trolling - and if you take it that way then I apologise as I don't mean offence to any individual personally, I just want to genuinely get the feel for the other side of the argument. I have a DD and a wife but she has had to take the day off work today as our daughter's school is shut. (Yes, I could've taken the day off instead of her, but we agreed mutually that I had more important things to do than her as I run a small business and she is part of a public sector which deals better).
My point is, with the majority of children coming from divorced and single homes these days, AIBU to not employ a single mum to my small business (when there is a man EQUALLY qualified to fill the job) because of all the time off they need and the risk even of them deciding to get pregnant again and force me through all merry dances of temps/maternity pay/will she/won't she come back/ etc.
There seems to be a knee jerk reaction that any such talk of the reality of this is sexist, but surely it is a fair point to at least accept the reality and have a discussion. However, I understand if someone feels the need to report this thread as it does pose some uncomfortable questions.
I think the problem is that you have decided your job is more important than hers. If everyone thinks like you, of course this will be an ongoing issue. If parents share there joint responsibilities more equally, attitiudes will change.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
any such talk of the reality of this is sexist
What is sexist is the assumption that the woman is the one who must take time off when the child unexpectedly needs looking after, when it takes two to make a child.
You might want to join in the webchat later this week regarding shared/flexible parental leave.
Exactly what the elegantly titled EuroShagmore said
Yes, EuroShagmore has put it perfectly.
Could you provide the stats for your claim that the majority of children grow up in single parent households headed by a mother?
You know parental leave can be taken by both parents (inc part of maternity leave), don't you?
Did your wife take annual leave today then?
You say that your wife's work could cope better without her than yours could cope with you - and this may be true depending on the nature of what you do (you couldn't take some paperwork home?), but you have already decided between you that she will take on a job that allows her this flexibility. You have already decided that her job is less important before the question even comes up. She has taken on a job-that-can-be-missed deliberately so that in cases like this she can take the day off.
If you are worried about your employees taking time off when it snows then:
1 - make it so that working for you is an interesting and valuable and high-ranking sort of job, so your employees can be the ones to say "my job is more important"
2 - make it so that your employees care about the company, so that they want to do the best they can by you and their coworkers, so they'll do their utmost not to let you and each other down
3 -make it possible for your employees to work flexibly, to take work home or to work flexible hours, and make it so that they know that they are trusted to do this and get things done - that way if they unexpectedly can't come in they can still get some work done
You dont know the individual circumstances of anyone you may employ. You may employ a single m9ther with loads of readilly available back up childcare. You may employ a man who takes time off sick at a drop of a hat. You may employ a man who takes his family responsibilities seriously. You may employ someone who develops a serious medical problem.
Case is shit happens all over. You cant second guess and as an employer you should hire the person best for the job at hand regardless.
As a woman I feel I have to be better than my male counterparts. You get me you get that much better for free.
The OP is talking about single parent homes which are, largely, run by the mums.
I think it's definitely a tough one. No you shouldn't discriminate, you should take the best person for the job. But I can understand the temptation for a small empoyer not to take a single parent of either gender (and I am a single mum working for a relatively small business (private school).)
I agree with Euro - the problem is thar in general, childcare is seen as the mothers problem rather than equal responsibilty of both parents. You are perpetuating that by the fact you stated that your job is more important. What if you employed a man whose partner was an essential service (e.g nurse / paramedic / doctor) and you had a phone call to say he wasn't coming in as his partners job was more important, in case of school closure / child sickness; would you then decide you would only employ single people with no family committments at all?
OK, everyone shoot me, but I can see where the OP is coming from. The sad fact of the matter is that women are still seen as the primary care givers and there are more children living with single mums than dads. It's a chicken and egg situation and it is worthy of discussion.
Of course the attitude is sexist. Your job is more important because you have a penis or because you and your wife decided it was?
I think Trills make some very good points, but I think Zealey does have a point, even if its not quite the one he thinks it is.
It's very noticeable on the employment forums that in many male-female couples, the mothers are the ones taking all the time off, because 'their husbands jobs are too important / well paid to risk'. They see that they're doing the best thing for their family by not having their DH appear any less than 100% committed to his employer.
So I think that further emphasises Trills' point 1 - the job has to be seen as worthwhile to the family as a whole.
There are plenty of women who have taken on important paid work.
You assuming their job is worth less to them than a man you employ IS sexist.
I don't get it.
If the only reason that you went to work and your wife stayed home is because you work for a small business and she doesn't, then surely if the woman worked for the small business and the man didn't, then the man would stay home.
And if they both worked for small businesses, then they would share the load equally, and there would be no disparity between the sexes.
at your logic...
I don't think YABU. I'm a mother, after having children I chose a job that I could do that would allow me to be flexible because I knew there would be times that I would need flexibility.
I am a single mother and small business owner and have to say yabvu.
How do you know that a single mother doesn't have adequate back up childcare for snow or illness or whatever? I certainly do.
However attitudes like yours (apart from being discriminatory) are the reason i'm sure many business owners don't employ women. When are the male species going to accept equal responsibility for the care of their children? Please drag your arse into the 21st century.
You should employ the best person for the job.
single divorced mum. I NEED to work. Like the majority of us who are raising a child on their own. I consider I am more reliable then a lot of men as I need to work to keep a roof over my child's head and food in her stomach. A single man can bugger off any time as he has nil responsibilities
My husband's employer has the same attitude as you OP. we have similar jobs and responsibilities so have to split care when DC is ill etc. makes our lives so much harder with such small minded attitudes!
If you actually want to have a discussion about this, try posting in a less twatish way and stop being deliberately patronising & provoking.
Oh - read it properly now.
You're only planning on discriminating against divorced or otherwise single mothers (and presumably fathers with care...)
Well, that makes perfect sense then.
You'd be fucked if you employed my DH
He does most of the childcare and all the cover if DS is ill or the nursery is closed.
And you wouldn't be able to afford me, despite my ready avaliability and lack of need for time off the children.
The problem - if this is a legitimate discussion - is that the only solution he proposes is punishing mothers instead of fathers stepping up. Always the case. If there's a social issue the answer is always to curtail women.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.