rejected for being a mum

(33 Posts)
disgustec Thu 17-Jul-14 22:08:35

After many years and with our youngest now 16, my decided to go back to wok. She went to an interview that last all of 3 min where she could not be employed a he had not worked or signed on in the last 10 years. Discriminatory or what

Figster Thu 17-Jul-14 22:09:59

Did she have relevant skills for the job she was being interviewed for?

chanie44 Fri 18-Jul-14 08:43:03

Need more details before I can comment!!!

Trapper Fri 18-Jul-14 08:52:50

Rejected for being a mum, or rejected for not having recent relevant experience for a skilled role?

Can you clarify?

Preciousbane Fri 18-Jul-14 08:57:45

Does need clarification

I think your saying that due to being out of the workplace for ten years they viewed her unfavourably.

There is a world of difference between no recent experience meaning you are overlooked to we don't want to employ a Mother.

disgustec Sat 19-Jul-14 11:08:22

She had all the skills necessary for the job. She was turned away because she cannot show a full ten year work history or having been in receipt of unemployment benefit for the last ten years .As a stay at home mum with working husband she could not sign on for unemployment benefit.

Heels99 Sat 19-Jul-14 11:10:32

You don't end to have a 10 year work histor or claimed benefits to get a job. This doesn't sound right, was the interview with an employer?

gallicgirl Sat 19-Jul-14 11:11:25

The employer is obviously an idiot then and she's had a lucky escape.

Does her cv need revamping? I assume it explains the employment gap.

nigerdelta Sat 19-Jul-14 11:12:23

She also could have no work history for 10+ yrs because of her own chronic illness, travelling, caring for a family member, or a lazy cow. Unless you can show that as a woman she's more likely to be in almost all of those categories (so indirect gender discrimination) then you've no legal case to make.

Better to think constructively about how to get some work experience & up to date references. Temp work can be good.

amyhamster Sat 19-Jul-14 11:14:04

There could have been numerous reasons
Just focus on the next opportunity & move on
She could start by volunteering at the local library - they always need IT buddies, home library volunteers etc

Jinsei Sat 19-Jul-14 11:15:46

I can't understand why an employer would need evidence of you having signed on when not working. confused

However, the problem is not that she is a mother.

Viviennemary Sat 19-Jul-14 11:16:19

I don't think it's discrimination for being a Mum. But she has no relevant up to date experience or training or qualifications to enable her to enter the workplace. She will have to work on the best way to get up to date references and some work experience and qualifications.

NotCitrus Sat 19-Jul-14 12:30:21

Do they just need proof of what she has been doing for 10 years? A personal reference and child benefits payments should cover that.

Kimaroo Sat 19-Jul-14 12:42:08

Surely they would have read her cv first before the interview and know that for 10 years she was bringing up the children? Seems odd to me. If it is as you say, then she has had a lucky escape from an employer who doesn't understand that people have choices. What if she had spent 10 years globe-trotting on an inheritance or the many other reasons why people don't sign on? I never did for the 12 years I stayed at home with the children.

I would imagine most people put in their job history eg 2004 - 2014 bringing up family. And then in the relevant skills section, list all the stuff from those 10 years that could be useful like multitasking, volunteering, managing behaviours etc. depending on the job. Nothing for an employer to nit-pick there.

Jinsei Sat 19-Jul-14 12:44:13

What was the job?

WeAllHaveWings Sat 19-Jul-14 13:05:58

Our company imports to US and joined the C TPAT (trade partnership against terrorism) initiative. T be part of this they must perform background checks on all potential employees and these include employment history - I don't know everything about it, but was told by a colleague that if someone had a broken employment history (periods not employed aNd not signing on) they were harder to take on.

disgustec Sat 19-Jul-14 14:50:20

Someone who has been on the dole also has none of these experiences but they are excepted.

Jinsei Sat 19-Jul-14 14:51:48

So what's the job?

Petallic Sat 19-Jul-14 14:55:51

10 year work history with no gaps is sometimes advertised with jobs that are connected to finance, cash handling or jobs that require more than a basic security check.

Petallic Sat 19-Jul-14 14:57:21

If someone was in the sole they have something to prove what they were doing at that time. It's the 10 year checkable history they are interested in. I saw a job this morning on Indeed that said the same but can't find it again now.

Petallic Sat 19-Jul-14 14:57:38

*on the dole

disgustec Sat 19-Jul-14 14:59:18

They won't except this you have to have been in work or signing on for unemployment benefit which a mum can't do

Jinsei Sat 19-Jul-14 15:03:15

Well, perhaps she needs to look for a different kind of job then, if she can't pass the security check for this one.

<trying to resist the urge to point out that, actually, a mum can work or claim unemployment benefit if they choose to, and indeed, many do!>

RiojaHaze Sat 19-Jul-14 15:03:25

I used to sell security systems and for the company to be part of the professional body, all employees had to have a 10 year proven record.

forago Sat 19-Jul-14 15:09:09

I'm a mum and have got a 20 year constant work history, I've never had more than a couple of weeks between jobs since finishing university. I had 3 maternity leaves of 9-11 months but, as a full time employee, I was still classed as employed by the company and went back to the same job each time.

I know literally 100's of women with children in the same position.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now