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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

HR Email...

63 replies

YouBetterWerk · 09/01/2015 10:42

Name changed in case I out myself!
I was going to post this in AIBU but thought FC was actually more fitting.

I have recently been made permanent at my job and received this Email from HR when I got in this morning:

^Please can you see * in Finance and confirm your marital status to her. I understand your title is Miss but we are not to presume this means you are single. This is needed for payroll.^

I know the Ms/Mrs/Miss has been done to death but really??
And the 'not to presume you are single' line irked me slightly too. Or am I over thinking it?

I responded with a confused email saying 'Perhaps just Ms then?'

I am really struggling though, and feel like I want to say more but don't know what.
The sender isn't in work today so I am hoping someone can tell me if I'm being oversensitive or if anything else should be said?

OP posts:

Report

HaroldsBishop · 09/01/2015 10:44

Just straight out ask them why they need your marital status?

flowery · 09/01/2015 10:46

I don't think there's anything wrong with them being told not to presume someone is single just because they go by Miss. I think the issue is why on earth do Payroll need to know your relationship status in the first place.

TheCowThatLaughs · 09/01/2015 10:48

It's not something to do with tax allowances is it?

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 09/01/2015 10:48

Why do they need to know your marital status?

Maybe * in finance would like to ask you out?

YouBetterWerk · 09/01/2015 10:52

Haha Moving I hadn't thought of that. Stretches out

It may be something to do with Tax, but even that is slightly weird isn't it? I think I'm just going to go up and ask...

OP posts:

YouBetterWerk · 09/01/2015 11:02

Ok, I have just been up and casually asked about it and I am told it is because it is 'a compulsory field. You are either Single, Married, Divorced or Other'
I am engaged and living with my partner and so I said.
'Oh, well, I guess 'Other' then?'
'No, you would be single. And when you get married you'll have to come back and let us know so we can change it'
I then faux-surprised and said 'Oh, wow, so does it effect my pay then?' and they laughed and said 'No, of course not'.
Because that would be silly.

OP posts:

TheCowThatLaughs · 09/01/2015 11:06

What a load of bollocks!

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 09/01/2015 11:06

I'd tell them to mind their own business. What a load of nonsense.

GilbertBlytheWouldGetIt · 09/01/2015 11:10

A man wouldn't have this issue. I'd point this out and ask them not to bother you again with this trivia.

GilbertBlytheWouldGetIt · 09/01/2015 11:10

I wonder what they think the "other" field is for?

YouBetterWerk · 09/01/2015 11:22

Indeed Gilbert. Married to cousin? Bigamist? Hermit?

OP posts:

flowery · 09/01/2015 11:25

To be fair to them, "compulsory field" probably means their payroll software won't process a new starter without a box being ticked. So a man would have this issue and it's less likely to be a sexist decision that female employees' marital status is relevant while male employees' status is not, and more likely to be a case of unnecessary bureaucracy.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 09/01/2015 11:30

Then they could just tick "other" for everyone flowery. Collecting data without a valid purpose is not permitted under the Data Protection Act.

A software issue (which this probably is) should be dealt with as a software issue, not an edict that must be followed. Not least because it's a massive waste of time. So far three or four people have been involved in what is literally a box ticking exercise. Madness.

GilbertBlytheWouldGetIt · 09/01/2015 11:31

Yes, they should just tick other, what's the purpose of it?

YouBetterWerk · 09/01/2015 11:33

I agree, Flowery, it's not my employer I'm annoyed at, but this system, and I did say something along the lines of 'What a strange system, how annoying for you'
(Although if they too had found it as ridiculous as I do I would maybe be a bit less peeved, but no one seems the least bit confused)

OP posts:

flowery · 09/01/2015 11:38

They could just tick other for everyone, but then some people would be offended at that and want it to say something else. And under the DP act data should be accurate, so they shouldn't just bung something in without checking with the employee what the accurate information is.

I agree it should be dealt with as a software issue, I never said otherwise. The OP could, if she is minded to, contact whoever is responsible for DP compliance and inform them that they might be collecting unnecessary data through their payroll software.

I said what it isnt is a sexist outrageous men-would-not-have-to-put-up-with-this issue.

loiner45 · 09/01/2015 11:39

Standard field built into a database because marital status might, at some point, be relevant (it used to be for tax purposes). Easier to build the information in than retrofit it. Software is likely to not be UK specific either, so in other tax jurisdictions (US?) it could be vital information. Applies to men as well as women. Annoying but just bureaucracy.

AMumInScotland · 09/01/2015 11:40

Chances are that field has been there for a long time, most payroll systems don't completely change their database structure very often. So, at times in the past the information has been needed. It could quite possibly be needed again in the future.

The admin staff have the choice of -

change everyone to 'other' and risk not having the information if the tax system changes to need it
leave older records as they are and not bothering to ask new starts, which leaves them with inconsistent garbage data if it changes
just ask. It's not a complicated or discriminatory question if they ask men as well.

YouBetterWerk · 09/01/2015 11:50

But they don't ask men, because men are just 'Mr'. (I am not in healthcare so none would be 'Dr') No men who work here have been asked.

OP posts:

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 09/01/2015 11:52

And do they ever review this data? Do they ask everyone? Because if not the data is already incorrect.

ProcrastIWillFinishThisLater · 09/01/2015 12:02

They might need to know for pension reasons or death in service grant (if you get one). Some benefits can only go to a surviving married partner.

Jackie0 · 09/01/2015 12:19

" they dont ask men because men are just Mr"
They had your title recorded as Miss, is that not the same though?
They have a title but marital status is unknown.
I'll be interested to hear what their logic is.
I was in a job a number of years and a missive came down that they needed our marital status. I though it was quite intrusive.
I was divorced and my area manager thought this was hilarious for some reason ,much fake embarrassment etc (nob)

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!

AMumInScotland · 09/01/2015 12:32

Then challenge it. They need to be able to explain why it is a compulsory field for women when it isn't for men, if it is 'needed' for the payroll.

JassyRadlett · 09/01/2015 12:38

Marital status can be relevant for pension beneficiaries if you die in service?

I know when DH was DP, I had to specifically name him as the beneficiary; it was automatic for spouses.

JassyRadlett · 09/01/2015 12:39

Sorry, Procrast, I missed your post!

Flip

1 2 3

Please create an account

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