Talk

Advanced search

To think that "we require a 5 year job history with no gaps"

(202 Posts)
PyongyangKipperbang Tue 30-Jun-20 14:27:48

is effectively saying "We dont want anyone with young kids"?

And it will disproportionately affect women who are usually the ones who give up work for a few years when the kids are little?

OP’s posts: |
CurtainsOpen Tue 30-Jun-20 14:28:35

Depends on the job.

birdwatching Tue 30-Jun-20 14:29:42

depends on the job. Mat leave does not show up on the CV as you are still employed. Most women wouldn't be affected.

defaultusername Tue 30-Jun-20 14:29:48

Mat leaves etc aren't "gaps." It means no one who went travelling for a bit, or has been unemployed. Unfair, probably.

But statutory leave isn't a CV gap. It's statutory leave.

magicmarkerz Tue 30-Jun-20 14:30:34

Maternity leave isn’t a gap, as you’re still employed.

justmyview Tue 30-Jun-20 14:30:40

If they're asking for 5 years uninterrupted work, perhaps that could be indirect discrimination against women

If they just want to know what you've been doing for 5 years, and would accept "career break", then I think it's OK

defaultusername Tue 30-Jun-20 14:30:57

Oh, I see what you mean. No, because either sex can take a career break, for whatever reason they like.

It's well known that staying out of the workplace damages your CV.

PyongyangKipperbang Tue 30-Jun-20 14:33:17

I realise that ML is counted as employment. I am talking about leaving work for (say) 2 years because child care costs make unworkable and then trying to re-enter the work place.

I agree that either sex can take a break but lets face it, we all know that women are the ones who take time out when the kids come along the vast majority of the time and how it affects their long term prospects.

It just seems a bit off to me.

OP’s posts: |
Frozenfrogs86 Tue 30-Jun-20 14:33:30

Absolutely it is since many, many more women take a break from work ( not just mat leave) when they have children. Unless it just wants you to explain for safeguarding purposes e.g writing I was a stay at home parent from x date to y date. In which case I think that would be fine.

Anotherunimaginativeusername Tue 30-Jun-20 14:35:08

I think it means 5 years employment history with no unexplained gaps. At least that's been the case for jobs I've applied for in the past...so they want to know what you were doing during the past 5 years not necessarily that you've had continuous employment in that time. What sector/industry is it?

MrsTerryPratchett Tue 30-Jun-20 14:35:33

I think it probably does discriminate. Not overtly but that's normal.

okiedokieme Tue 30-Jun-20 14:36:10

I had a 10 year requirement, if you had a gap eg career break you stated that. What they didn't want was leaving certain jobs off

Shinyletsbebadguys Tue 30-Jun-20 14:36:43

That doesn't mean you can't have had a gap though it means you need to explain the reason. I'm more than a bit nonplussed by this? I've gone for jobs with two sets of maternity leave and it hasn't been an issue I've simply recorded it as maternity leave.

BabyMoonPie Tue 30-Jun-20 14:37:14

It's hard to say without knowing what the job is. Having continuous employment might be necessary to ensure you are competent to perform the job or up to date with eg regulations

Goosefoot Tue 30-Jun-20 14:37:21

Yes, it's more likely to affect women as having kids is a very common reason to take a career break (who are these people assuming that always means they are on maternity leave???)

But also people who have been ill or had to care for an elderly parent or...

It's a pretty unpleasant requirement actually, unless they are a very unusual sort of job where they need someone right away with lots of active experience for safety reasons etc. They are probably shit employers all round so I'd be wary of working for them.

burnoutbabe Tue 30-Jun-20 14:38:03

they would also be ruling out anyone contracting, anyone made redundant and took 1-2 months to find a job.

I assume they mean, they want to be able to prove the last 5 years (i had to confirm that a friend was on maternity leave between jobs to a recruiter)

user1493413286 Tue 30-Jun-20 14:38:11

When my work put this on job applications they mean an explanation for any gaps rather than just a gap so
2015-2017 - job 1
2017-2018 travelling/took time out to care for my children/time spent studying
2018-2020 job 2
In can be due to safer recruiting.

FieldOverFence Tue 30-Jun-20 14:38:26

I would actually take that to mean that they want to know your employment history over the last five years, and if career break to raise a family was a part of that, just explain that. I would think that they're just trying to avoid holes where they don't know what the person was doing maybe ?

BoxAndKnife Tue 30-Jun-20 14:38:56

Yes, it's discriminatory.

What's the job?

Snailsetssail Tue 30-Jun-20 14:39:07

It doesn’t mean they will only employ someone who has been continually employed; it means there can’t be any gaps when explaining where you have been over the last 5 years. Non employment is fine, as long as there is a reason for it. You just write “raising family” etc.

Luzina Tue 30-Jun-20 14:39:08

When I worked in HR we required explanation for full 5 yr history, therefore a gap of 2 years being SAHM was fine as long as it was acknowledged/explained

Lougle Tue 30-Jun-20 14:39:41

It's as others have said: It just means that you have to give a reason for gaps. 'Caring for sick relatives/child care/traveling the world....'

JimMaxwellantheshippingforcast Tue 30-Jun-20 14:40:02

Is it not just to make sure you weren't in prison, for safeguarding purposes?

PyongyangKipperbang Tue 30-Jun-20 14:40:27

I have never come across this before and does say "Job history with no gaps" rather than "Employment history" but that may be down to bad wording from whoever wrote the ad.

OP’s posts: |
LakieLady Tue 30-Jun-20 14:41:01

I think it could be indirect discrimination. It will affect far more women than men, as it's more common for the mother to take a career break while caring for pre-school children than the father.

It could also discriminate against people with disabilities caused by fluctuating conditions, who have had to stop work because of ill-health for long periods.

Join the discussion

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

Get started »