Advanced search

This topic is for discussing childcare options. If you want to advertise, please use your Local site.

So, we are au pair recruiting again. We broke the last one.

(32 Posts)
bran Sun 09-Jun-13 19:25:39

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 21:22:20

I'm sorry if I've contributed to that feeling, bran. To be honest, I wasn't thinking of it so much in terms of parenting, my mind just wandered to thinking that most primary school teachers are female and how would that work when he started school, not realising that he was already at school with no issues.

I hope you get a good au pair sorted, from what I've seen it's a very stressful process.

OutragedFromLeeds Fri 14-Jun-13 20:55:45

I'm sorry you feel like that bran and I'm sure you're not a crap parent, but honestly if my 9 year old (with no SN) was so sexist that he refused to talk to a woman via Skype or even entertain the idea that a woman could be fun to be with I'd think something had gone seriously wrong somewhere.

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 20:47:53

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

OutragedFromLeeds Fri 14-Jun-13 19:32:15

Why is your DS so sexist? Does it not concern you at all? Does he have SN?

Nannies and au pairs seems to be an area of employment law where you can discriminate fairly freely. I see loads of ads looking for a certain gender, age range, ethnicity, religion. I'm pretty sure you couldn't advertise for a 'catholic builder' or a 'Chinese lollypop lady', but with nannies it seems to be ok.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 18:30:14

Ok...well as long as you know the rules, it's up to you if you break them smile

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 17:47:34

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 17:13:41

Off topic, but how do you imagine he'll cope if his teacher is female at school when he starts? Do you think he'll get over his gender bias by then?

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 17:12:24

That's your selection process though, bran.

If you had a selection pool of 4 candidates by skype, 2 men, 2 women, then your first 'interview test' would be 'will my DS come to speak to them.' If he won't with 2 candidates, then they're excluded, regardless of their gender. If they both happen to be women, so be it.

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 16:47:18

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 16:37:01

That's fine, but you can address that in ways that don't break the law. So, you can have a fair selection of interviewees based on experience and qualifications/interests, gender aside. Then, you can invite them to spend some time with your children. If your children only like men, then they will naturally respond better to your male candidates. Then, you can choose openly on the basis of that better interaction.

It's ok to prefer one male applicant over one female applicant. It's not ok to simply dismiss a female applicant on the basis of her gender, or tell her not to apply in the first place.

It's also ok to decide to interview 2 men and 1 woman, or even all men, as long as your selection criteria does not include 'must be male', does not have criteria that only men can fulfil and does not have criteria that are much easier for men to fulfil over women (ie. over 6ft tall and plays rugby).

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 16:30:07

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 16:20:36

Yeah....I think that would come under the 'people wearing short skirts get drinks' kind of category - a statement that technically doesn't exclude one sex from applying, but drastically reduces the number that are likely to wink

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 16:15:56

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 16:15:41

Positive or negative is irrelevant though - the law applies equally to both sexes and a woman could challenge it legally.

You are making it clear that you don't much care, but just in case anyone else reads this thread and thinks that they too can do this, I don't think you can.

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 16:12:50

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 16:12:34

I think it's EU law, rather than UK law...might be wrong.

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 16:05:08

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MirandaWest Fri 14-Jun-13 16:05:05

Are the rules different in Ireland (as in not Northern Ireland) as I think that's where Bran is (although may be wrong)

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 16:01:32

From the same link:

"GOQs cannot be used to:

•restrict jobs to single people, ie marital discrimination
restrict jobs to one sex for administrative convenience or because of customer preference
•establish or maintain a balance or quota of male and female employees
•restrict jobs to one sex on the grounds of physical strength or stamina
•restrict jobs to one sex because of a lack of changing or sanitary facilities for the other sex (except in some circumstances where the job involves living on the premises)
•dismiss an employee
•justify discriminatory terms, or access to benefits, facilities or services, or any other detriment once a person is employed, eg to deny equal access to overtime work
•restrict access to a vocational training course.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 15:59:24

I'm not a 'qualified HR person' grin

However, I'm also not sure that you have the right to specify gender unless the work falls under the 'Genuine Occupational Qualification' (GOQ) criteria.

The one which could apply to a live-in childcare post is 'Private Households'. However, one piece of guidance says:

"1.PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS – (s7(2)(ba))
Where the job is likely to involve the job holder working or living in a private home and objection might reasonably be taken to allowing a person of the opposite sex having the degree of physical or social contact with a person living in the home, or the knowledge of intimate details of such a person's life, which the job is likely to entail.
Live-in carer/companion or a female community worker who works with women in their own homes and consequently becomes involved in the domestic life of that household. . It may apply to some (but not necessarily all) positions as a nanny. It is unlikely that it would apply to such jobs as door-to-door market research or employment in a business which is being run from home.
Previous Cases
Neal v. Watts
A male applicant for a nanny post in a private home claimed sex discrimination when refused an interview although he had a recognised certificate as a nanny. The Tribunal found that the GOQ applied in this case as he would be required to live in private premises and the job required a large degree of physical or social contact with and knowledge of intimate details of the child's mother.

Note: 7(2)(ba) might not apply to work done for a business which is presently being run from a private household." Link

However, I'm not sure that you can use that to justify the opposite position. How would you justify the position of a GOQ being a man? It doesn't follow at all.

I'm not sure under what other grounds you could justify that a woman is not able to fulfil the role....unless you yourself are male?

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 15:48:31

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bran Fri 14-Jun-13 15:38:43

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 14:07:50

Unless of course, you are not in the UK and the country you are in has no such laws, in which case I apologise.

lougle Fri 14-Jun-13 14:06:54

How can you limit it to men only, bran? That goes against the sex discrimination laws and as an employer you are breaking the law shock.

I can't quite believe that someone would be so open about it, tbh.

drinkyourmilk Fri 14-Jun-13 13:59:43

You can absolutely contact them and say the position has opened up again!
I was second choice told the same in my current position, and still here two years later with no plans to leave. I wasn't in the least put out. It happens.

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