Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Feeling angry realising that I wouldn't get the job I have if I went for it now because I have children

95 replies

Rollergirl1 · 03/02/2011 23:19

I overheard a phone conversation today between one of my colleagues (senior management) on the phone to a recruitment agency, talking about a candidate that he had just seen. The candidate was a woman in her 40's. He was very pleased with her, liked her profile, how she came across, was happy with her experience. Her only downfall was that she has children. He went on to explain that he didn't feel that he could ask how old (her children were). But his concerns were that she would not be able to be away from home for, example, 3 days at a time. He didn't even ask her these questions. But the upshot was that she was not a candidate, because she had children. I couldn't believe what I was hearing.

I have 2 young children and work part-time. This overheard conversation has brought me right back down to earth. Although I have worked for the company for over 10 years and have a wealth of experience within our company and within our business, if I were to be interviewed now for a full-time job with my company, I probably wouldn't be considered because I have children.

How disgusting is that?!

OP posts:

CockularDepravity · 03/02/2011 23:22

From the business point of view, your colleague is most likely working within the best interests of the company. From a legal point of view he is on very, very shaky ground.

SueWhite · 03/02/2011 23:23

No one would ever be able to prove that he didn't give her the job because she had children. Equality laws are fine in principle, but I don't think they really work in practice. You never have the proof.

scottishmummy · 03/02/2011 23:28

how are you feeling now rg?had you hoped to progress within this company?i suppose if challenged he'd deny it and give another reason for non-apointment

MsKLo · 03/02/2011 23:34

I know many many mums who would not want to be away from home for days at a time but then others will do so - I can see your point but also his too

StataLover · 03/02/2011 23:40

But if the job requires travel, then why not stipulate that as a requirement? I have to travel for my job and I have young children - and I onyl took the job because I can rely on my husband.

OK to require travel, not OK to make assumptions about this woman's domestic arrangements. YANBU!

MillyR · 03/02/2011 23:41

I think if you go to a job interview for a job that involves travel, you have to make it clear in the interview that the travel and being away from home is something you are looking forward to in the job.

It shouldn't be assumed that mothers don't want to travel, but many people like the OP's colleague will make that assumption. As a parent you have to make your feelings clear to the company at interview.

mutznutz · 03/02/2011 23:45

The best thing to do is not volunteer the information that you're a parent in the first place.

caramelwaffle · 03/02/2011 23:50

If she is in her forties then surely it is possible her children may be in their twenties; she may even be a Grandmother...

RobF · 03/02/2011 23:50

Can you blame the manager for putting the needs of the business ahead of the need of someone's children? All the various "rights" that working mothers have been given have just made it harder for women with children to get jobs.

Original poster

Rollergirl1 · 03/02/2011 23:56

I understand that it is not practical to offer someone a job that requires frequent travel to someone that can not travel. But he didn't even enquire the age of her children and if travelling was feasible for her or not. As soon as he found out that she had children he lost interest in her as a candidate completely.

I had minor issues when trying to return to my job after my maternity leave last year. My company obviously didn't realise the legal requirements with regards to giving me my old job back. Needless to say I think they only took me back cos it would have been more of a pain in the arse to make me redundant.

I totally understand that companies need to employ people that fit their business, but writing a candidate off because she is female and has children and not asking the neccessary questions is definitely discriminatory.

OP posts:

RobF · 04/02/2011 00:09

If he'd asked her old her children were and they had been young enough to be a problem, and she hadn't got the job, the employer could be opening themselves up to a lawsuit. Mothers with adult or older teenage children should probably make this clear to the employer, because if they don't say it, the employer won't ask and will assume the worst.

yousankmybattleship · 04/02/2011 00:11

The employer has to put the needs of the business first and I think he is making a reasonable assumption. Whenn you become a Mum your children are your first priority. If this candidate has a Stay at Home Father to care for her children then she should have said so - otherwise I think it is fair enough to dismiss her for a job that involves lots of nights away from home.

MrsMustardSeed · 04/02/2011 00:15

When I was interviewed for my job, they just said upfront that I would need to travel abroad about 10 times a year for 3-4 days a time on average. I said this was fine, I already knew it would be the case and had worked out how I would manage it.

I think the problem here is the boss assuming that this woman won't be able to travel because she has children.

I wasn't asked if I had children or what ages they were, just could I do it. I'm pretty sure that's what is legal.

LadyGlencoraPalliser · 04/02/2011 00:20

Interesting that several people on this thread are making the assumption that people with young children cannot or will not travel. I did my first overseas business trip three weeks after I came back from maternity leave. DD1 was five months old. I didn't like it, but I did it and travelled regularly (monthly trips abroad) on until I changed jobs a couple of years later. Now I know not all mothers of young children would choose to do this, but equally this woman probably realised the job involved travel when she applied for it. How patronising to assume she might not be able to cope.

SueWhite · 04/02/2011 00:22

I reckon the majority of people with young children would prefer not to travel, especially women. Some are fine with it, but I think they're a minority. The problem here is the widely-made assumption that women always have primary care of the kids. It's increasingly not like that, and hopefully employers will start to pick up on the fact that more couples are 50-50 and there's as much chance of a dad saying 'no thanks' to a trip away or getting called out of work to pick up a sickly child as a woman.

MrsMustardSeed · 04/02/2011 00:22

Yer, that's what I meant to say Lady Glencora... sleep deprived

Underachieving · 04/02/2011 00:25

"From the business point of view, your colleague is most likely working within the best interests of the company."

So if the business loses out on a fantastic member of staff because the boss is too daft to ask how the candidate is fixed for going on trips that's in the business's best interest?

I don't agree.

When I'm interviewing I consider it in the best interests of the company to not jump to conclusions.

LadyGlencoraPalliser · 04/02/2011 00:25

What you said was right MrsMustardSeed - there was no need to go enquiring about the ages of her children, all they had to ask was whether she was prepared to do the travel. Simples, surely?

thefurryone · 04/02/2011 08:11

Agree that he should have just asked her if she was happy with the travel, there are people without children who may not be happy to go away on frequent business trips, just as there are people with children who don't mind. He's jumped to a conclusion based on his prejudiced opinions.

The point being that it is likely he wouldn't have had the same problem with a male candidate with exactly the same qualifications and experience who had children. There is a high chance he wouldn't have even thought to ask if a male candidate had children.

Also if he's interviewed her (or maybe even if he's just seen her CV) and told the agency that the reason he doesn't want to pursue her as a candidate is that she is a woman with children, then is he not already breaking the law?

xstitch · 04/02/2011 08:18

I agree with underachieving. He should have said in the inter view something along the lines of: 'This job will involve x amount of travel how do you feel about this?' and he should have asked every candidate this.

SardineQueen · 04/02/2011 08:24

Totally agree OP. If he had concerns he should have asked her. I would have thought that it would be usual practice for a job that requires travel, to mention it at interview and check whether the candidate is up for it. You don't know unless you ask. Some men do not want to travel for work, some women do. This blokes guesswork is sexism.

SardineQueen · 04/02/2011 08:26

Are you a large company, do you have an HR dept? You could approach them and say that you are concerned that this bloke could be leaving himself open to trouble - act as if you're wanting to protect the company. If HR have half a brain they will haul him in for a spot of equality training. Not that I've worked anywhere that would have given a monkeys, but its worth a try maybe.

BecauseImWorthIt · 04/02/2011 08:33

Why people can't see this is always beyond me.

cobbledtogether · 04/02/2011 08:41

Hearing that this goes on bothers me quite a lot as I am a woman with two children and knowing that could be used against me at interview really does bring me down to earth.

It is based on the automatic assumption that the woman is the primary carer in the family and in my situation its not the case. I am the main wage earner and the childcare is covered by DH and family.

I agree that the right thing to do in those circumstances is to ask every candidate how they feel about travel and working away. That allows every candidate to respond and also include any details like that. It says a lot about his skills if he didn't think to ask that question during interview, instead of assuming that because she was female with dependants that it would be a problem.

Yes, very about that. How on earth are you meant to move on in your career - if that is what you choose to do - if these things are endemic in business?

notquitenormal · 04/02/2011 08:44

Massive, and silly, assumption. All he had to do is say the position requires X amount of travel and ask if the person can do that.

I have a small child and have no problem with travelling.

My sister's partner, on the other hand, has no children. But takes care of his disabled mother and would never consider it.

Flip

1 2 3 4