To think that many sahms don't consider the long-term implications when deciding to give up work? ***this is not a sahm vs wohm debate***

[wannaBe]

This is not a thread criticizing anyone or their decisions...

When I decided to give up work to bring up DS, I did so in the knowledge that for me, staying at home with my dc was the best thing. We were fortunate as well in that financially we could afford for me to stay at home.

Back then, I had in mind that we would have two children, so realistically would have at least eight years at home until the youngest started school, and even then, going back to work wouldn't necessarily be something I would consider as would want to be there for after school/holidays etc, and finding a job that fits in with the above is almost impossible.

So, fast forward nine years and the two children we'd planned to have turned out to only be one, and I've been a sahm for that long, although I have done volunteering in that time (reading/helping in school/chair of governors/PTA etc...) so haven't been sat on my arse as such (although the amount of time I've spent on mn does contradict that statement somewhat, )

Now I'm in a position where I want to go back to work. Actually, I've been in that position for about the past 1.5/2 years but due to circumstances such as moving areas etc have only just been able to start exploring the possibility seriously.

And I've come to a realization which, although I guess I knew deep down, I never contemplated until now. Even if you take the fact that there are very few jobs for far too many applicants in the current climate, the one thing that employers seem to want above anything else is experience, and current experience at that.

And if you haven't worked for a number of years then the reality is that they will take the person who has worked more recently, every time. And as employers currently have the pick of applicants (regardless of who you are) the chances of getting a job in the current climate if you've been bringing up your children for the past however many years is minimal.

So what I've basically realized is that being a sahm has made me unemployable.

I don't regret my decision for a second. You can't ever get that time with your children again and I'm glad that I had that opportunity and took it.

But in retrospect I do wonder whether I should have sought even a part time work opportunity sooner - even if it was something minimal.

And equally I realize that you can't tell someone who is just choosing to give up work to be with their children that they may find that they're unemployable ten years down the line when the kids are at school and they want to go back to work again without seeming like you're criticizing their decision/lifestyle.

When we make decisions we often do so in the here and now, not necessarily with the future in mind - not for ourselves anyway.

I think employmentwise anyone who is currently out of work for any reason has it extremely hard anyway.

The thought of never working again for the next 30 years is frankly rather depressing...

why thankyou, NY

as is yours, actually

Golden - I wondered whether the star was a oblique reference to his arse..i.e his chocolate starfish .

Am a common git, though.....

Gay is speaking with a predudice held by many employers. However, mums returning to work can be just as productive (or more productive) than other men and women applying for jobs - it depends surely on their personality. Equally, just because someone has a job, it doesn't mean they work hard, does it?

Add to that, some younger women despise SAHMs - not realising that it will be them in a few years. And older women who have stayed at work may resent women who have had time out with their children. (I'm not saying that all younger or older working women have these views, just that they represent a sizeable chunk of employers/interviewers.)

working I agree with you

it doesn't change the facts though...employers these days have a massively wider range f desperate people to choose from

there are laws to prevent discrimination against all sorts of different groups wrt employment, but for the average mum who wants to get a job to fit around kids ?

nope

another way in which women are discriminated against, in a stealth stylee

This is the reason I will never be a full time SAHM. I also know DH really likes the idea of him staying home for a few years, but I'm not comfortable with that option for him, either - we would both want to work full time again within a few years and I think it's dangerous to be out of the workforce completely. I'm lucky that I'm in an almost-completely female field where most people work part time so that will work for me. Unfortunately for him that's not as possible.

working employers are only interested in what you can give to them - caring responsibilites means you can generally give less. Caring for ill relatives does not prove to them that you are an enthusiastic and reliable employee.

It's not fair, but that is life.

I was miffed to discover when I was playing around with mortgage calculators the other day that I might be better staying at home and 'supporting' DHs career by being free childcare so he can work late etc and hopefully get promoted more quickly...

That's because a single earner on 40k can borrow FAR more (about 160k total) than 2 earners, one on 27k and one on 13k (about 120k total) - even though the total multiple is the same.

So should I work for a little more than minimum wage (probably the level I will be at when I go back), or do everything I can to support DHs career for the sake of our long term finances?

Working

I dont think its narrow to want to employ someone who has been in the workplace for the previous couple of years. It makes total sense. Personally I wouldnt have an issue employing someone who maybe worked pt/consultancy for the last few years to accommodate family needs and now wanted to go back to ft work.
However I wouldnt even consider a person who stayed at home for the last 2,3+ years to look after children and now wanted to get back. To me that person would be de skilled and I would choose the candidate with the more relevant and recent experience every time.

I think that if employers could be a bit more flexible around hours then women would be more inclined to stay in the workplace. However this has to apply to everyone and this can be difficult to manage.

I would think that voluntary work can have some value, if it's relevant to the work you're doing, particularly if it involves a degree of responsibility. I changed direction and wouldn't have been able to do that without some relevant voluntary work on my cv

Lots of people at the moment are victims of the recession, rather than having had time out for childcare

I deal with recruitment for my employer. We are very open minded and tend to interview most people who apply for jobs with us as you can't judge people on box ticking exercises alone. When we have any sort of administrative vacancy we are looking for someone we feel confident can function at a very high level from day one ( especially as it takes longer to recruit than the notice we get when people leave, so we have generally had the post vacant for about a month) It is the confidence of those already in work that seems to be the difference. Candidate A looking for a job change will say "Yes, I can do it - you can see I can do it because I'm dong it already" Candidate B, who may be a SAHM will say "I used to do it, I believe I can do it and I've carried on doing it in a less pressured voluntary capacity"
That is why the SAHM does not get the job. Recruitment is a very expensive process and if someone is the full package you go for them.

Although I only took 6 weeks off with each of my children I can see the advantages of being with your children in the first few years ( though mine turned out just fine with a nanny followed by a succession of childminders and students) From a work point of view if Iwas looking to go down the SAHM route I'd try very hard to work just one day or a few hours a week to keep a toe in the water, I'm positive it makes it easier to get employment later.

YANBU. I've been at home for almost 4 years now and have started to get quite worrried about my future employment prospects. I don't have the option to do any kind of voluntary work at the moment because my youngest DC is not quite 2 and I can't afford childcare for her.

I have recently done an evening class and am hoping to be able to do some voluntary work once DC2 is 3 and can go to nursery. I am hoping that in a few years time when I am in a position to begin applying for jobs that the market will have picked up a bit.

I think that it's important to challenge it though... has anyone read Martin Seligman talking about "reflexive reality" vs "objective reality"? Objective reality being e.g. the laws of nature, the fact the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, that the moon has certain cycles, that gravity is a force? Reflexive reality being reality that is defined by our thought processes etc.

I have no doubt that there are some professions and fields where any time away from the frontline is disadvantageous because of the breadth of updated information needed to do the work competently. However, in these jobs, an individual's skill level is often more prized than their "workhorse attitude" or "reliability" anyway. Think of House, MD. The best and brightest of many firms get away with being not terribly punctual and/or lazing about quite a bit because what they contribute is brilliant and valued and they get the job done.

What I object to is that time out of the workforce which really does contribute to society is so easily denigrated and devalued. Caring is the most obvious example of this. It's a job which has to be done and which is terribly expensive if not carried out by family members. Yet, apparently, it is okay to say that it is directly comparable "faffing around with the PTA" or doing a "watercolour course" because it is a fact that employers think this way? There is no objective reality to that "fact", it is not a foregone conclusion and yes, AF, it is about women's position in the world. An employer who did not need a top-level inspired professional in a cut-throat field e.g. the vast majority of employers in this country, should, if they have even an ounce of cop on and common sense, be able to see that someone who had, say, taken time out to care for a dying relative with high care needs will have had to be very responsible, organised and dedicated to that role and they can bring all those qualities to many different roles.

If you want to say that an employer won't employ a carer because they don't have specific knowledge and skills for a job, fair dues. But to say that caring doesn't demonstrate "responsibility" or a "workhorse attitude" is just ignorant and no way based in "fact".

As a sidetrack to the recruitment issues, and this is a very personal opinion, I would never, ever consider placing my future financial stability in the hands of a man

working everything you say demonstrates why Feminism still has such a long way to go

I absolutely agree with you

and like I said, this whole thing is another way in which women, as the main "carers" in our society, are discriminated against

Not everyone has options though AF, you know that.

So- have spent approx 7 years going from A Level level quals to MA- does this hold any water for employers or is it all a complete waste of effort? Am considering a little self employed work, will that help at all? consultancy style.

My sector was charity sector, MA relevant (very) to a specific aspect of that.

I will be giving up work when my maternity leave runs out. For me its really about my two DCs. The reality is that my DC1 really doesn't react well to nannies or nursery (we've tried both). She just seems to want time with mummy (DC2 isn't helping that reaction) and I felt bad about abandoning my child.

People say I'm throwing away 15 years as a lawyer (work for City Law firm). What they don't get is that I'm not bothered about my career since I don't really want to go above my current level. I am worried about how I will keep my sanity looking after two DCs 5 days a week on my own. Going to work each day is like taking a vacation compared to looking after two youngs DCs.

The annoying thing is my DH would happily ook after both of them but it doesn't make sense for him to give up work. He earn vastly more than what I do but also has much better hours: he never has to work weekends and he works very flexible hours during the week. I always worked evenings and weekends. The problem is that one thing he can't do is part-time.

Caring is only valued when the job you are applying for requires caring skills.
In the area I am in (business) caring is in no way beneficial.

Of course the jobs SAHM's do are important and valuable - but its valuable to their families, not to companies and thats all they care about.

Incidentally (and I dont agree with this) I think a lot of companies would look far more benignly on a candidate who took time off to care for a sick relative than one who stayed home with children.

YANBU- it is sad but true. This is why I work weekends. My youngest is 18 months and I would love to be a SAHM until she starts school but I am too scared about what my employability will be like by then. I am lucky as I love my job and it is rare to find a company in my field of work that is open weekends, plus it's 3 days a week and because I do weekends we only have to pay one day of childcare- but it's killing us as a family to never have any quality time all together. And I have no idea how to make it work when DD1 starts school next year.

I know several mums whose youngest is 3/4/5 trying to find work after a few years off and suddenly realising how difficult it is. We just advertised a minimum wage administrator position at DD's preschool- had tons of applicants and the woman who got the job is a qualified accountant! Says it all really.

YANBU- it is sad but true. This is why I work weekends. My youngest is 18 months and I would love to be a SAHM until she starts school but I am too scared about what my employability will be like by then. I am lucky as I love my job and it is rare to find a company in my field of work that is open weekends, plus it's 3 days a week and because I do weekends we only have to pay one day of childcare- but it's killing us as a family to never have any quality time all together. And I have no idea how to make it work when DD1 starts school next year.

I know several mums whose youngest is 3/4/5 trying to find work after a few years off and suddenly realising how difficult it is. We just advertised a minimum wage administrator position at DD's preschool- had tons of applicants and the woman who got the job is a qualified accountant! Says it all really.

OP, it's not impossible. I removed myself from the workforce (was a customer service manager) to do a degree whilst my older 3 kids were little, then I got pregnant and had DS2 in my final year. Apart from a job working evenings in a supermarket I didn't work for a couple of years. Also, I had 4 kids and it would have been financially crippling (when considering childcare costs) to do a PGCE (as I had planned to).

When DS2 started pre school I was a parent volunteer for 1 session a week, then when he started school I was a literacy volunteer. I then got a job as a lunchtime supervisor/play leader which fitted in nicely with school hours and enabled me to do my NVQ Level 3. I'm now a TA and have a job which fits in really well with my family life and minimal childcare costs.

Sometimes you have to take a lateral route around things, but voluntary work can provide valuable experience.

I was told 2 years ago by a recruitment wanker consultant that there was absolutely no point in representing me as no-one would employ me if I had been out of the Market for 2 years!! I had 15 years experience! Worth nothing according to him

I know that peachy...did you mean my comment about not placing your financial wellbeing in the hands of a man ?

< tries not to channel xenia >

All things being equal when the board is clear, it is best not to place your future in the hands of a man.

The "person" I am aiming that sentiment at is the young woman who bows to her husband's, her family's, her peer's, perhaps even her own wish to step out of the rat race (it's certainly very tempting...) pressure to give up work when you have your first child

I see it a lot in my social circle

I did AF.

And I knew what you really meant too

BTW, my DP is a SAHD, same issues for him

but yay, lets turn this into a feminist issue !!!!!

oh good