Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to have felt humiliated at being referred to as a houseperson

137 replies

OrkaLiely · 14/02/2012 07:05

Went to get a new phone yesterday. The sales assistant was entering my details and asked what my job was. I suppose I'm a SAHM but that wasn't an option so she selected "houseperson". It just didn't sound right Confused I would have preferred housewife to such a weird gender neutral term.

Then I failed the credit check because, despite having no debts or loans, I have no credit history because I've been a houseperson for so long Blush

I will raise DD with yesterday's experience in mind.

OP posts:
catgirl1976 · 14/02/2012 16:21

I've never had a brigade before........we need uniforms

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:26

Perhaps SAHP should become the given term. Pronounced SAAAARRRP.

jellybeans · 14/02/2012 16:27

Not as silly as some of the other posters comments on this thread determined to put others down and would rather poke fun than address why they are so bitter.

catgirl1976 · 14/02/2012 16:29

Why is saying some is not employed when they are not employed

a) putting someone down
b) poking fun at some one
c) bitter

Its a fact not a judgement.

jellybeans · 14/02/2012 16:30

'Jelly bean - all mothers are full time mothers'

But not all are caring full time. And it is that difference that people mean when they use the phrase. Lots of people use it on forms etc. Why take offence by it? I didn't when I was a WOHM. Didn't bother me at all.

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:30

How about NIPE - Not In Paid Employment?

Birdsgottafly · 14/02/2012 16:33

The financial world risk assess people, change the occupation on a insurance quote and the price changes.

Some providers use "caring responsibilities", so that any carer can be counted in with that. My department deals with Foster Carers and they are certainly not unemployed but are strickly speaking not employed.

"Self employed" on the drop down lists have differet ttitles,now. It used tobe one catagory. This just reflects our changing society. It doesn't matter what dictionaries say.

It makes life simpler in the finacial world if you have a genderless category for each circumstance.

A carer (of any group) should not be classes as unemployed.

catgirl1976 · 14/02/2012 16:36

NIPE works. I like NIPE

TheParan0idAndr0id · 14/02/2012 16:41

How about a bit of realism though? Taking Op's example, say you're standing in a phone shop applying for a credit contract. Man says "are you employed?" and you say YES. He says "what do you do?" and you say SAHP...he's going to look at you as if you have two heads and think to himself: what the fuck is she talking about? She's not employed!

You can argue about how you feel about labels till you are blue in the face, but its all about common usage and what people understand from each term.

Its just another example of people tying themselves up in knots judging everyone and themselves with labels, agonising over the precise meaning of what they should call things.

catgirl1976 · 14/02/2012 16:43

Thanks Paranoid

That explains the point really clearly - my brain is too sleep deprived today to be succinct or make proper sense :)

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:45

But paranoid - a feew people upthread have pointed out that financial institutions do treat the two categories differently, and so it does matter.

bonkersLFDT20 · 14/02/2012 16:45

I believe the figures the government roll out for numbers unemployed DO NOT include people who are not actually recorded as unemployed.

For the purposes of credit rating being unemployed and being a house elf are different.

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:46

And the common understanding of unemployed is on benefits and looking for woirk - it's in teh media and govt every day.

TheParan0idAndr0id · 14/02/2012 16:46

They might treat them differently (in some respects), they still don't consider a SAHP to be "employed" as several are claiming to be however busy they may be.

catgirl1976 · 14/02/2012 16:50

Oh dear god

SAHPs are not employed.

Surely no one disagrees with that?

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:51

No, I agree, not no-one has been really saying that the SAHP would say "in FT employment" on a form, but that an appropriate term for being in a household situation where one of you is looking after the children and the other is bringing on money might be useful as distinct from a catch-all "unemployed".

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:52

I was thinking about this, actually - it's not so much the meaning of employed, is it, rather the connotations and media/govt use of unemployed in quite a narrow, specific sense that make this important in the OP's context.

habbibu · 14/02/2012 16:55

Perhaps you might say that a SAHP is not employed, but also not "unemployed" in the media/govt/relevant to financial industry sense of the word? I think what I'm saying is that in this context it's not a case of simple opposites as "unemployed" has quite specific broadly used connotations (and I don't mean emotional/perjorative, just those to do with govt definitions and stats).

catgirl1976 · 14/02/2012 16:59

One poster was adament she was employed, but apart form that no, no one really has been saying SAHPs are employed.

I suppose this is why they came up with houseperson - but the OP was humiliated by that term.

lorcana · 14/02/2012 17:19

You are employed if ÿou receive a wage/salary, have leave entitlements and other like conditions.
Everyone who has their child in their care is a 'fulltime parent'. Some choose not to do the former role - some feel fine about it but many are defensive and strident about it ....

TheParan0idAndr0id · 14/02/2012 17:21

I'd love to be a part time parent I really would.

OrkaLiely · 14/02/2012 18:28

Thanks for all replies.

Was surprised that some have said I shouldn't have applied for a phone if I'm not working because that would mean I couldn't pay the bill. Like most people I've had a mobile for years and since I gave up working to become a - ahem - house person I have paid my phone bill out of my income from investments.

And I have utility bills and other payments in my name plus a bank account so I thought I would pass a credit check. However, this doesn't count towards a credit rating and I was told that a bad credit history is better than no credit history.

OP posts:
DeSelby · 14/02/2012 18:31

YABU, it's a stupid term but not humiliating. I prefer hausfrau.

And for credit risk purposes I would object to ticking a box marked unemployed. I am not in receipt of a monthly salary, but our household income (ie my husbands salary) is necessarily at my disposal so I'm not in the same credit risk category as someone who has no personal income at all.

TheParan0idAndr0id · 14/02/2012 18:32

Nobody said that. They said its not altogether surprising you don't get credit if you don't have your own income, which is not the same thing.

OrkaLiely · 14/02/2012 18:44

I do have my own income but it comes from investments not employment and there isn't an option for that.

I will get a credit card from my bank and start building up some credit history.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread