Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that this is sexual discrimination?

155 replies

kumquatsarethelonelyfruit · 11/03/2012 17:41

The vast majority of SAHP are women. Like me. I have been at home, raised my kids and 5 years later NEED to go back to work (pressing financial reasons) but apparently I am no longer employable as a teacher because I have forgotten everything I have ever learned. I can't even do supply as the agencies require you to have classroom experience within the last 2 years. One supply agency said they would consider taking me on as a TA (would only break even on childcare costs). This is despite me continuously working as a tutor and GCSE examiner! I am so pissed off. I have a good degree from a good university and got top grades in my PGCE. What the frig was the point in any of it? AND I still owe 7k in loans! To make matters worse they will employ cover supervisors with any degree and no teaching qualification but not take me on their books as I have no reference from the last two years. I feel so angry. I will never regret being at home with my kids but I know from here that there are so many women in my position and it is wrong and unfair both on SAHP and their children.
OH, and I can't even take a return to teaching course as the Tories have axed them :(

OP posts:
Tee2072 · 11/03/2012 17:43

But it has nothing to do with your gender. It would be the same if you were a SAHD.

So, no. It's not sexual discrimination. Sorry.

TattyDevine · 11/03/2012 17:44

Its not sexual discrimination simply because statistically most SAHP are women. Its still a choice. Pregnancy is different; only a woman can become pregnant - however, not only women can be SAHP.

TheFallenMadonna · 11/03/2012 17:45

It's not sexual discrimination.

I went back after 5 years as a SAHM. I went back as a maternity leave cover and two years later was HoD. I interviewed someone last week who had taken a career break to look after children.

What is your subject?

Original poster
kumquatsarethelonelyfruit · 11/03/2012 17:47

It won't be a 'choice' for much longer will it? It'll be pop em out and back to work ladies. My point is that if you are a SAHP it is a valid employment choice and you shouldn't be discriminated against for it. I kept up my professional development as I said. It's not like I've been in 'chokey'!

OP posts:
Original poster
kumquatsarethelonelyfruit · 11/03/2012 17:47

ThefallenMadonna: English

OP posts:
scarlettsmummy2 · 11/03/2012 17:48

not sex discrimination, just unlucky.

wimblehorse · 11/03/2012 17:48

Sadly this is something to consider when deciding whether to SAHP or not. Regardless of whether you "make" anything over childcare at the time. Not saying this is "fair", just seems to be how it is.
Have you tried all your options, sounds like if you could just get 1 break, that could be all you need.
Would volunteering at your childrens' school help? Or doing TA role as a means to get current reference?
Don't agree it is discrimination as it would apply to anyone out of their career for a period.

theboobmeister · 11/03/2012 17:50

It could be discrimination on the grounds of maternity ... a 'protected characteristic' in the Equalities Act 2010, not the same thing as gender discrimination.

I dunno if it covers this sort of situation though?

amothersplaceisinthewrong · 11/03/2012 17:50

NOt sexual discrimination

But wouldnt' it be nice if SAHPs were offered some retraining/refresher courses so they could brush up on their skills before returning into the workplace.

ilovesooty · 11/03/2012 17:51

No, it's not sexual discrimination. You made a choice to suspend your career and various developments since have made returning difficult.

Original poster
kumquatsarethelonelyfruit · 11/03/2012 17:51

I do feel that this is something which mainly happens to women and it is unfair. Society benefits in many ways from people choosing to be carers. I don't think it should be seen as 'not working' but rather a valid career choice in itself.

OP posts:
JustHecate · 11/03/2012 17:52

I know what you're saying, it's not bloody fair that someone should be penalised for taking time out to raise their family. But is it sexual discrimination? Well, sexual discrimination is treating 2 people in the same situation differently based on their gender, isn't it? (unless there is some other or wider definition of which I am not aware - which there may well be. I am not an expert and may be wrong)

But if it is that, it would only be sexual discrimination if a man who had been a SAHP for 5 years was welcomed back into teaching with open arms and the fact that he had taken 5 years out didn't matter.

TheFallenMadonna · 11/03/2012 17:52

Trouble is, there's the giving away of English teachers. I teach Science, and they have probably 5 times as many applicants for every job as we do.

How much experience did you have pre-maternity break?

Original poster
kumquatsarethelonelyfruit · 11/03/2012 17:53

six years

OP posts:
Birdsgottafly · 11/03/2012 17:53

Tbf, i think that you need to be working to keep up with all of the changes in safeguarding, procedure, working practice, etc. If you are on agency, then the training will not always be offered to you that is to pernament staff.

As it applies to everyone, it isn't discriminatory. Are you only counting childcare to be your expense, or is the other parent paying half?

That is often why many women think that it is not worthwhile working.

ShellyBoobs · 11/03/2012 17:54

YABU.

JustHecate · 11/03/2012 17:54

Oh, that said - there needs to be a change so that the value of someone staying home with their children is recognised and yes, since the vast majority of people who stay at home with children are women, women are the main victims when it comes to getting back into work.

hairytaleofnewyork · 11/03/2012 17:54

"But wouldnt' it be nice if SAHPs were offered some retraining/refresher courses so they could brush up on their skills before returning into the workplace."

Who is stopping sahp doing this? It's a free world and people make their own choices.

catgirl1976 · 11/03/2012 17:55

Sad, frustrating and probably short sighted by potential employers but as everyone else has said, not sexual discrimination

hairytaleofnewyork · 11/03/2012 17:57

"But wouldnt' it be nice if SAHPs were offered some retraining/refresher courses so they could brush up on their skills before returning into the workplace."

Who is stopping sahp doing this? It's a free world and people make their own choices.

TheFallenMadonna · 11/03/2012 17:57

Then you might find you fill a need. So if someone leaves mid year and they need someone they can give exam classes to for example. Then you'd go for experience over low cost. Are you near your old school? Could you do supply there? We have cover supervisors (and I am a big fan btw), but we have supply staff too, and if we could get someone we knew, we'd go for them over agency supply for sure.

TidyDancer · 11/03/2012 17:58

Definitely not sexual discrimination, and although it's a shit situation, I don't think it's discriminatory at all. You made a decision to be a SAHP and these have unfortunately been the consequences of that. When you take a career break to SAH, in a lot of professions you will have been considered to not have current knowledge. And five years is a long time. I work in the NHS/social services area and this was certainly a consideration for me.

Is there any way you can tutor your way back in?

Pusheed · 11/03/2012 17:59

I'm in IT. If I was out for 5 years I would be unemployable. Not fair but it has nothing to do with discrimination. So YABU.

hairytaleofnewyork · 11/03/2012 18:00

"victims" Hecate?

If people choose to be sahp that's their choice and with it comes the sacrifice of not being as competitive in the employment market place as those with more recent relevant experience.

It is not some god given right to be a sahp.

marriedinwhite · 11/03/2012 18:03

I know an awful lot of people who have been unemployed for more than a year at present. It is harder to get a job for everyone if you have had a break from full-time employment.

It is a fact of life I'm afraid. I earnt £100k+ before dc. Had 8 years off and went back to work part time for £8,500 a year. Started at the bottom, reskilled, changed profession, got professional quals and 9 years later earn £45k. Will never earn what I used to but don't want to either - work/life balance, putting something back in and all of that.

Why can't you do a bit of part-time ta work to get your hand back in.