Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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:
catgirl1976 · 11/03/2012 20:08

My DH claims our CB

I think they will just scrap the NI protection :(

SardineQueen · 11/03/2012 20:09

I think that would be direct discrimination birds.

Incidentally you just mentioned that while people are on mat leave they are still officially at work so it wouldn't come up anyway.

Fiendishlie · 11/03/2012 20:12

I read the start of the thread and was about to jump in and tell you you are all wrong and it is indirect sexual discrimination, purely because it is a fact that the majority of sahp are women, in the same way that the majority of part-time workers are women, but I thankfully see that Darleneconnor has already done so.
What to do about it though? That's the hard part for the op. I agree that part of the problem is that the subject is English and not one where there's a shortage of teachers.

TidyDancer · 11/03/2012 20:13

I think Birds has nailed it.

Discrimination may apply if the time period stipulated was less than that of standard ML. Since the time period is two years, that allows for a standard ML and more.

TidyDancer · 11/03/2012 20:14

If you factor in a year's ML to 'not count' for the two years out of the classroom, that would leave the OP with five years out, that being two more than the requirement of three.

KatieMiddleton · 11/03/2012 20:24

It's clear many people don't understand what indirect discrimination is. It is where a policy or requirement makes it more likely that a particular group will be disadvantaged. Currently this is only unlawful if the discriminated group has a protected characteristic as defined by the Equality Act 2010.

In the OP's case a couple of simple questions need to be asked:

  1. Does the requirement affect one group more than another?
  2. Is that group protected by the EA?

answers:

  1. Yes, people taking time out to look after children are more likely to be disadvantaged. Proportionally this group is more likely to be made up of women.
  2. Yes. The protected characteristic is sex.

However, if the case can be objectively justified then that's different. Without knowing enough about teaching requirements I cannot say. But if there is no legal or professional requirement for candidates to have recent experienced for Continuous Professional Development reasons or to evidence competency or similar then I cannot see how that requirement is lawful.

A recent case here for those who are interested in such things.

OP what does your teaching union say?

SardineQueen · 11/03/2012 20:27

What katie said Smile

KateSpade · 11/03/2012 20:38

You couldn't have honestly thought you'd just walk back into the same field/job after 5 years off?

I only had three months maternity leave because i didn't want to not have a job to go back too?

Sorry, i don't mean to be bitchy/horrible, but with the job market being what it is, did you not think to start doing something to try and prepare?

PlumpDogPillionaire · 11/03/2012 20:39

I think you've hit the nail on the head with objective justification, KatieMiddleton.

advicewouldhelp · 11/03/2012 20:41

This thread has been really interesting to read and helpful to me because I'm having some issues with my return to work after ML and being denied the opportunity of a promotion as ive been told my ML does not count for this purpose.

If any of the posters on this thread who are experienced in these things have time to have a quick look at my thread in "employment issues" and offer any thoughts id be really grateful.(sorry am on phone and don't know how to link)

TheFallenMadonna · 11/03/2012 20:43

I'm going to say again - walking back in after 5 years is exactly what I did.

TidyDancer · 11/03/2012 20:44

That objective justification point was pretty much exactly what I said and meant with the whole arbitrary decision thing that people conveniently overlooked.

[will not be ignored emoticon]

Hmph.

SardineQueen · 11/03/2012 20:46

Kate they are supposed to keep your job for you for a year in the UK.

I don't think that women taking more than 3 months mat leave should be considered to be playing fast and loose with their careers.

RuleBritannia · 11/03/2012 20:47

I'm not a teacher but here's an idea. Let the school you worked for know that you are available. Employing you as supply would be cheaper than going to an agency, wouldn't it. Or any other school that knows you. If it works, you would be able to get your reference.

KateSpade · 11/03/2012 20:53

No, No, i didn't mean it like that Sardine I'm not at all saying people shouldn't have more than three months off, people defiantly should have longer, i just think expecting walk back into a career after a 5 year break is a bit unrealistic thats all.

I did want to go back after a month but my fanjo hurt too much Blush

SardineQueen · 11/03/2012 20:55

Fair enough Katie! Smile

LineRunner · 11/03/2012 20:59

Sorry to come in so late to the thread.

I believe that if a condition of work or study is more difficult for a single parent to comply with, then because 92% of single parents are female, then it could be construed as sex discrimination. |On this, there is a fair bit of case law, e.g. on enforced shift-work changes.

Tortu · 11/03/2012 21:12

Hey OP. I'm interviewing English teachers for a post at my school this week (and, FYI, in my area, English is still a shortage subject). Taking time out to look after children is really not abnormal, as it is a largely female profession. I'm fairly sure there is some sort of course available (are you sure the Tories have axed them all? I think one of our applicants had done something recent) as a reflection of this situation.

A few things:

  1. If you've worked as a tutor, why can't you get one of the parents to act as a referee? Was it through an agency? Even if the application form does not allow for this, you could offer in your supporting statement.
  2. The GCSE assessment procedures and curriculum have changed significantly since you've been away. This would be a big concern for me. You would HAVE to show that you understood this and were familiar with the new procedures. Perhaps you could emphasise this when talking about your tutoring experience.
  3. Not sure what you mean by 'top grades in my PGCE'. There is no way of measuring this unless you can get a reference from a tutor.

We really would not have been at all bothered by your career break at my school (and can't imagine anybody else would be either) when reading your application. It is fairly common, to be honest.

Now, lose the negative attitude and get applying! Don't get bogged down in this sexual discrimination thing (which is really interesting, by the way), because that looks like making excuses. The jobs for September are really only being advertised now and will continue until May/June. You DO stand a decent chance.

kumquatsarethelonelyfruit · 11/03/2012 21:16

Thanks Tortu :) Can I have a job at your school?

OP posts:
CrunchyFrog · 12/03/2012 00:18

YANBU OP.

It's being used to shorten the short lists, IMO.

I've been out 2.5 years (not a choice as such, relationship breakdown and move of areas) and am not getting interviews purely because one of the desirable criteria (not even essential) is experience in the last 2 years.

Also tutoring and using my skills in other ways, but I'm expensive and they are churning out NQTs to take on nice cheap 1 year contracts.

SAHP or people who have career breaks due to children are overwhelmingly female, which makes this indirect discrimination for sure.

Fiendishlie · 12/03/2012 00:27

'top grades in my PGCE'? Er, yes, there's distinction, good, satisfactory and fail. So a distinction would be a 'top grade'

WorraLiberty · 12/03/2012 00:32

Weird

So many opinions and informative posts from people who have taken the time to reply to the OP and all she can say is....

Thanks Tortu Smile Can I have a job at your school?

Makes me wonder why anyone bothers at times Confused

KatieMiddleton · 12/03/2012 00:35

Grin Worra

Tis just enough that I am right. I don't expect thanks [joke]

LineRunner · 12/03/2012 00:56

Bless you, Worra. Smile

callmemrs · 12/03/2012 07:24

While sex discrimination legislation is hugely important, it muddies the waters when people cry 'discrimination' in cases where it is not clear cut and where it's doubtful there's any case to answer.

A few points:

ALL people, on becoming parents, have caring responsibilities. How they choose to manage these is to a large extent personal choice. While a woman is on ML she is still employed with full employment rights. After that she can return to her job, and the two parents can outsource some of those caring responsibilities. Or she can resign. Or the father can resign to become primary carer.

In the ops case she has had 5 years out of work. As a teacher of some years experience, we can assume she was earning, say 30k. Not big bucks but not a pittance. Enough for childcare if she had chosen to keep her job. We can also assume her husband/partner earns at least as much as her, otherwise it would be very odd for the person on the lower income to keep working while the professional on 30k gave up!

In other words, this was a CHOICE.

I'll also point out, again, that the majority of English teachers are female. Op is most likely losing out against OTHER women, who have chosen to keep their skills up to date. It is very very hard to get into English teaching right now. If there are other people out there who have equivalent qualifications and more recent relevant experience then frankly they are getting the jobs on merit. Why should they be discriminated against if they are the better candidate.

And this is absolutely not a 'veiled attack on SAHM' as some one ludicrously suggested- its just plain common sense.

Swipe left for the next trending thread