Are SAHMS discriminated against. Red magazine are doing an article about it.

[Darkesteyes]

Just seen this on twitter.

Are stay at home mums discriminated against? Are you one and unhappy with benefits, or feel judged? Tell us.
[email protected]

"It doesn't work like that ... no one person pays another person's share"

Well, it seems natural enough to think that as well as having paid my share in previous and future employment, maybe my DH can contribute some of it whilst I'm looking after the DC's, or even the DC's can one day contribute something to the economy after I've got them to adulthood. Also my work with young children in pre-school and other settings (when I was working recently and over the last twenty years) has been shown to have an economic value in terms of the children's future economic and social well-being far in excess of the pay given to staff (and even including the other costs of the provision) .... research showed a X6 return on investment I believe.

I DONT HAVE HELP WITH CHILDCARE. MY CHILDREN ARE TOO OLD.....

Many like you will be.

'People like me'........

Oh give it a rest. If you want to have some more money than do what others have done on this thread. Go out and work.....

Many really 'many'? how many?

only 8% on women earn more than 40k.

^^^^ this is an issue.

Many like you will be what.... Sorry - I dont understand what you are saying....

Kazoo has a chip on her shoulder. She wants to be a SAHP, she is envious of people who are getting more than her. She would like some of the dosh. She doesnt want to work and for her family that is hopefully the right decision.

But to come on a thread and starting judging people who work like Karlos because the state has let them down with childcare/schooling options is awful.

"Only 8% of women earn more than 40k."

I'm actually shocked. Blimey. That's a tiny amount.

Faster - very true, £40k is not a great amount around London, yet nearly 90% dont earn it. It is worrying....

maisie - you are quite right!

Kazooblue Wed 27-Mar-13 19:05:43
Many like you will be.

but there are not many couples on high incomes.

only 8% on women earn more than 40k.

^^ this is an issue.

I CARE SO MUCH MORE THAN ONLY 8% OF WOMEN EARN OVER 40K (WHICH IS NOT A LOT IN LONDON) THAN SAHP ARE NOT GETTING A CHILDCARE SUBSIDY.

(sorry but that deserves caps!)

Nice Maisie.

I have a family,I have always worked until recent years and the years. I have had out were valuable and beneficial to my dc.

Others should be helped to have the same if they want it instead of wasting money on helping wealthy families who don't need help with their childcare.Yes not you Maisie but others on over 60 k the cut off for families on 1 income re the loss of CB.

I am sure Kazoo that you made the right decision for YOUR family. You clearly would like to have more money, wouldnt we all! But I am staggered that you feel the need to judge others and start deciding who gets benefits and who doesnt.

What if I started a thread that said 'why do SAMP's who arent paying in still getting a pension and other benefits'? Purely from an economic view point. I wouldnt because I understand how tax works.

Would be flamed by some but realistically I would like to always go on a 5 star holiday with business class flights. I need to get that promotion to allow me to do it. I dont want to as my hours would increase massively.

So, I therefore accept that based on my decisions there are some things I cannot afford doing my current role. I dont start on people who can afford these things and bleat it is unfair I cannot afford it too.

Little chickpea - what if they (like me) came to the conclusion that they couldn't give the level of commitment to the job they would like to... because they had to be off when Dcs were sick, had to leave in time to pick up DCs etc etc (basically felt like they were doing nothing well and letting everyone down). I personally think I did the right thing for everyone...me, DC, employer....

So now with older DCs (less commitments) they feel they can give a job the commitment it deserves ...but they aren't allowed to...even if they have researched the post, looked at updating their skills and have proved themselves repeatedly in numerous previous roles (it takes a bit of adapting to become a SAHP - believe me) - they get written off without a chance because they have a gap in their cv and you think that means it will take longer to get them up to speed ....
Otherwise - lets not have children and then wait for the fall out of that when we want our pensions paid or the nursing home can't find the staff to look after us...

Little chickpea is right. Someone with a gap in their CV is going to struggle against someone who is up to date and no gap. However we all know this is the case. We can complain its wrong, unfair etc but we do know how it is.

Its rather like celebrities complaining about their lack of privacy when they become A List. Its not a secret that at that level there is always someone in the bushes waiting to take a picture of you with your rollers in and no make it. But still they complain and carry on in the industry getting their £10 m per picture....

Littlechickpea, you say you're not being discriminatory in your recruitment practices which must mean you hold no bias but you have described a very unobjective recruitment process whereby you would always choose someone with no gap on their cv over someone with a gap on their cv- that is a bias and therefore discriminatory!

Last post I applied for I was over qualified for...but then had been out of the field for a while - was completely upfront about everything ...I only applied for it because I KNEW I could do that job well - main role of job was in something that I had become a bit of an expert in - even said that DP would become SAHD. (Didn't say it - but they would have got a lot for their money). Also no problem me moving on once I got my foot in the door - it was (like most of these roles ) a fixed term contract for a year...
I got sterling references from two very respected senior figures ....
I dindn't even get an interview ...Now I'm wondering if they looked at DCs and career break and threw my cv in the bin...

Maisie I'm judging a system that penalises sahm and rewards wp.The system isn't fair and doesn't value the hugely important job that SAHMs do.

As tax payers my family can judge what they like.

I think two or three years career break is probably acceptable but people with ten years or more I think would find it quite hard to get back in at the level they left. If I was recruiting I don't think I'd bother with anybody with ten years out of the workplace.

I didn't mean that to sound harsh but I was just thinking the way these recruitment people think and that is the way most of them think.

unlucky83 its not that you are not allowd. Its that businesses are looking for a very quick return on their investment and that includes in candadates. I am sorry but what i said is true. I would advise you get unskilled before applying. Demonstrating research and upskilling, with historic experience and passion is a stronger position than coming in against someone with those skills already. You also have o be flexible, the business will always want to come first. I am sorry it's RL.

Goldenbear yes we don't. If the person with the gap is clearly the better option then that's the person that gets the job but if they are not upto date on knowledge them their not the best option. We do what is best for the business and not the individual. And i can assure you most business in the current climate are doing the same. So you want me to discriminate against the other person that we believe is better suited to the role just so we can demonstrate some sort of PC.

With regards the skills attained as a SAHP, I have no doubt these are useful but unfortunately I can't see how these would adapt to a role in a business environment. Please can some explain this to me?

Well, that is very shortsighted of you- to write off someone before they have even got to an interview, not bother with their CV. For a start you don't know what they did prior to being SAHP. If you are highly intelligent, can apply yourself, skilled at running and making money for businesses- you don't stop being those things. By thinking that a SAHP is a write off you're risking not getting the best person for a job, potentially a very costly mistake.

It's not anything to do with being PC, it is about best practice that if applied to the process will lead to the best outcome for the business.

goldenbear I hope that wasn't directed at me.... Because if it was you need to read my notes again.... And at what point did I say a SAHP is a write off? Check yourself before responding!

when I have given men a chance who have a gap in their cv, they have been less reliable than those who don't. people who can manage their finances without working appear to be less reliable than those who need the job.