I don't know if I'm being unreasonable, genuinely.
Recently DH started a new job within the company, and until now his rota has been up in the air. He took it upon himself to look at the available rotas to find a gap where he could fit in and he noticed there was an opportunity for him to work monday - friday with fixed weekends off (something that is quite rare in his line of work) and brought this up with his boss. Boss agreed that it looked like he would be able to have this shift, there was fixed cover for the weekends he'd have off, and it suited the company very well for him to do this. Boss happy, DH over the moon, all good.
DH was told he'd have his rota by the end of December with a view to start it in January.
A couple of weeks ago new colleague transferred over and is being trained to do the same job as DH. They got chatting the other day, and she mentioned how she'd been told she can have a monday - friday shift. DH spoke to his boss about this and apparently yes, she's been given the shift instead of DH, last minute decision - he just hadn't been notified yet.
When he asked why she'd been given it over him, he was told it is because 'she's a mum, we tend to give the weekends to women with children where available'
Now, I know, being a mother myself that weekends with my children mean a lot. But they mean an equally great deal to my husband.
Am I being unreasonable in thinking this is unfair on DH, and that he's basically been denied something he was told he could have, just because he's a man? Or is what they've done fair for reasons I'm not understanding?