AIBU to think SAHMs shouldn't put this nonsense on a CV/job application

[windygallows]

In the last year I've recruited for numerous part-time jobs, receiving applications from many women who took time out to be with family and are now returning to work.

Many of the applicants have been straightforward and simply noted on their CV that they have been SAHM - simple.

But increasingly applicants, perhaps based on some guidance from career counsellors or MN, are finding more creative ways to describe their absence from the workforce.

One, we'll call her Mrs Jones, wrote that for 10 years she was employed by the 'Jones family' and that her work involved 'organizing international travel for her family.' Because organizing a holiday is similar to the tasks led by senior executives.

Another wrote a list of every task she did at home from getting groceries to cleaning the house which, while impressive as an exhaustive list, doesn't really mean much when applying to an office-based role. Especially as it's basically a list of everything most employees have to fit in outside of work.

More galling are the claims that women make about the critical role they played - with my favourite being the one who 'Spent 7 years looking after my two children who needed and deserved my attention.'

There is huge value in the work that SAHMs do but please, please don't put this kind of waffle on your CV. You never know if your interview panel will consist of a FT working, single mom like me who finds it pretty insulting that working means her children apparently lost out on 'the attention they needed and deserved.' Urgh.

I came across this description of a SAHM - "a manager of my family and home" - this is the best description i have ever heard as this is exactly what we are

Its also exactly what WOHP are. Please don't put that on your CV.

Look, this is nothing to do with "women's work" not being valued, or SAHPs being looked down on. It's to do with the fact that, unless you ARE applying for a caring role, it has bugger all to do with the job you are applying for. Employers want to know two things, and two things only:

• what relevant WORK-RELATED and preferably work-acquired skills do you have?
• if you had an extended spell out of work, was it by choice or because you were in prison/couldn't get a job?

That is literally it. Putting "domestic engineer"/"CEO of the home" is a problem because it makes you look like you have bad judgement about what is actually needed for a job. Looking like you think paying your own bills is equivalent to being a "Finance Director" is not a good look. And demonstrating bad judgement and a poor ability to self-assess on a CV puts you at a distinct disadvantage, especially given that your CV has to impress in 30 seconds or less because there won't be another chance.

I do feel sorry for women who get this advice - it's bollocks. I am also shocked, albeit not hugely surprised, to see that people are also getting terrible advice at the Jobcentre. "Transferrable skills" really only count if you acquired them in a context where someone was in a position to judge what you were doing - an employer or volunteer coordinator - or if you were doing something outside the norm which is know to require skill and fortitude, like the navigating the SN system a PP mentioned. (That can indeed be relevant for some roles.)

I would have absolutely no problems looking at a CV which simply said "career break for caring responsibilities" or whatever. Then I can assess the strength of that person's work experience against the other candidate. I think threads like this are a public service to people trying to get back into the workforce - you need to be aware that unless the people advising you have been hiring people themselves, recently, they may well be giving you shitty advice, and there's much better to be found online.

Agreed Hamiltoes. My family and home doesn't manage itself just because I woh full time. If only

That the issue. It shows really bad judgment.

Cooking tea does not make you a chef or caterer. If you think cooking tea is the equivalent of a professional caterer or chef......you are showing appling judgment.

I would just like to add that all this nonsense that WOHM do the same as SAHM is nonsense too. I agree about the housework etc, you can stretch that out to fill your available time, but unless you manage to physically care for your children while you work, then you do not do what I do. In the same way that I do not contribute financially to my family like WOHM do.

Its not nonsense at all. Do you think WOHM didn't have materinity leave like everyone else? Don't get weekends, holidays? All the skills you will have learned will also be learned by a WOHM, you can organise international travel? Great so can I. Disperse a tantrumming toddler? Yep me too. Prepare a healthy lunch? Every Saturday and Sunday.

Seriously I take my hat of you. I couldn't stay home with my kids I'd be bored senseless. Its great that you do. But please don't say it's nonsense that the skills gained by being a SAHP aren't gained by a WOHP (which was what this whole thread is about). You just do a bit more of it.

Agreed Hamiltoes. My family and home doesn't manage itself just because I woh full time. If only

yes this!

This is unlikely to affect me as I've worked freelance since having our first baby, so wont have any real gaps to explain. But I really sympathise with people trying to re-enter the workplace, as it's so hard to get a job now.

As others have said, rubbish CV advice is responsible for a lot of mistakes - I've seen a lot of CVs with things that have made me wince a bit, from all sorts of people. But CVs are very specific documents, so writing a good one is a skill in itself, and very rarely relevant to the job. Much of my work involves writing, and it's one of the things that everyone thinks they can do, but few people can do well, so I tend to go easy on CV mistakes like this, and if there was time give the candidate a gentle bit of advice.

It's wrong to say that all working parents do what SAHMs do, just in fewer hours, though. There are many threads on here about how one parent just does their job, and nothing around the house or childcare. So while no one would write 'I cook all my own meals' on their CV, it's wrong to assume that everyone does that. Some people in the workplace have every meal cooked for them, which is actually the sort of information that would put me off a candidate.

This has been done a gazillion times on Mumsnet. Just get over yourselves. Some of us go back to work soon after having had children, so,e don't. Just stop fucking judging each other like that. It makes me cringe to see some employers (presumably so called professionals) not giving a chance to a good candidate because she has made the decision to be with her family for a while and that was important to her. Honestly, that is what makes me cringe.

I remember similar advice - to list all the skills and such had 'developed and expanded upon' when out of work - being given out on a pain management course a few years back. Most of my group had chronic illness(es) that started during/shortly after school or Uni. I think many of us commented that it seemed overly optimistic and bit...off to try to commodify our situation into things like "coping with unexpected difficulties and balancing multiple appointment arrangements". I don't think the person in charge of the course believed it much either but it was in the manual we were all given.

I think there is certainly a need for better advice for those with career gaps as well as those who, for whatever reason, start working later. There is a lot of weird advice out there.

Yay - that is not the point of the thread. No-one is "not giving a chance to a good candidate because she has made the decision to be with her family for a while".

They're not giving a chance to someone who appears to think that driving her children around = chauffeur and cooking dinner = chef because its poor judgement. Not because she's a SAHM.

I also see too many people describing being a SAHP a choice, which people are lucky to be able to afford. This only applies if you can earn more than childcare pays, which obviously increases with additional children.

Yay that's not remotely what is being said. Not one person has said " I wouldn't hire someone who has been a sahp" , simply that there are good and bad ways to com at that info on your cv.

It makes me cringe to see some employers (presumably so called professionals) not giving a chance to a good candidate because she has made the decision to be with her family for a while and that was important to her.

But, as has been explained repeatedly, that is not what people are saying. Several people have even said that if a candidate has used this "domestic CEO" nonsense but seems otherwise capable, they might ring her and discreetly advise her to re-work her CV. Several more, including me, have said they would absolutely consider a qualified candidate who had time out, and that the best way to represent this is briefly and simply, as a career break.

But there's no way around the fact that if you treat being a SAHP on your CV as a job and list all your skills, etc, you have damaged the potential employer's view of you. This is an especial disadvantage when it's already something of a risk, in many cases, to employ someone who's been out of the workforce for several years. This thread is giving women advice on how to maximise their chances of making that transition successfully.

It makes me cringe to see some employers (presumably so called professionals) not giving a chance to a good candidate because she has made the decision to be with her family for a while and that was important to her.

Not one person has said they would refuse a job to someone because she spent time as a SAHM.

I agree Yay, but this thread is about badly written CVs not discounting people who have stayed at home to look after their children

I remember similar advice - to list all the skills and such had 'developed and expanded upon' when out of work - being given out on a pain management course a few years back. Most of my group had chronic illness(es) that started during/shortly after school or Uni.

People in the civil service/education sector do seem particularly prone to giving this terrible advice - they often seem to have not the slightest acquaintance with the private sector and what hiring managers there might be looking for.

I interviewed a man (and gave him the job) who had taken two years out to care for his elderly and dying parents. On his CV he put "period of domestic responsibility". I really liked that as it could cover caring for children or adults and is discrete about something that isn't the employers business (didn't ask at the interview obviously and found out later when I got to know him).

came across this description of a SAHM - "a manager of my family and home" - this is the best description i have ever heard as this is exactly what we are -

That's your opinion. My opinion is that the word "manager" makes it aggrandizing bullshit. I have a personal aversion to bullshiters, most people do. If you blatantly bullshit in one part of your CV how can I have any confidence in the rest of it? How can I be confident you won't bullshit me if I actually employ you?

other people have to list their duties - they don't just give a job title - we all know that a customer service assistant will deal with people maybe on telephone or face to face etc but you dont tell them not to include this "waffle" - infact you probably would discount them for not saying anything

Nobody has to list their duties, and certainly not for every role they've ever had, so you're starting out from a flawed premise. That's where a lot of people fall down and end up with an excessively wordy CV that just turns the recruiter right off.

it's already something of a risk, in many cases, to employ someone who's been out of the workforce for several years
Comments like this betray the underlying sentiment.

I was asked on a recent application for my employment history. There is a 3.5 year gap for when I was a stay at home parent. I wrote career break to raise family.

To be completely honest, I couldn't afford nursery so became a stay at home parent.

To a business, it is a risk employing someone who's been out of the workforce. Most businesses would rather employ someone as young as possible with recent experience and no family commitments, even though they're far more likely to bugger off after 6 months to go travelling.

Mothers are often seen as a risk - fathers and children of elderly parents probably will be soon if they aren't already.

Given those societal hurdles are already in place, it makes sense for people not to make it more difficult for employers to take a risk and hire them.

Comments like this betray the underlying sentiment.

No, they're factual. Someone who's been out of work for 5 years likely has outdated IT skills, rusty other skills. They may also be out of practice of the fundamentals of working with other people - collaboration, navigating an office, taking feedback - and not be used to not being in charge any more. They also may in part have chosen to take time out because they weren't doing very well jobwise anyway.

They might well bring fabulous assets which more than make up for this, and this stuff can also be made up for by, say, taking an IT skills course or doing some volunteering. But it's always more of a risk to hire someone who's out of work than in, whether they've been unemployed 1 month or 10 years, because one of the key things you want to have when you take the big risk of hiring someone is other employers' assessments of them.

To hear all this backbiting it makes me glad that I am out of the job market completely. I have no intention of getting back into that crazy world.
Sounds a minefield.