To think this woman was ridiculous

[lastqueenofscotland]

I am leaving my job and am helping interview for my replacement.

Just had an interview with a lady and were just confirming that everyone is expected to work one Saturday a month and there is some overtime (paid at 1.5x hourly rate) certain months of the year.
The woman said that wouldn’t work for her and we were like “oh it was in the job description” and she puffs out her chest and declares loudly
“But I am a mother I can’t believe you have NO flexibility for this.”

Colleague who is the mother of 4 inc an 18 month year old had to seriously bite her tongue.

It’s really annoyed me and I can’t work out why

*All of which cost money.

@onefoot

🤔 I didn’t much care for the entitled tone of some of your comments either!

I can’t fathom how people openly cast entire groups of people as ‘less important’ or ‘second class’ because of their lifestyle choices. Or how anyone can feel ‘entitled’ to more than others because of choices they made!

Life doesn’t work that way!

🤔 if this were flipped around, if a childless person was on here saying they didn’t feel people with children should be hired and inferring they were selfish for leaving kids to have a career, I’m pretty sure you and @math would be up in arms. “How dare you...” but to openly say childless people should be forced to fit around their colleges and infer they’re selfish for wanting social lives is fine??? 🤔

Unfortunately I believe in equality, between gender, ages, ethnicities and all life choices. Unless you’re a criminal, then nobodys life choices make them any better/worse or more entitled than anyone else, in my book!

Aria999 I agree 100%.

Unfortunately I believe in equality, between gender, ages, ethnicities and all life choices. Unless you’re a criminal, then nobodys life choices make them any better/worse or more entitled than anyone else, in my book!

Your problem is that you see everything in terms of entitlement.
Mainly your own entitlement.

The bit about better/worse, etc. is you projecting elements into this discussion that are not there.

math but why are you insisting that the only reason non-parents don't want to provide permanent cover for parents is "a social life"?
(I actually haven't had any form of "social" event in my life since my brother came over to have tea with me about a month ago - and before that I have just looked back to June, with nothing else in my calendar!)

What if they are sole carers for elderly or infirm relatives?
What if they have a second job to make ends meet?
What if they volunteer to help the homeless every night?
What if...any one of a thousand other, equally valid reasons?

You seem to see this as a them VS me, when I think better results are achieved from them WITH me to get it all done.
(and yes a person's choice to not have children is just as valid as choosing to have them. Neither is better or worse and neither should take superiority in the workplace, because the workplace is not about your personal life circumstances - everyone is "equal" there)

if this were flipped around, if a childless person was on here saying they didn’t feel people with children should be hired

That is exactly what this thread is about, Meteor.

People resenting the cheek of parents who can't work unreasonable hours. Stating that if they can't then they shouldn't have applied for the job. Vitriol and 'you chose to have them' in response to statements of fact wrt the actual needs of children that have to be met.

The argument that people with children who have not locked down childcare before they even have a job offer shouldn't be applying for jobs is a very short hop away from 'people shouldn't be hired unless they can demonstrate that they have childcare available to cover all required hours'.

Judging from the OP, IF the applicant had politely enquired whether there was any scope for flexibility in the hours, and offered up what they could do and where they could be flexible (show willing), that would be one thing and I'd agree with you that having a pop at her is unfair.

But she didn't, dd she?

She just announced (having read the job spec with the clearly stated hours etc) "But I am a mother I can’t believe you have NO flexibility for this.” - as if nobody else had ever been a parent before her.

THAT'S what people find objectionable. The ATTITUDE she brought with her (extremely unremarkable) parent status.

ShotsFired, I am responding to those who have explicitly claimed that the interest in a social life is exactly equivalent to the interest of parents in providing care for their children.

I would include care for aging parents or sick relatives or some other family member needing constant care in the category of family responsibilities that includes care for children. While I have not explicitly included it, please consider it implied.

Volunteering to help the homeless every other night is an unreasonable choice imo, for purposes of classification of demands on time here. It is laudable, but optional. It would come under the heading of 'optional/hobby' in my book.

Parents /caregivers do not have the luxury of choice as to the disposal of their time and presence. That important distinction seems to be completely missed by many here.

yes a person's choice to not have children is just as valid as choosing to have them. Neither is better or worse and neither should take superiority in the workplace, because the workplace is not about your personal life circumstances - everyone is "equal" there
The workplace that does not value individual employees, refuses to see the context of their lives, and does not make attempts to be flexible is going to go the way of the dinosaurs. It is a profoundly misogynistic and out of date model of personnel use. Those societies that do not provide incentive (and a push if necessary) to increase inclusiveness and harness the contributions of all qualified to contribute will be left behind as the decades progress. Current dinosaur models fail to avail themselves of the talents of half the theoretically available workforce. How is that good for business?

A workplace that operates by forcing employees into 'them' and 'us' camps is also going nowhere. Employee morale is grossly undervalued in many businesses.

After 22 years, researchers found that the women who worked on rotating night shifts for more than five years were up to 11% more likely to have died early compared to those who never worked these shifts.

So if we follow some people’s logic on here, as a childless women I should be covering unsocial shifts because someone else, who has CHOSEN to have children, doesn’t have childcare & I should thereby risk cutting my life short?

And there it is - the hatred and deep seated resentment towards parents that always lurks beneath threads like this.

I'm all for supporting working mothers. What people don't like is parents who seem to think they are top of the pile just because they have kids. That everyone else without kids should give up Christmas, August holidays, work late nights and weekends just because they don't have kids. People without children have a life you know. Or maybe you don't.

mathanxiety, you are basically saying that just because they have chosen to have kids and I haven't that I should pick up the slack. Sod that for a game of soldiers! I will obviously help out but no way would I work for a company who expected me to work all the unsocial shifts.

I may not have kids, but I do want to spend time with my husband and friends.

If companies structured their overtime payments right there would generally be some people who wanted the antisocial shifts.

ShotsFired - yes, resentment, as I have pointed out, is a major factor here:

She just announced (having read the job spec with the clearly stated hours etc) "But I am a mother I can’t believe you have NO flexibility for this.” - as if nobody else had ever been a parent before her.

THAT'S what people find objectionable. The ATTITUDE she brought with her (extremely unremarkable) parent status.

...When actually what she has asked is basically a very rational and reasonable question. Her assumption was not misplaced. What is wrong with this picture is the fact that her assumption of flexibility was misplaced.

About the emphasis on ATTITUDE, and the intolerance of it - we as women shouldn't be so critical of women who dare to stick their necks out. It is women with ATTITUDE who have got us so much that we take for granted.

We would still be denied the vote if women hadn't made nuisances of themselves and forced the issue. Plenty of women were opposed to the suffragettes and very angered by them.

We would still be denied the right to work after marriage if women hadn't insisted. Or denied the right to work in certain professions or occupations. We would still have an economy that reflected the lower earning capacity of women without those annoying women, and a standard of living appropriate to that smaller economy.

We would still be subjected to sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace if uppity women hadn't forcefully put a stop to that and insisted that our right to work is infringed by workplaces that are hostile environments.

Oh wait.

@math

That’s not what this thread is about at all. It’s about a company who outlined their requirements and an applicant who knowingly couldn’t fill them but rather brashly expected flexibility (special treatment) for being a parent.

(Entitled CF)

It would have been nice had the company been able to do that but at what point do we acknowledge that a business’s number 1 priority often isn’t Accomodating staff who can’t meet requirements.

How much of life depends on people being in their jobs when needed? Would you find it reasonable if you called 999 and had to wait 20 minutes because the call operators couldn’t work that day as ‘they had kids’?

Kids are a very very common occurance in the UK, (no link to prove this @math you’ll have to take my word) 😬 which means lots of parents out there working all kinds of jobs and flexibility simply isn’t always possible.

You can’t expect to dictate to a company when you are willing to work, or expect others to pernemantly pick up the slack!

It’s also a bit shitty to make out that you’re ‘saving the future’ by procreating. You’d be contributing to the future just as effectively if you volunteered helping unemployed youths into work...or adopted and gave a child a brighter path!

I happen to currently work in a team with several parents - none of whom have any issues what so ever. They work hours which suit them but work hard and don’t expect anyone to pick up the slack.
If a kid happens to be unwell - no issue we get on with it as if they themselves were poorly - it happens - but they wouldn’t dream of strutting around makinh demands or refusing to meet requirements, they also wouldn’t dream of insinuating that anyone else’s responsibilities or life choices were less important than their own.

Your children and what you cooked to do with your life, they’re whats important to you and that’s wonderful but it doesn’t mean that someone else’s hobbies, passions or choices should mean they have to fit around you - work harder than you - or fit around you if that’s not what’s in their contracts.

Luckily for me, nurse, I was able to work shifts opposite my DH so children were care for.
This did mean I worked every Friday evening and Saturday and Sunday. We had no family weekend time for years.
I understand both parent and non parent views.
I agree with PP that the childless should not have to do all the unsociable hours as they well may have other caring requirements ie. parents or family.
People should not expect better hours just because they are parents. It should all be shared.

By the way, to the OP - yanbu, she sounded weird

I'm child free and I refuse to cover colleagues who want to finish work early, not work Christmas etc because they have children.

I'm not a lesser person than them just because I happen to not have children and I have my own responsibilities and life.

Why can't people see that they are being played?

The constant harping about 'top of the pile' and phrases to that effect- can you not see what is being done to you?
The problem isn't mothers killing you, Tinkety, it's employers.

I have addressed the 'Bingo' elements of the thread already, PinkSparkly.
Choosing to have children/you made your bed being one of the more egregiously child-hating strands of thought here.

Agree again, Aria.

I interviewed (or attempted to interview) someone this week who arrived almost 20 minutes late and in a ripped coat and trainers. When he was informed he wouldn’t be seen due to the lateness he told us it was only 18 minutes actually and we had wasted his time!

I once put a Year 11 into detention for being late every day, we're talking about 10.30 being an early start for him, the chitty had a reference to 'no valid medical reason'. He argued that he had a medical reason, he couldn't wake up early, it made him feel ill! No amount of discussion about his employment prospects changed his attitude.

I had to leave a care job because, whilst we had day staff and night staff, technically our contracts included 24hr cover (fair enough, it's a 24hr job). After 18 months of working a daytime pattern (anywhere between 6am to 10pm) a night shift worker went on long term sick and I got put on nights. No discussion, just 'this is your rota now'. The reason? The manager told me I was the only one who didn't have kids.

The final straw came at Christmas when I was rota-ed on to work 8 nights in a row, 24th Dec to 31st Dec. Because they'd accommodated the leave requests of everyone who had asked time off for child care, and I was told I didn't have a family to cook for.

Most people are happy with a bit of give and take, and I'd have no issue with helping out a colleague who had to leave early for a sick child or whatever. But people without children should not have to routinely carry people who do have children. It's not about having Saturday nights off to go out on the lash, it's about having work life balance. I'm no less entitled to WLB than someone who has opted to have children.

Blimey. I’m a mother of three and I work three out of four Saturdays.- if you want the job you find the childcare

Guess she didn’t get the job then with that attitude

I can’t go to Yemen: I’m an analyst

Are you finding the cobra position helpful for your back pain?

Where would you find Saturday childcare I wonder?

So just because I consider my life choices as valid as theirs I'm a child hater now!

I don't have children and work flexible hours (start and finish early, with a shorter lunch break). When a member of my team was coming back from mat leave she wanted the same. The only way it could have been done would be by me giving up my hours to swap (due to business changes). Management did ask but I said no as I requested flexible working in the first place for a reason.

She is currently threatening to resign unless she gets her way. She won't as I'll have to resign if she does. Bloody nightmare though. The assumption that my life is irrelevant is getting tedious.