Aibu mat leave shouldn’t count as a year of work on cv?

[windygallows]

I’m currently Interviewing candidates including an internal colleague who claims to have 3 yrs experience In a particular skill/role. However over 1 yr of those 3yrs she was off on mat leave.

I think it’s okay for her to say she was employed in the role for 3 yrs but she can’t really say she has 3 yrs experience doing it, can she? Really she’s only been doing the tasks involved in her role for 2 years. This fact is important since the role requires significant experience and I think 2 years is not enough.

I’ve been on mat leave twice and not trying to discrimate, just trying to be logical about it. Would welcome thoughts on whether I’m BU or not I’m thinking 3 yrs employed does not equal 3 yrs experience.

I haven’t checked with HR but pretty sure they wouldn’t agree with me!

You have to ask yourself if she hadn't had maternity leave would you be making the same assumptions or decisions about her. If you're treating her differently purely because of maternity leave this is discrimination

I don’t understand why you don’t invite her to interview, and then ask her specific questions about the projects that she says she worked on. Surely it will become apparently fairly quickly whether she has the experience you are looking for, and whether she has actually worked on the projects or not?

The fact that the candidate in an internal candidate is the only reason that you know she has been on maternity leave. If she was an external candidate you would be prohibited from questioning about any maternal leave as that would be discriminatory. YABU as many women of child-bearing age will have had maternity leave that does not mean that they are less qualified or competent than their male counterparts. It is the job of the application/ assessment/ interview process to determine the correct candidate - specific months/ years within a job when the difference is relatively small is surely a very low level way of gauging competence.

It amazes me that women behave like this to other women. It is completely unnecessary. You should perform an unbiased interview and compare every candidate against predefined criteria. This is just unbelievable in this day and age!

How do people get to the point where they are interviewing candidates while being so ignorant of the law?

I agree OP may have some sort of bias. I'm not being horrible - lots if not most people do and it is an incredibly hard thing to recognise about yourself!

I agree that asking her about specific parts of the crucial project is fine, and not discriminatory if it's relevant to the role. She may have kept up to date from home and kept in touch with colleagues and had a decent debrief when she returned. She may not which might have resulted in a gap in her skills. It's your job to find out if she has a gap in her skills at interview. As you would for any candidate. And she hasn't lied on her CV by neglecting to mention her maternity leave, as above this doesn't always mean she wasn't involved or hasn't learned anything.

How do people get to the point where they are interviewing candidates while being so ignorant of the law?

She's not ignorant of it. That was made very clear when she said she didn't want to go to HR because they would disagree. I think she's looking for advice on how she can get away with breaking the law. Advice which she, rightfully, is not going to get.

But...for someone who has literally only been in the workforce for 3 years, there IS a difference between 2 and 3 years experience, since that 1 year is 1/3 of their working life

I completely agree, so now we can both be flamed! It doesn't matter why a person has been away from the workplace, at that point in their career they just won't have been around long enough to have experienced all of the skills needed (I've worked in procurement and it is a very complex field - I still didn't feel confident after 3 years).

Although I see your point I'm going to have to say YABU as if there are external people going for the job as well who she is competing against then you won't know if their years of employment include mat leave therefore you would be discriminating against her.

actually say I have about 20 years experience
And yet despite that experience, you seem not to understand HR policies about discrimination, and how experience isn’t only measure in time served.

A great example of how it isn’t longevity which counts.

You haven’t actually said in any of your posts what you think she should have written - bearing in mind, of course, that requiring her to tell you (whether directly or indirectly) on her application about her maternity leave is against the law.

As for her level of involvement in the project, her maternity leave is a total red herring (a big fat discriminatory red herring). It’s not exactly uncommon for people - men, women, young, old - to exaggerate on their CVs. I expect all your applicants will have exaggerated their achievements to some extent. Your job as a competent interviewer is to ascertain who is best-suited to the job in terms of experience and skills.

By the way, you appear very concerned about age discrimination in the workplace. Which is ironic. I suppose it’s natural for people to be more concerned about the protected characteristics that actually affect them.

Hi op. You clearly need to brush upon your recruitment and selection techniques. Pm me if you'd like the details of an excellent trainer who can help you develop in this area.

Why don't you slow down, think about what we've said, interview her and ask her about the project experience you don't think she has, and keep an open mind.

I often wonder if anyone on the internet has ever changed their mind about anything... I don't think so.

Apologies if I've missed someone else asking this, but how do you know she took a year off? She could've had a shorter mat leave than that and therefore more experience than you think.

OP Well I certainly don't think its misogynistic to ask the question!

I do think all metrics that involve quantity as opposed to quality are a mistake when hiring though....and do tend to disadvantage women more than men...and those who work part time...who tend to be women more than men...

In my field we are midway through a transition from number of papers publishes, number of invited speaker gigs at international conferences, total grant income etc. to quality indicators instead.

This is because the quality of previous outputs is a better indicator of future performance than the quantity.

In your process you really need to think hard if it is the quantity of time working that job that is the best indicator of someones future potential...or if it might be something else...like the evidence of performance in the role and personal added value they brought that they can give during the interview.

Free yourself from non-predictive metrics! Its liberating!

@windygallows What do you think the applicant should have written in her application? How can she round down 3 years employment to 2 years experience?

If length of experience is crucial how will you establish whether another applicant who says they have 4 years experience has spent 2 years on maternity?

In answer to your original question You are not being logical, YABU and as you are already aware you are also being discriminatory. Stop trying to deflect this by comparing it to a man.

I wonder if the applicant is on MN? Someone could recognise themselves on this thread.

This is appalling. OP, I really don’t see what your problem is here. Stop being pedantic about how she worded the CV and look at the facts. If you’re unsure about the depth of her involvement in certain projects then surely you can
a) Ask the candidate about this at interview (isn’t this what interviews are for?)
b) As she’s an internal candidate you could make discreet enquiries with her managers on those projects as to the extent of her involvement and indeed how they thought she performed. Surely that’s the benefit of having an internal candidate apply?

You know you’re on shaky ground legally with this. You must also know that every other candidate you see with have bugged up their CV and mentioned involvement in projects even if this was fleeting.

TBH, you sound bitter and angry at ageism; which is fair enough. But don’t take it out on this woman. You have done exactly the same thing. You’ve tampered around the edges of your CV to make a foot in the door more likely. Your thinking is that once at interview they’ll just see your skills rather than your age. I don’t blame you. But please afford her the same courtesy.

I can see what you are tryign to say, but you need to look at all CVs with the assumption that they might have had extended periods off work, either sick or mat leave. You will never "know", except with internal candidates (even outside candidates when you know they were off for X length of time, you won't really know if they were involved with covering emails and advising the person covering).

If she said "I have taken part with projects A B and C" when you know project B was one she wasn't involved with because it happened when she was on mat leave, that's a different matter.

She's not taken credit for particular events, she's just said she's had experience of the role for 3 years.

If you want 3 solid years experience with no gaps within that, you will have to look at all CVs and discredit anyone with less than 5 years.

I wrote my masters thesis on my last maternity leave op - should I omit my masters from my cv because some of it was done during maternity leave when I was no better than a cabbage?

I’d imagine you wouldn’t have 25 years worth of experience if someone had refused to let you progress 15 years ago or whatever when you had your dc.

Oh and if she'd had less than 2 years in the job, with one out, you might have an argument - but with 3 years, only 12 months out (was it full 12 months?) she will have experienced all parts of the yearly business cycle.

I am at loss what experience you think she will have not covered in 2 full years if you are in a normal business. (If you work for someone like the electorial commission and the last general election was during her mat leave that would be a different matter).

Yabu and I'm saying that as someone who is on mat leave but with 15 years experience at work

Oh dear. I don't think you're well suited to recruit people @windygallows, you don't seem to be able to absorb nor assess information that people give you. Not all managers are good at recruiting, it different necessarily mean you aren't good at the rest of your job it's just an area you'll need help with. In your situation it's probably best to ask your manager or one of your peers for some help so that you can work out how to structure assessments that will get you the best candidate in the role (hint - it's not going to be ticking boxes with number of years in them). That may not be this internal candidate if she doesn't have specific experience you're looking for, but the way you're going about this you simply won't find out who the right person actually is for this role.

OP She went on one mat leave - that means she could go on another. Hire a man instead!

*doesn't necessarily not different necessarily (auto-incorrect doing its thing)

This is so bizarre. Being a woman doesn't give you magical powers to bend time. Being employed in a role for 3 years is different than gaining 3 years hands-on experience of a certain role surely? The fault lies in the job description in my opinion. If having 3 years (full-time equivalent) hands-on experience is important then you need to specify that. Working on the project is not a lie however. Even if her part was minor she was still a part of it.