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!

What exactly did she say about the project?
If she said she was part of the project at some point when not on mat leave, then meh.

Take a step back and stop being so pedantic

I would agree with you but the difference between 2and 3 yrs is probably not that significant. If it was the difference between 2months and 14months then, yes, it would be more significant.

In general we would interview internal candidates anyway, it's good experience for them and it's good for team morale to clearly evidence that internal candidates get opportunities.

I use evidence based questions asking them to describe what they did to deliver x, drilling down if they use terms like we or the project in order to collect evidence of what they personally did.

Example - describe a project that you delivered from project brief to closure.

Drill down on lessons learnt, bits they are proud of etc.

Whilst I get your point you would be discriminating against the internal candidate if you don't interview if based on her application you would have if you didn't know about the maternity leave. You can't ask about things that apply only to 1 gender so anything to do with maternity if off the table.

The difference between 2 and 3 years makes no difference at all in practical terms, you aren't comparing 2 with 20. I actually look (very far sadly) back on things I achieved in year 2 with awe, it took 2 more years to achieve so much again owing to assignments and another 4 after that to again do something great.

You believe she doesn't have the capability because you see a missing year; she might have been on leave but have left an amazing plan and picked up all the relevant learnings at the end (or even helped on KIT days), so have a pause to consider that you don't actually know what she's done on that project as a fact. Did her answers give you the impression she can't do the job? Then don't hire. Did somebody else give better answers? Then they are the better candidate. If you're just making assumptions based on 2 vs 3 though, then it's time for a rethink about the purpose of interviewing candidates and at least how you can do that better next time. Assess experience in an interview based on responses to detailed questions. Verify work history with references.

I’m just puzzled by what you think she should have said. Clearly she has to put the length of time she’s been employed on her CV. In her supporting statement it sounds like you think she should have said ‘I’ve got two years’ experience’, thereby in effect disclosing the fact of her maternity leave and her parental status to you, which she’s clearly not required to do (and incidentally it’s not at all in your interests for her to do that!)

As PP have pointed out, by your reasoning people should also have to disclose on their CVs:

1. Any period of sick leave
2. Any period of leave other than annual leave - paternity, adoption, compassionate, unpaid sabbatical etc
3. Whether a role was full-time or part-time, and for how long
4. Any period when the employee had less work to do, was not engaged on a project, etc.

OR alternatively you could, you know, interview her and use your critical facilities to assess her suitability for the role, without discriminating against her because she’s an internal candidate. Human beings vary quite considerably in intelligence, character, speed of learning and aptitude, so really the amount of time spent doing a job is a pretty blunt tool to assess someone with anyway.

You are discriminating because she was on maternity leave.

There’s a reason your HR team has worded the experience for the role as “significant” and not must have 3 years experience! That alone can be seen as discriminatory. The amount of times I have this conversation with managers “they must have X amount of years experience” it’s a very out dated view and as I say bordering being discrimative on its own.

I think YABU too and guanrantee your HR rep will tell you the same. The lady has been employed for 3 years, I understand your logic but the above is a fact. If you don’t want to hire her (which I’m feeling you don’t) you need to look at something else to pull her on. I do hope you find a real reason though as it disappoints me when managers have tunnel vision.

I took mat leave twice so it's not a slight on that.
I presume you’ll report that on your CV when you are looking for a new job when you’re fired for discrimination

Would you be okay with a surgeon who needed 200 operations under his belt or a midwife who needed 100 saying that she had helped deliver 100 babies when she'd actually only done 66?
False equivalence. This example gives specific experience of an actual task. I’d not ask a surgeon how many years experience they have, I’d ask the number of operations they had done.

Just like you shouldn’t be focusing on how many years experience she has but how many times has she carried out the tasks you need her to do. The PMs I work with might only handle 3 projects at any time and those projects usually last 2 or 3 years. With the different stages of project there are certain things that happen. So in a 3 year period, a PM would only have handled the delivery of three sets of contract documents. But, they might have had shorter projects which would mean that someone with 2 years experience might well actually have more experience with contract documents. It’s not about how long they were there but what they have actually done.

Not read whole thread but I’m pretty sure maternity leave is classed as continuous employment to protect women, show me one woman who has stated she took maternity leave during her employment. You are not allowed to question a candidate re pregnancy, it’s against the law. Just because you don’t believe it should be included as experience is your own viewpoint and therefore bias. You are on shaky ground.

Yabu. Not only is it a dick move for you to hold this candidates maternity leave against her it is also discrimination.

Nobody writes up maternity leave periods on their cv, (ask yourself OP would you ?) and to keep a level playing field they they shouldn’t, because employers must not treat any employees (or candidates) unfavourably because of their pregnancy, the fact that you are using your knowledge of this candidates maternity leave status against here is very dodgy ground indeed, and leaves you wide open for a discrimination case against you.

I have applied for an internal position at work. I didn't mention my maternity leave. I will now be checking with hr that I'm not going to be discriminated against because I took time out.

Of course it shouldn't count

Dear Mumsnet

Can we please not actively encourage people to discriminate against women for starting families, also your prejudice is thinly veiled when you're being pedantic about 2 vs 3 years experience.

Signed
Fed Up Feminist

@windygallows But she has put yrs of experience on her cv that don't tally and said she worked on live projects during that time that she did not

... so what are you asking then? You've clearly made your mind up... what do you want from us? Trophy?

It’s almost as if women are being discriminated against because of their biology.

Stuck - you're right. I wanted everyone's opinion on this but I didn't expect the crazy bashing and suggestions that I'm a misogynist because I questioned someone's length of experience.

YABU

what do you expect her to say in her CV? The period she was on mat leave counts towards her employment in that role. Do you expect her to say she has had a period of mat leave? What about sick leave? Why do you need 3 years experience as opposed to 2 anyway?

Check your bias OP, rather than call posts “crazy”.

The government counted my full salary whilst on statutory unpaid maternity leave and my husband lost his job so I was not entitled to benefits. Is that fair? I would definitely have been discriminated against for taking maternity leave if I admitted to that on my cv plus if you have several dc it would make your cv look a bit strange. Some agencies told me not to mention having a dc let alone I took maternity leave!!

Whilst I get what you mean in principle a year off several years work experience is most likely not going to make that much difference unless it’s a manual skill maybe.

OP - AIBU?

Posters- YABU!

OP- No I’m not, you’re all biased!

If we are so wrong then why don’t you approach HR with your thoughts OP?

The thing is windy, People might well remember some of the other threads you’ve started - eg. about SAHMs being dependent for their sustenance on men; or your anger about women listing childcare duties on CVs - this kind of thing. A certain attitude comes across. You have point in there somewhere, but why are you so wound up about this particular woman? Everyone (men and women) are “selective” about the info they include in their CVs. How much maternity did you take - you still haven’t answered that question? And will you be listing it on your CV?

@windygallows Most people on the thread have said you are BU, but you clearly don't think you are, so what was the point of asking? You're comparing extreme examples like surgeons hours with a project manger role. Obviously you'd ask the surgeon number of operations, not years of experience. My midwife friend often states number of babies delivered. Your insistence about years experience is very outdated.

I think it's very sad that you have an internal candidate who happens to have had some ML, who wants to progress and be supported in the next stage of her career, but all you care about is a line on her CV. I do hope you interview her and give her a chance. If she's really not ready for the role than fair enough. When I had internal candidates I did all I could to help them make their next steps, not nick pick over their CV.

Out of interest what would you put on your own CV?

By the way I would say the same thing about a man who took a sabbatical for a year!

Except there’s not the same requirement to protect the continuity of employment of a man in these circumstances