Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

329 replies

windygallows · 27/02/2019 18:55

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!

OP posts:
cantbearsed1 · 28/02/2019 08:23

There are two issues here.
The first is about discriminating against mothers which is obviously not okay.
The second which is a more general discussion, is whether more years experience makes a difference with good employees. Most of MN on threads like this generally say that more years work experience makes no difference. This is a view I strongly disagree with.
Obviously if you are comparing a poor employee with a good employee, then you go for the latter, even if the former has more years work experience.
But with someone who is good at their job, enthusiastic and committed, then more years experience will mean they will get better at their job. This is the same with any skill. Good drivers get better as the years go by. I know I am a more skilled driver now than I was two years after I had passed my test. The same goes for most jobs.

JuniperGins · 28/02/2019 08:29

I’d support any woman in having an equal CV to a man tbh. Good luck to her, I’ve never mentioned maternity leave on my CV (and I’ve had 4 over the years). The day my husband writes how many children he is balancing alongside his job is the day I own up to kids on a CV.
I think it’s an important principle to uphold for women, to ensure equality and is distinct from non-sex specific reasons for leave

JuniperGins · 28/02/2019 08:33

(I think though in this case she’s had a lucky escape working for you, you come across as bloody minded, confrontational and blinkered. If I was picking up in this at work I’d unemotionally ask pertinent questions at interview to clarify her knowledge and experience as opposed to tying myself in knots over what is ‘right’)

Butchyrestingface · 28/02/2019 08:36

Another one of these threads where one wonders why the OP even posted. You got mixed views but not quite the echo chamber you were apparently looking for. Confused

And yes, I’d agree that you are discriminating against this woman based on a) maternity and b) the fact she’s an internal candidate.

havingtochangeusernameagain · 28/02/2019 08:37

It matters because she is insisting she has done the work in the job for 3 yrs including essentially taking credit for work done when she was on leave

But did she lay the foundations for that work?

Come on, men take credit for other peoples' work All The Time.

As I said in my first post, does she have quality experience? Ticking the number of years is exactly that - box ticking - and does not make for a good recruitment process.

Original poster
windygallows · 28/02/2019 08:42

As the OP I wasn't looking for an echo chamber but v surprised that so many respondents were actually completely fine for the candidate to claim she had much longer experience than she actually does because it was mat leave.

If the situation was a woman who took a year's absence off work to go travelling would you feel the same - that she could say she was working, delivering projects, and gaining skills during that time?

OP posts:
Butchyrestingface · 28/02/2019 08:45

If the situation was a woman who took a year's absence off work to go travelling would you feel the same - that she could say she was working, delivering projects, and gaining skills during that time?

You sound like a broken record. PP have answered this time and again. Unless you are planning to ask every single external candidate who comes through the door about any parental leave, illness, bereavement leave they may have taken, then YABU.

Frankly though, it comes across that you just don’t like this woman.

Original poster
windygallows · 28/02/2019 08:46

Out of interest what would you put on your own CV? I've not noted my maternity leave on my CV but have rounded off my years of experience. It's a different situation though - I've been working for 25 years and actually say I have about 20 years experience because at my age it's best to actually keep the number down - such is age discrimination. But don't worry - I'm obviously very unemployable as I'm a horrible manager who is 'blinkered' because I raised a simple question about how to assess length of experience. Sigh

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.

OP posts:
LittleTipple · 28/02/2019 08:46

@cantbearsed1 I think the other variable to consider is internal versus external candidates. I believe where possible you should promote internally, even if that means offering additional training and support for them to be successful in the role.

One of my highest performing team members had zero experience in the role before I hired him from another department, but I could see he had lots of transferable skills and the right attitude for our industry. Yes, it took more of my time, than if I'd hired externally, but that's what being a manager is about- helping staff achieve their potential. He was forever grateful I gave him the chance and showed me loyalty, flexibility and high standards of work.

Loopytiles · 28/02/2019 08:46

Posters have pointed out that external candidates could well have done the same thing - you just don’t know. It’s standard not to mention maternity leave in job applications and just state duration of time in the role, including that period.

Loopytiles · 28/02/2019 08:48

Time out for other reasons, eg travel - with a couple of exceptions, eg adoption and parental leave - is not counted as continuous employment under employment law. There are specific protections to seek to reduce discrimination due to pregnancy / motherhood.

Original poster
windygallows · 28/02/2019 08:49

When I had internal candidates I did all I could to help them make their next steps, not nick pick over their CV.

I raised a simple question about how to calculate it. Anyway, the posts from others below have pretty much suggested that length of experience is pointless anyway, which is a sad indictment for those who have been working a long time and feel that's made them better at their job. At this rate I should probably just recruit the person who has 2 weeks work experience but a good attitude and potential!

OP posts:
Butchyrestingface · 28/02/2019 08:50

At this rate I should probably just recruit the person who has 2 weeks work experience but a good attitude and potential!

Yup. That is exactly what everyone said. Well read.

cantbearsed1 · 28/02/2019 08:51

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.
Agreed

1ndig0 · 28/02/2019 08:52

Op - how much maternity did you take back in the day though per child? Six months? A few years?

cantbearsed1 · 28/02/2019 08:54

I can remember when most places only gave 3 months. Although I do not support that.

EnchantingRaven · 28/02/2019 08:55

If the situation was a woman who took a year's absence off work to go travelling would you feel the same - that she could say she was working, delivering projects, and gaining skills during that time?

OP this again is a completely different example to even consider comparing. This lady is protected because she was on mat leave.. you are not protected to go bloody travelling. Your length of service would be broken or you’d be on a ‘career break’ As another PP states how do you know she didn’t lay the ground work for these projects? I didn’t even realise it’s only an interview I thought you’d already interviewed her. We interview all internal candidates as it’s good experience for them. I personally think it’s disgusting you are treating an internal candidate like this.!

You are discriminating on several things here and I’m shocked you are still going on about this. I work in HR, if you don’t believe the many accurate responses on here and think you are well within your rights go speak to your HR team and they will be mortified.

Imagine if this lady got wind of this and took you to tribunal?

Betaboo · 28/02/2019 08:59

'stated she was involved in projects she was barely aware '

THIS is a whole different scenario to her saying she has 3 years experience when she was on maternity leave for 1 year..

If she specifically stated and named projects which you know she was not involved in than that is lying on her CV, it is not the same as giving a blanket statement of '3 years experience'.

1ndig0 · 28/02/2019 09:02

“ I've not noted my maternity leave on my CV but have rounded off my years of experience. It's a different situation though - I've been working for 25 years and actually say I have about 20 years experience because at my age it's best to actually keep the number down - such is age discrimination”

And you really don’t see any hypocrisy in that at all? Confused

myrtleWilson · 28/02/2019 09:02

Why does three years particularly matter for procurement purposes OP?

AssassinatedBeauty · 28/02/2019 09:03

Posters have absolutely not said that experience is pointless! People have been pointing out that it is a poor approximation to measure competence. You don't seem to have understood this, or are deliberately avoiding it. First of all, establish the candidate's actual competency. If you have two equally good candidates then length of time in role might be a way of distinguishing them.

And, you're absolutely ignoring the fact that you only know about the mat leave because she's an internal candidate. You have no idea what leave the eternal candidates will have had.

Motherofcreek · 28/02/2019 09:04

You sound like you have already taken a dislike to her - calling her dishonest eg..

She has every right to include her maternity leave in her experience. I’m appalled to be honest. It’s bad enough companies discriminating against women and choosing men over over them incase they get up the duff - with out woman actually doing it to other woman.

Christ. If she is capable for the job she is capable! With it being internal I’m sure there will be lots of evidence of her work standards Hmm

Ffs.

Brefugee · 28/02/2019 09:04

I had someone on my team last year moaning about not being promoted after being 6 years in the company - 4.5 of which were on maternity leave (which started 3 months after she started). (not UK)

So in that respect - no she's not getting a promotion over people who have done 5, 6 & 7 years of work in that time gaining skills etc. But the company is discriminating?

It's a minefield and it seems that there isn't a good answer to any of it.

Mookatron · 28/02/2019 09:05

She didn't even have to tell you about the mat leave. So YABU and discriminatory.

Motherofcreek · 28/02/2019 09:07

Length of work doesn’t mean better quality of service. Why would it? It solely counts on the individual.

I’ve worked with people that have been in my company way longer than me and I’m agog that they’ve manage to keep there jobs tbh!

Maybe your not the best person to take interviews if you can’t even recognise that fundamental aspect.

Swipe left for the next trending thread