‘I won’t be employing women with children again’

[Everhopefulhev]

AIBU in feeling really wound up by this comment?
I’ve just had to quit my new job as my childcare arrangement fell through which is shit for my employer because obviously they could do without having to find someone else. However, whilst talking to my current boss he said ‘I won’t be employing women with children again’ and told me not to take it personally or think he’s a dick for saying it.
Is this just an example of the problems women face in the workplace? Just because I didn’t work out for them they are disqualifying any further woman with a child?
I just find this type of thing infuriating.

Why is only women that are criticized for wanting a career and family?

Because quite often they don't take their career as seriously as the men.
They don't insist on being the professional they need to be, like the men demand.
I don't care if you are male or female if you can't/ refuse to do the job properly due to having kids, you shouldn't be in the job. At senior level you need a partner at home to do the child rearing or at least one not as high up as yourself who can leave work for kids. Why would this be the case for men but not women?

^^This

@Devlesko

Why is only women that are criticized for wanting a career and family?

Because quite often they don't take their career as seriously as the men.
They don't insist on being the professional they need to be, like the men demand.
I don't care if you are male or female if you can't/ refuse to do the job properly due to having kids, you shouldn't be in the job. At senior level you need a partner at home to do the child rearing or at least one not as high up as yourself who can leave work for kids. Why would this be the case for men but not women?

I disagree about senior people needing someone at home. Often senior staff have have far more flexibility.

They may have more flexibility from the office, but fewer women have these jobs where they have to travel often, be at work longer and are prepared to put in the extra lumps of flesh that's required.
men can and do manage this by keeping little woman at home with the kids, in a job less important than his.

This is something that needs to be tackled on an individual level, not societal or employer related at all.
If you want a career and kids you need to find a man who will take a back seat, just as the men do. it really is no different.

@Devlesko

They may have more flexibility from the office, but fewer women have these jobs where they have to travel often, be at work longer and are prepared to put in the extra lumps of flesh that's required. men can and do manage this by keeping little woman at home with the kids, in a job less important than his.

This is something that needs to be tackled on an individual level, not societal or employer related at all.
If you want a career and kids you need to find a man who will take a back seat, just as the men do. it really is no different.

No - you need a partnership. Both me and DH have full on jobs which can require long hours and travel. We work it out between us. Dh is more senior than me but he doesn't expect me to stay at home.

This is something that needs to be tackled on an individual level, not societal or employer related at all.
If you want a career and kids you need to find a man who will take a back seat, just as the men do. it really is no different.

Or you just need an attitude adjustment regarding parenthood. That you can't be a full on helicopter when you have a career.

There are so many issues here. Firstly its not legal to say that is it!! Childcare should not be the responsibility of one person. (unless a single parent). It should be a societal issue as a happy well educated population benefits all of us.
But then perhaps childcare should be free or very very cheap, if a government actually wanted everyone to work it would be. They want a poor/underclass. On the other hand wouldn't it be great if one wage gave a good lifestyle. Then if people chose to only one would need to go to work, or two working part time. There are so many other options that could be if we were a more enlightened and progressive society but they say a country gets the government it deserves and more people voted for the waste of space prime minister we have, he is now at his country residence. I met someone whose friend worked in the Mayor of London's office and said he was really really lazy when he was mayor. The conservatives are never going to have a society that is fair or equal, progressive and forward looking. They take funding off state schools, art, drama, music and now poetry has been removed from the curriculum. Yet in privates schools these are all thriving. Look at band line ups/artists etc see where they were educated. Conservatives just want a workforce that won't cause trouble and is only educated enough so we can make money for them. Childcare will always be your problem with the sort of administration we have and this is despite 50 yrs of active feminism which seems to have sadly shot woman in our own feet. A world wide study shows this problem is world wide. In most cultures and countries. There is a petition in India for men to do more in the home.

@FinnyStory exactly this, as a female boss who's employed men and women it drives me bloody spare that my female employees have to always be the default carers. Not including single parents in this.

But until husbands and partners take equal share in childcare the issue will always be there.

I get the comment from the boss, not correct than he said that out loud and rude given your circumstances but I would think twice about employing women.

@katy1213

As so many women allow the fathers of their children to opt out of any responsibility, I can understand employers not wanting to be lumbered.

Allow them

In most couples with children the man’s job pays more than the woman’s though?

Maybe employers could help buy paying women as much as men promoting them when the have children to provide for etc.

In most couples with children the man’s job pays more than the woman’s though?

That’s entirely the woman’s choice though. Many women chose low-paid, low-skilled careers, then bitch and moan that their man earns more than them and it is the woman who’s “career” takes a back seat.

Are you in the UK? Discrimination like that is against the law I think.

WTF?! Allow?! How exactly do you force a feckless father to take responsibility?
By not having children with a man who sees hem as your problem. For ex if his attitude to housework is that it is your problem then you can easily see that the same will apply to children.
By discussing childcare before having children: who will pay for it, how will it work when they go to school, what will happen during school holidays.

Of course, sometimes you can't know. But I know several women who had children with 'feckless' men because their priority at the time was having babies and they either didn't think about what would happen in 1-2-5 years or thought a baby would magically transform him.

This isn't about feckless fathers, that's another issue altogether. The vast majority of the women who take on all the childcare responsibilities and whose employers are most disadvantaged by that live with the father and would tell you their partner is a wonderful father, they've just jointly decided to prioritize the man's career.

I take my career way more seriously than my DH. He gets paid more to work less (proportionately). I don't take time off for DC reasons if I can possibly avoid it. He is treated like a hero by his boss and colleagues when he does. There's no point challenging it as it benefits us as a couple but my God it grates!

While this man was showing pure stupidity to say what he did out loud, I think this posters who can’t understand where he’s coming from need to open their minds a bit more.

Any unreliable employee is going to be an unfavourable option, whether they’re unreliable because of childcare issues, or anything else. Employers don’t owe women with children a favour.

People need to think about the jobs they have and the childcare they could afford before they have children. That said, I believe childcare should be much more heavily subsidised, if not free. Then people wouldn’t need benefits for having children, and would make choices based on what they could afford minus the childcare.

I'd have just said 'well that would be illegal so you don't have a choice'

This meme was invented for people like @biglouis

I hope he doesn’t expect anyone young to pay his nursing home fees.

Gosh... that is terrible. He shouldn't be taking your situation out on you or anyone else.

I have 2 kids and haven't missed a day of work because i have kids fortunately but if i did such is life!

He certainly is a dick!

I saw a woman with a newborn, a toddler and two other small children in the park the other day, cool as a cucumber. I can barely manage one toddler. If a woman came to a job interview with me and told me she had 4 kids and was there on time and wearing clothes I’d employ them on the spot because I know that woman could handle anything!

@CorianderLord

I'd have just said 'well that would be illegal so you don't have a choice'

Except he does, of course.

There are jobs that need to be done here and now. They can't wait, can't be done from home, can't be done halfway.
Also neither the state nor employers can't fix stinking attitudes of some people. Women do get shitty end of the stick, but in all fairness, I never met a man who would refuse a task or drop everything because Junior lost a shoe or has a piano recital.

It can go the other way, my partner was turned down years ago for an Msc and they made a big deal asking how he would manage with 4 small children. This was despite having had all four of them during his four year degree, (eldest one 2 months after he started, youngest just after end) moving house during a time of great local upheaval and demonstrations against a road and not knowing where we were going to live and being the first in his family to go to uni (he was in his 30s). He got a first. This totally deflated him and he refused to either complain or to go on in academia.

@amispeakingenglish

It can go the other way, my partner was turned down years ago for an Msc and they made a big deal asking how he would manage with 4 small children. This was despite having had all four of them during his four year degree, (eldest one 2 months after he started, youngest just after end) moving house during a time of great local upheaval and demonstrations against a road and not knowing where we were going to live and being the first in his family to go to uni (he was in his 30s). He got a first. This totally deflated him and he refused to either complain or to go on in academia.

That is absolutely disgraceful. Did they really say that's why they rejected him? I'd be sacked if I did that.

Employers might not want to employ women with small children and I can see their point up to a certain extent, but they don't really have a choice (even though many think they do). There is no industry that can afford not to employ women - even male dominated industries have low-skilled female staff like cleaners etc. If we cut out nearly half the workforce, the economy would suffer massively. It is naive to think we can keep up levels of productivity without employing young women and mothers.
It should therefore be a priority for the British government to make access to the labour market as easy as possible for mothers, mainly by changing two things: nurseries should be state subsidised and every child should be guaranteed a place, and maternity pay should be covered by the state. These things are standard in many countries and it is a disgrace things in the UK are the way they are. It's an embarrassment to the UK that some mothers can end up being forced to resign because they don't have childcare.