Families should have more space than couples

[CrunchiestCru]

Employer provides accommodation, existing employees can request to move within as needed. AIBU to expect that a family would get the larger accommodation over a couple?

@SofiaMichelle I agree there shouldn’t be a reward for breeding as a PP so eloquently put it. But unfortunately the employer isn’t the best and they haven’t thought the policy through.

@SofiaMichelle I do think society is becoming less empathetic it’s scary at times

@Whyo but they can’t because they are required to live in the accommodation by their employer, so therefore the employer should provide suitable living accommodation. There are plenty of jobs where you are required to live in the house you are given, it’s been in quite a few of my employment contracts.

You've already admitted there are the same number of bedrooms OP. Why not just say exactly what the size difference is, or the floor plan you've seen, or the photos you've seen that made you think the other accommodation is "better"? I've given you many plausible reasons why the slightly smaller flat might have been thought to be a better or same option for the family.

@CrunchiestCru

If you have children you need more space it’s not rocket science. Engineering wise it’s 100sq ft per person, more people more area. They employ people knowing their family situation and in this particular industry they often choose single people or couples for that reason as they’re cheaper.

For people who own homes there’s no issue buy a six bedroom house for yourself as you get the bigger kitchen but yes a family with children could equally use it. It’s funny this question has linked into so many other points. I think this shows why we’ve had such an issue with COVID people aren’t on the whole willing to think of others needs before their own.

but we haven't had "such an issue" with covid precisely because people HAVE put community first! People have worn masks, socially distanced, formed ad hoc local support groups, shopped for their neighbours and so on. Yes there have been idiots and asshats but this is humanity not angelkind. So far as employment goes, so long as the conditions are clear before a contract is signed, I don't see what the issue is....as i said this is business not social justice.

[quote CrunchiestCru]@SofiaMichelle I do think society is becoming less empathetic it’s scary at times[/quote]
I don't, as i said Covid has shown this.

Also a more senior position may command a larger house as part of their package ?

If the only difference is floor space then no. I’d imagine enough work goes into allocating relatively fairly that floor space comparison isn’t a factor. Probs measured by number of bedrooms I imagine.
I imagine it similarly to rooms allocated at uni - some are clearly bigger or nicer than others. But everyone just gets allocated at random.
There are sufficient size properties for families of up to 4 say, and therefore they’re allocated at random

What's the alternative? Hire based on what houses are left? When there aren't any family homes left they should only hire childless employees?

@MRex sorry for missing your post. This is the latest one that’s annoyed me but there are plenty of others where they’ve put four people families into same or smaller accom than couples/singles

Typical cold mumsnet answers on here. Of course a family with kids should have more space / bedrooms!!

[quote CrunchiestCru]@SofiaMichelle I do think society is becoming less empathetic it’s scary at times[/quote]
You think Victorian Britain was empathetic?

You think Colonial Britain was empathetic?

You think Windrush Britain was empathetic?

Newsflash: Humans are selfish.

I find it more worrying that people are only noticing now when it somehow affects them directly...

[quote CrunchiestCru]@MRex sorry for missing your post. This is the latest one that’s annoyed me but there are plenty of others where they’ve put four people families into same or smaller accom than couples/singles[/quote]
you know what? is this where you work? Does it affect you?
cos I am at the "stay or go but stop whining" stage

@CrunchiestCru

If you have children you need more space it’s not rocket science. Engineering wise it’s 100sq ft per person, more people more area. They employ people knowing their family situation and in this particular industry they often choose single people or couples for that reason as they’re cheaper.

For people who own homes there’s no issue buy a six bedroom house for yourself as you get the bigger kitchen but yes a family with children could equally use it. It’s funny this question has linked into so many other points. I think this shows why we’ve had such an issue with COVID people aren’t on the whole willing to think of others needs before their own.

They employ the person not the family.

If they took into account whether they had children or not that could end up being classed as discriminatory as it would tend to disproportionately work against women (who are more likely to be single parents or have custody after divorce) getting a job in the first place.

Hence why they won't do it at per sq per family member.

When you go for a job interview you shouldn't be being asked about your living arrangements / marital / child status.

@CrunchiestCru

It is free accommodation in that it’s part of the package working for the employer.

So nearly everyone on here would accept a larger place knowing it will give a larger family than yours less space? Generally they are flats so it’s not like children have space to run around. Just seems selfish, but it’s the employer creating the issue with poor policies.

Other people's issue with their accomodation is something for someone to raise with the employer not make other employees feel guilty about. The financial package (including employee benefits) of other employees isn't my business.

So the fact someone else has a bigger / smaller accomodation isn't something I would get involved in anymore than it isn't the done thing to discuss how much other employees are paid.

Its about what an employer values not 'fairnes'. People get paid different amounts based on performance and ability all the time.

If you have children you need more space it’s not rocket science.

You also need more food, more clothes, more money. Should employers give out automatic 10% pay rises every time someone produces another child?

@MurielSpriggs

If you have children you need more space it’s not rocket science.

You also need more food, more clothes, more money. Should employers give out automatic 10% pay rises every time someone produces another child?

Yes the NHS should give you a pay rise every time you pop out another child.

Of course this is going to be to the detriment of women who are told they must have another child so that Dad can get paid more which the Mum and kids don't see cos of he's a controlling prick.

And of course can you imagine how well this will go down with the electorate as a whole (keeping in mind the demographic profile of the uk with a majority being older and not living with kids). It wouldn't just be benefit scrougers, itd be public sector scroungers.

@godmum56 I think you’ve missed the point of mumsnet

they’ve put four people families into same or smaller accom than couples/singles

OP Sorry if you've answered this already, but how many bedrooms are the 4 person families being allocated, and how many have the couples had?

If there's a standard property that comes with the job and you have to live in all time (not say, the person employed needs to live in 4 nights a week they are on call, but could go live with their family on weekends elsewhere), then as long as you know at interview what the minimum sized property you will be given to live in, it might be nice if a larger family is allocated larger properties that are available, but the employee went into it with their eyes open and no, the childless couple shouldn't be kicked out of their property when someone else is hired with a bigger family.

Id the accommodation for the 4 person family is adequate for 4 people /meets the minimum size the employee was told they would have on accepting the job, why does it matter that someone else who's worked their longer /asked first gets a bigger property?

[quote CrunchiestCru]@godmum56 I think you’ve missed the point of mumsnet [/quote]
I know but I live in hope

Does this employer pay higher salaries to those with more people (a bigger family) to feed and clothe?

Perhaps the standard of housing (size/situation/quality/value) should be connected to the job. It is part of your pay.

Equal work should equal the value of the place you can have. (If you are in a two bed - it should be worth the same as a 4 bed... regardless of the number in your family.)

@CrunchiestCru YABU.

Whilst it's common sense that a bigger family should be allowed a bigger home/more bedrooms, it's not always as black and white as that.

As has been said, there are too many variables. EG, I know several couples who live in 2 bed bungalows owned by a housing association, and have lived there for for 20-25 years. There have been several comments from a couple of people who have a family member on the housing list, who have said, 'you could put a family of 4 in those bungalows.'

Why the F should they move out of their home? The home they have been in for 25 years? And where are they supposed to go? To a shitty council 1-bed? These particular 2 beds were built for private sale in the 1970s, and the builder went bust, so social housing took them over. They are roomy and lovely, and have big gardens, driveways, and garages.. And they look nice. ALL the 1 bed bungalows in our area are like shoeboxes. No room in them hardly, no storage, no parking space, no garage, and a 10 foot long front 'garden,' that has a public footpath so close to the house that people can see straight into their windows.

As one of them said, just because someone decides to pop out a couple of sprogs, I am meant to sacrifice my home? Not likely!