To not get a job because I’m a sahm

[velvetcandy]

So after 8 years being a sahm I’ve decided to go back to work. Had a very good interview last week, the role was actually half the salary I had before I had kids and a lower position but still the same area of work etc.

the feedback was, that I was perfect but they were worried because I’ve been out of work for so long so gave the job to a recent grad. I have over ten years experience plus a degree.

aibu to think this is unfair?

Someone with 10 years of experience from 8 years ago is actually of less value to my team than a recent grad. More likely to be stuck in 'old' or outdated ways of doing things and unwilling to change. The world in my area has moved on significantly. Knowledge and skills needed are totally different. The grad would have learned these at University and the ones we hire have done extensive research beyond their studies and have interesting and creative opinions and ideas for new opportunities as well as ambition, focus and drive.

I have no idea what industry you work in but if it relies on theories that have moved on in that time and you haven't shown you've kept up it's clear why you weren't chosen over the grad, kids or not.

I'm a recruiting manager and I want to stress again that just because you're the most experienced candidate does not mean you're also the best fit for the job.

I'm recruiting for a junior to mid-level roles at the moment. And I have people with 20,30, even 40+ years of experience applying.
Could they do the job? I'm sure they could. But they would also get bored and frustrated with tasks they could do with their eyes closed. So the graduate might have simply been a better fit for the job.

And also, we don't know what the job is. I've also worked in roles where you need to take over the shift on the dot and it really simply isn't possible for someone to start half an hour later.

so what everyone’s basically saying is go back to work asap after you’ve had kids even though the majority of your pay check will be spent on childcare,

Everyone has different priorities. From the absolute beginning of my working life i have had one eye on my pension, my career progression and where i want to be in 5, 10, 15 etc years. It hasn't always gone to plan, but one thing i have ALWAYS been keen on (my mum is one of the women who misses pension because of the half-stamp nonsense in the 70s) is that i remain relevant and attractive to employers. Not because i love working (i don't) but because i don't want to face an old age of potential poverty. My main way of investing in that was getting back to work asap and seeing the childcare costs as part of that investment.

And it has been a bloody hard slog with a lot of tears and stress along the way.

additionally if you do take some time out still somehow use/update your skills that you can’t technically access unless you’re at work

Well, you can't sit back and expect all this knowledge to fall in your lap. It could be as easy as keeping up with industry developments by treading the trade mags, or investing in freshening up your Office skills. Whatever. You know what your industry needs because you did it for 10 years. Being pro-active is what employers love.

and also give your services away for free by volunteering because obviously once you have kids that renders your experience as void. Love mums net

Mumsnet can offer loads of really good practical advice. Volunteering is a way of showing that you can commit, that your timekeeping is good, that you have a system in place for when you are not at home etc etc.

You do seem quite passive for someone who is looking for work, OP. Perhaps that came across in the interview?

Well, yeah! It's common knowledge that being a SAHM makes it much, much harder to re-enter the workforce. People don't want to employ people with no recent experience or qualifications.

so what everyone’s basically saying is go back to work asap after you’ve had kids even though the majority of your pay check will be spent on childcare, additionally if you do take some time out still somehow use/update your skills that you can’t technically access unless you’re at work and also give your services away for free by volunteering because obviously once you have kids that renders your experience as void

Yep - unless you're in a role where it doesn't matter if you take 1, 10 or 20 years out that is the reality. Why do you think so many parents go back to work after the children are born?

That's a choice a lot of women make, yes. You've made a different choice, which is perfectly fine, but you have to accept that you are therefore not in the same position as another person who hasn't had a career break.

Most people find there is more to volunteering than "giving your services away for free".

And having kids does not render your experience as void. It renders it 8 years old (in your case). I've stayed in the workplace but if I tried to get a job doing what I'd been doing 8 years ago, I would also be out of touch and deskilled. I have other skills that suggest I might be able to transfer back, but that requires me to convince an employer to take a chance on me, not for them to automatically think that I am amazing.

You are not the same person you were 8 years ago. You may or may not be able to do the same job you were doing then. None of us know that. Have a read round MN and see how many women struggle with doing their old jobs after just a year of maternity leave.

I think OP you are mixing up what is relevant.

It is not that fact that you have kids that has held you back in your job search. Millions of parents work.

It is the 8 year gap in your work history. You could be child free and male and experienced.... and an 8 year gap will be an issue. It is 8 years. It is a really, really long time.

so what everyone’s basically saying is go back to work asap after you’ve had kids

Nobody said that. You made your choice, chose a path and yes this means that affects how your life goes and what other choices you have available. Other women decided to go back ASAP - we also didn't have some options like you had. Honestly, what were you expecting, that a large gap during which you didn't keep your skill sup to date will have no effect at all?

Everyone is basically saying go back to work asap after you’ve had kids even though the majority of your pay check will be spent on childcare

Yes. *
*
Or you have another option: get a better job/build a better paid career - before you have children.

Wow this is hideous!

Wow. Was it a man or a woman who said that? Their minds would have been blown by my maternity leave when I was 43..

Everyone is basically saying go back to work asap after you’ve had kids even though the majority of your pay check will be spent on childcare

For a finite number of years during which time you’ll have had pay increases, contributed to a pension, learned more skills, better chance of promotion etc. What an incredibly short sighted post .

so what everyone’s basically saying is go back to work asap after you’ve had kids even though the majority of your pay check will be spent on childcare,

absolutely.

I spent three years working for nothing due to childcare costs. I’m now head of my dept and on a good salary. No way would I be here if I’d taken time out.

the number of women I know who are stuck either can’t get a job or doing min wage stuff way below their capabilities is unreal. And some of those have been really fucked over when their husband leaves them.

In my experience the decision to be a sahm and for how long is all too frequently short sighted. Women are so often their own worst enemy.

@IcedPurple well you won't know whether jobs with flexible hours are the 'majority' or 'minority' unless you did a statistical survey and worked out exactly what proportion of jobs needed punctuality.
But to simplify matters further.. 10 years of experience, graduate is hardly going to be a retail, train driver or similar job is it?

It's really irrelevant without knowing the industry. Flexible working etc is very possible with mine. But it also means me logging in after hours if something goes wrong. Or getting up early/late for various timezones. Goes both ways.

Someone who gives the impression of taking flexibility... but not giving any isn't an attractive candidate.

100% agree with Mountain. I have worked in an office and worked at home for many many years for a large corporate depending on what the flavour of the month was. They went too far on many occasions and you werent allowed to even visit your clients - you were constantly reminded that you should be using SKYPE as if we didnt know that already. It really wasnt the same and these clients were spending often millions.

I was customer facing and there really is no where to hide. There are late night phone calls ocassionally and at weekends. All part of the role which was well paid. As long as you didnt take advantage it was fine, HOWEVER there were a considerable amount of women who did take advantage. Who were never available between 1530-1630 and who claimed to make up the time but never did. Women who refused a conference call at say 1700 because they knew it was going to be noisy. There were an awful lot of dentist appointments but please bear in mind that no one is really that concerned whether your child is feeling under the weather or that you need to leave early to attend sports day/school play where they have part etc because THEY then need to cover for you.

I am thinking of one shocker of a women who took and took everything she could and the rest of the team just had to manage without her. Her own manager was scared of her and there were so many reorganisations they knew it wasnt worth taking her on.

Having kids is necessary for society. But wanting to spend all day at home with them is a choice (unless they're disabled, etc). There's nothing inherently virtuous that you more deserving of a job. Compared to anybody else who has spent the past X years doing something else.

Part-time and flexible working isn't a social service btw. It actually benefits businesses that suit it. Retention of talented staff, better coordination/working practices, more motivated employees.

Hiring someone with no recent experience? By itself no benefit. It really depends on the candidate pool.

It is, but keep trying. I was out of work for 10 years. Retrained in tech 5 years ago and no one's ever even asked about the gap in the CV. Plenty of forms won't be dicks about it.

well you won't know whether jobs with flexible hours are the 'majority' or 'minority' unless you did a statistical survey and worked out exactly what proportion of jobs needed punctuality.

Think of everyone who works for a living. Not just the people in your profession but the ones who keep basic services going, the ones you interact with every day. How many of them can do their job 'flexibly'? I'd say it's only a minority of 'office' type jobs where people can set their own timetable. These may be disproportionately represented on MN, but they're certainly not the majority in society as a whole.

But to simplify matters further.. 10 years of experience, graduate is hardly going to be a retail, train driver or similar job is it?

No but it could be a teacher, a health care worker, a lawyer or any number of professions for whom time keeping is very important.

You applied for a graduate job and they gave it to a graduate 🤷‍♀️

Retraining makes you a 'graduate'.
The sort of person who'd actually get hired over someone like the OP, if this was the tech industry.
Not exactly supporting her point, is it?

OP again being a SAHM, etc isn't the issue. In fact this PARTICULAR company could have been discriminatory. It's quite possible.

However as thread has gone on... it's quite clear that you think 10 years of experience, a decade ago is still wholly relevant today. You don't see the need to have 'kept in touch'. By reading industry publications, maybe having a chat with a few of your ex-colleagues, etc. They wouldn't have wasted their time giving you multiple interviews if they didn't think you were a good possibility. However even thought you had more experience , it was not required for the role, and ultimately they could have felt that the graduate's more recent stuff was desirable.

If you still have no luck after a few tries you might consider working with a career coach. And remember that even people with relevant experience still go through several rounds of rejection, interview etc. As long as you present yourself well it should be fine.

I work with a fair few of these types. Drives me bananas.

Exactly that.

I went back to work FT when DD was 9 months old. Childcare was over double the cost of our mortgage, we had a household income of about £32k at the time. 7 years later my salary has quadrupled and childcare costs have finished so short term pain, and it was painful but we managed and now we're comfortable.

Half... I bet you get a lot of people saying you have been lucky....

Based on what the OP has posted I see no evidence of discrimination or not getting the job because of being a SAHM. That’s what you would like to think as it’s easier to stomach than the alternative reality which is:

This is the effect of what happens when people take a lifestyle choice of removing themselves out of the workplace for extended periods (years); don’t maintain skills by volunteering/training etc.; are unable to demonstrate commitment to returning to the workplace; apply for the wrong job relative to skill level so expectations are mismatched - and in the first interview without being offered the job discuss their need for flexibility.