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?

It’s really unfair.
Being a mother and raising your kids without any outsourcing is so so under valued in our society. It is in fact one of the most important jobs there are.
All this does is give women less choice, not more.

In my industry and many others, 10 years of experience ending 8 years ago would be absolutely worthless.

Only in the context of a world with high competition, which ignores transferable skills. The number of jobs I have seen that require recent experience with a specific IT program: it’s not necessary if you know how to use thousands of programs and can learn a new one quickly, but employers can insist it is. Because they can get that, and pay peanuts for it too.

I've posted this before, but it took me about 7 years to regain my previous level of seniority and salary after taking a break of 18 months when mine were small. Salary went to about 40% of previous salary (although still quite high, was previously well into six figures). This was 20 years ago. I'm sure the time it takes to recover is directly proportionate to how long you take off. Fair doesn't come into it - it's about an employer making a fair assessment of your ability to do the job. Your experience is 8 years out of date. My advice is take the job and show them how good you are.

It’s the reality of sex discrimination by the back door.

I wonder if they even asked the graduate if they could do the hours. It is very poor Equal Opps practice to ask different questions of different candidates,

I’m not saying the points about keeping up to date are not valid, obviously it is important to get up to speed and be ‘employment fit’. Which includes making sure that your DC’s father, if present, understands that you can no longer be the only and default responder to those calls from school when a child falls ill etc. As an employer of a mostly female workforce I was always very fed up when it seemed I had to carry this whole burden while employers of the fathers of my employees’ kids carried on without inconvenience.

So what is wrong with a bit of flexibility?

Nothing, and I agree that mothers tend to make great employees. But, for me, the flexibility would not be the issue: it's the assumption from the OP that she can just opt not to work the stated hours. That tells me that she had not considered that the change of hours might not suit the needs of the business or other employees - a big red flag.

There are two appropriate times to discuss variations to the stated terms of the job: before applying (especially if it's something major like only being able to work 20 hours when the ad says full-time) or after being offered the job. Not at interview.

It's hard to know what happened but brace yourself, in my experience workplace sexism goes into a whole different gear once you're a woman with kids.

My suspicion is that not everyone likes the proposition that women should be/are able to combine motherhood and a career. It's normal for men but seen as having ideas 'above one's station' for women.

It's not everyone though. Keep going, you'll find an employer who values your skills.

Thats shit.
We recently took on a woman coming from a decade as a sahm - she’s fucking fantastic.

Exactly the same story as you too, our job is less than what she was on but she wanted to ease herself in. She’s doing really well and wouldn’t ever not choose someone on that fact alone in the future.

If they could see from your CV that you had a gap for childcare responsibilities why did they even bother to call you for interview? It wastes everyone's time and is really dispiriting. (speak from bitter experience!) I just don't understand why companies insist on doing this. Or, call you in for interview and then say you are "over qualified". Again, why ask you to turn up at all?!

Having experience i years ago doesn’t necessarily make you better placed for this job than the recent graduate that got it. There could be plenty of reasons why he or she would be a better fit than you are, and not just because they are available at the times the job requires. Often employers don’t want people who are over qualified because they might be moving on or expecting more money sooner.

You would probably need a similar level of support to get back into it properly as the other candidate, and if you’re both equally capable of doing the job, why wouldn’t an enthusiastic youngster who can work whatever hours are required be more attractive than someone who can’t work the hours and has other important commitments?

But not all jobs CAN be flexible.

I know on MN, everyone seems to work jobs where you can be constantly flexible, but IRL it's just not always possible.

Many jobs require people to be in the business for set hours each day, or require you to be there when the doors open. If the business is only open for eight hours a day, and OP's contract is eight hours a day, she can't just come in late and stay late to "make up the time".

It depends what job it is but in almost 10 years lots of things can change and it is more likely the recent graduate is up to date with all of these changes.

They will also probably be cheaper if it’s anything like teaching and are easily molded to fit their way of working.

One of my teacher friends didn’t get a job because an interviewee got a 1st and she got a 2:1 at university. Even though she’d been teaching for over 5 years and the other person was only recently qualified.

Fortunately she got a job somewhere else and has been there for 3 years but the person they employed lasted less than 2 terms. And this has happened several times that I know of.
So it shows that being recently qualified isn’t always a good thing.

Don’t let this dishearten you though.
Many people will absolutely want life experience as well as job experience over someone who may use the company as a stop gap until their next job.

Do you have a trusted male friend? Ask them what they'd do.
I know several men who have taken time out fir whatever reason and they did nit apply fir more junior roles, they went for tge same or higher level jobs. They used their time off to explain all the other things they'd learned and skills they developed.

As a sahm, you are likely to be much more organised, efficient and high performing.

I'd suggest you consider that a near miss - if they are dumb enough to think a shame is ineffective they're probably sexist cos thinking that is def sexist!

This is excellent advice.

@Dibbydoos

As a sahm, you are likely to be much more organised, efficient and high performing.

Oh, come ON - this is nonsense.

It’s a shame that you didn’t push back when they gave you the feedback by saying “You knew before you invited me to interview that I had a long gap in employment. Can you please tell me what it was that I said in the interview that made you decide that the time away was a reason not to offer me the job?”

Or... they were prepared to give her a chance on the basis of her past experience and OP didn't present herself well enough, or was simply not the best candidate.

@HaveringWavering that’s good! I haven’t replied to their email so will say that

Maybe try and out it a bit more diplomatically, but you get the gist! Good luck.

I only apply for jobs at my level op. Years ago when my children were small i wanted less. Never got those positions, overqualified. Go on some courses, it will give your confidence.And something to talk about. If I was ever asked about my children, I asked about theirs! Ditto aged parents.
Personally I hate interviews. I have two this week. Rather not!

Maybe they invited her to interview to ask what she had done to keep her skills current?

As others have said the OP is a bit evasive about this, so perhaps the interviewers weren't impressed by her answers.

All speculation of course.

Would you want to work somewhere where half an hour of flex is such a big deal? Get something better for you!

They don't care about your children. They can see from your career gap that you have them.

As a sahm, you are likely to be much more organised, efficient and high performing.

This is complete bollocks, sorry. There are hundreds of thousands of women who manage to have children and work, which takes real organisation and efficiency.

I feel for you OP and YADNBU. You have all the experience and qualifications that you need, plus maturity. It is utterly ridiculous to see how little mothers are supported and valued. It's not like you've been in a crack den for the last decade. You've been through a normal phase of life where raising little humans (& astronomic childcare costs) meant pausing work. Now you're ready to continue and companies treat you like your sell by date has passed. Utterly ridiculous.

Should also say it was a second interview, I had a previous interview via zoom