To think that most company menopause policies are an absolute joke?

[JenniferAnistonsHair2023]

I work for a FTSE100 firm, been there a long time. No historical performance issues. Mid 50s, senior role, quite high pressure.

At the start of this year I went down to 4 days in an attempt to slow down a little. I'm menopausal, anxious, permanently tired (insomnia) - you get the picture. On HRT which has helped but doesn't turn you back into the person you were when you were 30.

My last performance review I was pretty much told I'm underperforming. This came as a shock to me as I'm managing a full time workload in 4 days. Was given some areas to focus on which I'm trying my hardest to do, but part of me thinks I'm just not good enough any more.

Decide to contact HR today to discuss what constitutes 'reasonable adjustments' to my role because of menopause symptoms. (We have a policy published on our intranet). HR helpline pretty much just told me that I need to work things out with my manager. Made the point that my manager was the problem and I didn't feel comfortable discussing menopause with a 50 something male with no training on the matter. Still get a 'computer says no' response.

I mean, what's the fucking point of having a policy? I'm losing the will to live. On top of all that I'm asked to do a day of meetings which involves 3 hours of travelling either side next week, with no opportunity to take any of that time back. I refused on the basis that there was a dial-in option and that I wasn't willing to go massively over my 28 hours for the week (there are times when I have to travel when f2f is the only option and that's fine, I suck it up).

AIBU? Has anyone got experience of a workplace where they have a better menopause policy so that I can consider applying?!

50% of the workforce will go through the menopause. (Peri) Menopausal symptoms last for years. Use your brain as to why a policy may be needed.

The help should be provided in the same way as ANY other medical issue. Not a special policy for each one. If we have a menopause policy then we should have a cancer policy, migraine policy, arthritis policy, IBS policy... see where I'm going with this?

You must be able to figure out why menopause is currently being treated differently?

If not, it's because menopause hasn't traditionally been considered an illness or medical condition unlike cancer, migraines, arthritis, etc. It still isn't by a lot of people, hence some of the responses here. Introducing a menopause policy brings awareness that the organisation is treating it as a sickness or medical issue.

That's also why some companies have new period policies.

Mad some of the replies on here. Feels like a race to the bottom, where people are arguing why have a policy as managers should be able to sort out adjustments if an employee has a health issue. But it doesn’t work like that as managers are often biased, weak, poor or just not trained properly to lead staff, and get the best out of people by ensuring they can stay in the workplace despite issues. I mean every female over a certain age in any firms workforce will go through menopause so makes sense to assure employees they will be treated fairly and adjustments can be made and managers have a set of guides on what they should be doing.
The problem is firms rush to put out a policy all in the name of D&I but don’t train managers and I’m not surprised a lot of women don’t feel comfortable talking about personal issues with clueless middle age men.

No dearie - you need to use your brain.
50% of the workforce go through menopause - but not all will have symptoms severe enough to necessitate adjustments. Just like how 50% have periods, but not all have issues with them.
Symptoms lasting for years - like so many other chronic illnesses so actually you're supporting what I said with this statement instead of arguing against it.

Come back when you've done a bit more thinking.

@SawX I'm fine with the menopause policy simply stating 'treat menopause as a sickness issue'. That's a one-liner. Nothing more needs to be stated. But what many PP seem to be describing is something more, going into detail about time off, workloads etc etc that really, once something is a sickness issue comes under the banner of that. The burden of proof should still be upheld via the normal processes.

My issue with period policies is that there is no impetus to treat women. Because periods are 'normal', companies are all 'oh its normal to suffer let's giving women time off' and it never gets solved.

That's bullshit and that's not the outcome we want. We want painful periods to be recognised as a MEDICAL issue, and for treatment to be explored. Giving blanket leave normalises painful periods instead of treating it as a medical issue when absolutely - it IS a medical issue.

Same for menopause with severe symptoms. Why are we expected to put up with it? Why is nobody campaigning for the medical community to take it seriously?

Stop pushing the problem around. Medicalise it and deal with it like any other illnesses. That is the only outcome that will ensure we get the treatment we deserve. The ONLY reason there needs to be a special policy where the burden of medical proof is lower is because the medical community refuses to take us seriously and while that's good in the short-term it's a very damaging long run outcome.

Btw my company's policy is about education, and like you said treating is as an illness - but it's also covered under our private healthcare. We get clinical support. Now, that I fully applaud, they put their money where their mouth is. Excellent!

At my company so many people have some sort of issue, I for example am neurodiverse and have MH issues among other things.
Managers would go insane if they have to keep up with everything.
What we do have is not only clear sickness procedures but a very strong occupational health team that can not only support managers but employees can also consult with them first, on their own, to get them to liaise with the LM. Managers know when someone raises something they need to engage the team. That's all. We also have training, resources etc but that's for most common issues, including menopause.

The problem happens when companies don't have this support structure. They don't have anybody to refer to, they just jump around putting in policies to deal with the flavour of the month. Because they don't give a shit about being fair. They give a shit about pretending to be.

simply stating 'treat menopause as a sickness issue'. That's a one-liner. Nothing more needs to be stated. But what many PP seem to be describing is something more, going into detail about time off, workloads etc etc that

Most people who haven't been through it know very little about menopause symptoms or what a woman might need to help her.

You seem to want everybody to accept that menopause can be debilitating and should be treated like other medical issues but without doing any kind of education or awareness raising. It's odd.

Did you miss the bit where I mentioned training and resources?

Policies, and education/awareness are two separate things. They may have a degree of overlap in the sense that policy pages might include links to training, ours certainly do.
However the overarching point of a policy is to tell people what they should do. Which, in our case, is 'consult occupational health'. The training and resources are there but everything is generic - managers will be educated on what they need to know by the relevant professionals.

The other reason for emphasizing needing occupational health involvement is because if not done correctly even a 'reasonable adjustment' done in good faith can leave one open to discrimination.

I've looked at a few policies , this for example:
https://www.nhsggc.org.uk/media/264720/menopause-policy-version-2.pdf
'Consider a referral to occupational health' is written as the last point, managers are supposed to handle it first. With things like 'review task allocation' which could clearly lead to a discrimination case if not handled properly, e.g someone moved off a more stressful project. 'Consider a different shift pattern' again in my role this would be impossible without severely impacting the flow of work - again, someone agreeing a 'day work' pattern which then results in them being left out of later, more crucial meetings could argue discrimination.

We do not have 'considering' anything ALL reasonable adjustments MUST go through occupational health to be fair to all parties - employee, line manager and employee. There's no need for a massive list here and handing it off to managers, because we have a strong OH unit and have invested in them to make them accessible and provide the appropriate support with everything clearly documented. We don't expect them to be the experts, attempt to manage things themselves then screw it up.

Nothing against awareness campaigns btw - but again, that is separate from policy.

Btw - if you claim that people 'not knowing what a woman might need' is an issue - what are you going to do when you have an employee with a rare disorder? Or if, like autism, there are a plethora of issues, two autistic individuals can need diametrically opposite things?

The idea here shouldn't be that people NEED to know everything. They need to follow procedure, consult the employee and their experts and listen to them. That's all. 'Knowing what a woman needs' is not the job of a manager because as I stated there are thousands of conditions with thousands of things needed. It's the job of OH - and for the manager to educate themselves as necessary.

*them to screw up the them here is the line managers of course.

Also @SawX @Pleasebeafleabite
the OP's post is a perfect example. What happened to her would not have happened in my company. And is exactly what I was referring to.
Company publishes 'guidance', a laundry list, then tells people to show manager the list. The end. no support apart from a HR call centre, outsourced somewhere.

In my company you would talk to a human, if you didn't want to talk to your 50 year old male manager fine you could discuss this with OH first who would then facilitate the conversation and advise your manager.

The policy is not the problem. The support, and interpretation is the problem. Everyone arguing about a policy has missed the point.

@JenniferAnistonsHair2023 I feel sorry for the undeserved bashing you've got on here. it's hard. But there are decent employers out there.

@PinkRoses1245 Yes miscarriage and fertility is awful but is akin to bereavement and so a maternity policy that covers miscarriage and infant loss of more inline with maternity-esque policy guidelines. For menopause it can be debilitating for many years and is a health issue that can affect women’s performance in the work place. As for fertility my company does have an IVF policy, obviously it has its limitations but it’s something that is controllable unlike menopause where even if medicated you can still be suffering symptoms for years leading to capability dismissal. This is not trying to damp down your efforts, I have been their myself with miscarriage and we tailored our maternity and paternity policies in the business when in quick succession we had 2 colleagues on maternity and one on paternity who suffered infant loss in the same year - it really was bought to the forefront.

When OP expands she is talking about an unsupportive manager who expects her to work 100% FTE for 80% FTE pay. Menop challenges are just icing on the top. Unless 'someone else' would allow OP to do 80% work for 80% pay.

Having RTFT it looks like the OP was hoping to use the menopause policy to cover herself, but she shouldn't have to. 80% hours 80% pay.
That aside in many professional jobs the concept of 'hours worked' doesn't apply. Mine states that I'll work an 'average' of 35 hours but also additional as expected by the needs of the job 'including weekends and public holidays' so really ... what's the point?
If you've always worked past your hours FT, and everyone else around you does the same (as I believe OP said in her previous post about her industry.) it makes no sense to magically expect to 'stick to your hours' when you go PT. Especially if you're senior management in such a large company.

Don't know what the answer is here but I've found for many things despite what policy etc says an unsupportive boss is always a major blocker... so many things stop with the line manager.

How senior people in my place handle it they move to another team/department with a better boss.

PikachuChickenRice Sorry, I'm really struggling to follow your point which might be a me problem.

I hope it all works out for you OP.

It's a lot better than havin NO menopause policy or even awareness of this natural event in many working and otherwise women's lives. Just as increased Maternity Benefits/Pay and Shared Parental Leave is.

None of these 'measures' are perfect and need further development but they are all a step in the right direction towards 'female equality'.

Sometimes I worry that the very same patriarchy that 'allowed' the implementation of such 'female equality' provisions, because not all men are cunts after all; could easily shut down the whole shebang too.

I advocate a female 'strategy' of tread quietly but true to course.

@PikachuChickenRice Menopause policies do more than deal with adjustments as other posters have pointed out. Please don’t bother replying to me; you’ve spammed the thread sufficiently already and I’m not your dearie.

@PikachuChickenRice I think you make a good point.

I do expect to work beyond my hours, to a degree. What doesn't help is other members of my team who work a condensed week ie 5 days condensed into 4. I feel this confuses the issue as they work longer hours. I refuse to do that as I might as well be working a condensed week as well and getting 100% pay.

You might ask why I just don't do that: the answer is because I don't want to. I don't want to be committed to working 35 hours over 4 days. It defeats the whole object of me cutting my hours.

You consider detailed, thoughtful replies 'spam' at the same time ask other people to use their brains ... oh the irony! Looks like you do indeed need to take your own advice.

So are you saying that currently, you work 'slightly' more than your hours 28, over 4 days and are getting 100% of the work done? But not 35 hours? How's that measured? When you were told that you were underperforming, did you hit your objectives? What evidence was provided?

It's very difficult to measure performance in a senior management role I find because it's based on some vague measure that can be influenced by so many factors beyond your control. How your manager sees it isn't 'objective' but really dependent on their view of you.

Quite recently for example in my firm (although roles not people get made redundant!) we had someone let go, high performer, renowned in the industry, but others in his department just didn't like the innovation he was trying to bring and saw a golden opportunity with the current round of redundancies + he was in the process of handing over his current team to move roles. We were all quite shocked. My own boss almost left a few years ago because his own big boss just hated him and escaped by jumping to another team.

My point is I think you need to think more strategically about your current role, the team, how you fit into and where you see yourself going. If your manager's given you an unfair performance review (and I presume the company has clear standards to follow) you can raise a grievance. In terms of the work, certainly clarify the requires roles and responsibilities. But think more politically - is there anywhere else you can move to in the org with a manager that will actually treat you like a valued employee instead of ... this?

You definitely need to record this though. That you're being treated unfairly. Make sure to document everything. Are there any ERG's in the firm - if the general HR line is being unhelpful.

@PikachuChickenRice it's complicated, and it's more around perceived 'behaviours' than around what i actually deliver. But you've given me a lot to think about.

Ok just be sure that you’re not using meno as a way out of your underperformance issue. Your posts are all over the place. You’re struggling you’re not struggling. As a manager I don’t read your posts well. I read it as someone struggling and trying to find a reason.

so if you feel you’re appraisal is inaccurate, why are you looking at reasonable adjustments, and not just providing evidence as to your performance?

Which is (partly) why I used the word "can".

I am well aware that it is not listed in the Equality Act as a separate protected characteristic.

The other reason I used the word "can" is because for most women it isn't a disability, some women don't have symptoms, or nothing significant, and others find HRT works for them.

But some women are disabled by it and should receive support from their employers accordingly.

It’s not about wanting to quit. They are not quitting because it’s a positive life change, they’re quitting because menopause symptoms are not manageable within the (often male centric) framework of their roles. But in many cases a supportive workplace can find a way around this without detriment to the business, and enables them to retain good experienced employees. We accept that in pregnancy employees might need a different chair or other H&S accommodations- why not accept that in menopause an employee might need easier access to toilet rather than waiting on specific break times for example.

I really would like to know how many women are truly disabled from it. I went through an intense menopause resulting from breast cancer along with being on an Aramadase Inhibiter (Letrozole) which stops any peripheral fat from being converted into oestrogen. Breast cancer was hormone positive so no HRT for me and symptoms started overnight. I have had to cope with absolutely no medication as respite. It does amaze me how some women describe their symptoms given this. I do still work.

Statistically 25% of women describe their symptoms as severe. About 15% of those consider treatment, so way, way less than one in ten disabled by it like the op. As it would be only those where treatment didn’t work.

I guess that’s why the responses objecting are there, as over 90% of women are not unable to work like the op and don’t need adjustments, so they don’t want to be blanket singled out in thr workplace that they will reach a certain age and be unable to perform their roles and need adjustments for years. But all feel adjustments should be available for the small percentage of women who need it.

Just to say Op, I'm with you on how difficult it can be to manage the symptoms. I'm going through the same. Ignore those women on here who have little to no understanding, they have no clue that symptoms can develop at anytime from peri until they die. A woman remains in menopause until she dies, no such thing as being 'through it' so they have no idea as to what is round the corner.