To think that non-binary candidates are more unlikely to be offered a job?

[GinnyPiggie]

I have a non-binary child in their twenties and they are really struggling to secure work.

It might be unfair of me, but I really think that in presenting themselves as non-binary, they are going to struggle to be offered a job with the vast majority of employers. Yes this might be pure discrimination but personally I'd be worried about HR issues and getting sued for saying the wrong thing.

AIBU to think that if you have a range of good candidates, you are going to be reluctant to hire a non-binary candidate because of the potential for issues in the office?

Where would you put it on a CV?
I don't put my sex, age or anything like that on mine.

I can see people putting it in a covering letter, that wouldn't put my off hiring someone - but announcing pronouns in an interview (regardless of what they are) would make me take a step back.

what I said was, people with biases will surround themselves and hire people who ‘fit in with the culture’. Which means if you are GC, you won’t hire NB or trans people, or even people openly supportive of NB and trans people. So people don’t leave as they are happy in their bubble of people who think like them.

I don't disagree with this, I'm sure this happens and to an extent I can understand why. I agree that someone who feels the need to put this on a CV sounds like someone who is more hung up on themselves than the job.

However, I work with a young woman in her mid 20s. Biological female, looks female, female name etc. She specifies "she/her" on her email signature, presumably in solidarity with trans people.

She is very bright. A real high achiever. Highly competent and enthusiastic.

The thought of her CV ending up in a "no" pile just because of adding "she/her" as a show of solidarity is just crazy.

But perhaps she is aware of that and perhaps she wouldn't put it on a cv?

I don't know. Just thinking out loud.

This

Any company which accepts transgender people will have no problem with that introduction. These are generally large companies, or companies which already employ transgender people.

Really, @DadJoke ? Would it not come across as a really odd, irrelevant thing to say at the start of an interview, for any company? Something that would make the interviewers think the person they were interviewing didn't really understand the interview context?

I get that it's relevant if you're being interviewed for a role specifically related to gender identity, but otherwise it's a bit,
"Hello, lovely to meet you, I'm Gemma, I have a German Shepherd".

Thing is, many do make it all about their identity. And as op rightly says, this makes it too easy to accidentally say the wrong thing and unintentionally offend.

Announcing 'my pronouns are' may suggest to an employer that this person may discriminate against and even expect their employer to discriminate against people with the protected belief of being gender critical.

It may be ok at an appropriate stage to state preferred pronouns, but without the implied shared genderist belief and control of other peoples speech.

Is that legal? Genuine question.

Your child needs to stop introducing themselves like that. Its like someone saying at a job interview, ' hullo, my name is John and I am gay.' or ' Hullo, my name is Hibah and I am south east asian.'. 'Hullo, my name is Sarah and I am Christian'.
Its a failure to read the room and situation, irrelevant to the job interview (no-one has ever used my pronouns in an interview), and it marks your child out as bringing their personal beliefs and identity into every situation whether relevant or not. I can see why interviewers would steer clear of someone who did this in a competitive interview situation.

Its not about being non-binary, its about them marking themselves out as a political warrior who could end up being a pain in the arse who is not good for team working and cohesion. Most interviewers are looking for someone who will easily fit into the existing team. Not someone who demands the team fits around them..

"Presenting themselves as non-binary" reflects a conscious decision to express one's gender identity in a way that goes beyond the binary concept of male or female. This presentation involves appearance, pronouns, behaviors, and the use of language to communicate their gender identity to others.

Projecting?!? The OP has LITERALLY said this is what their daughter is doing!!

Quoting this a second time because I think it's important.

In this example the non binary identifying person was an employee of the company who made a successful claim for discrimination (on the basis of gender identity), harassment, bullying and victimisation.

This is someone who was hired by the company and, for whatever reason, it went badly. It's not an example of someone simply not being hired because of their preferred pronouns.

When someone makes a discrimination claim on the basis of the way they have been treated in the workplace, they can produce evidence of this treatment (which must happen repeatedly in order to establish a successful harassment claim). If someone is simply not hired in the first place, it's almost impossible to prove that they were not hired purely because of their gender identity.

Obviously bullying and harassment in the workplace is wrong, and if that is what happened in this case then it is only fair that the person won their claim.

But if HR departments or hiring managers are aware of this tribunal decision, in my opinion it's more likely to make them think, "Having a non binary employee increases the risk of interpersonal tensions in the workplace, it's probably less risky not to hire them in the first place."

Because hiring someone with they/them pronouns doesn't ensure that you are protected against potential discrimination claims. On the contrary. It means that once they're in the door their identity will require constant managing in order not to cause problems which could lead to discrimination claims. Much easier just to say they weren't the best candidate for the role.

Yes but people don't generally march into a job interview and say "Hello, my name is Alex and I'm a Sagittarius".

To be considered competitive for a position a candidate needs to do everything they possibly can do to be viewed as professional, competent, enthusiastic, and hard-working. Being personable can often help too, although it may be less important than the previous qualities, depending on the nature of the role.

There's only a fairly limited time in an interview to be able to put these aspects across. If a candidate spends time speaking about their identity (gender or otherwise), their interests, their sexuality, their private life, etc that just means less time on the aspects that are likely to be most valued by employers. I would view reading a CV in exactly the same way. I simply do not care what your private life is, what your sexuality is, how you 'identify'. I want to know how well you will do the job. Anything else is a distraction. In fact, I might be put off by the candidate mentioning it at all. Why is it relevant to the job?!

Some employers may find personal information like this important (an LGBT....+ charity perhaps), others might be actively put off by it (lots of people in the comments here). I do think some young people have been taught to view their identity as everything, unique and integral to every aspect of their being. I simply do not care as an employer, stick to your professional competancy and don't let anything else get in the way. If your identity / beliefs / private life comes up in personal conversations somewhere down the line, fine, but i'd suggest they keep it out of the recruitment process.

In the virtual world these identities gain you a lot of positive attention, but in the real world it is rather different.

Honestly if I was the interviewer I would just say that there will be guaranteed drama with this individual and it would be safer for the company to avoid instead of facing plenty of HR issues.

I made DD take she/her off her CV. She was trying to be an ally. All her friends had it. They all identify as female.
I told DD her future hirers will not be 20 somethings or have bought into this allyship.

No one cares about people's identities unless they make their whole lives about that identity. Then they just come across as a potential PITA.

This!

I think how they would handle this exact situation in an interview would be important…so how would they explain it (if the interviewer was rash enough to start a discussion about it!) would they present as open and able to explain it in a relaxed way etc. Why don’t you try and set up some practise interviews if you have any friends or colleagues who’d try this?

only if it could be proven at a guess would make the difference, or another reason would be used instead rather than officially etc

I've worked for various small companies as a medical consultant on a self employed basis and at some point or another every small business owner has said to me they don't employ non binary, trans, young married women because they are a "pain in the arse" and they are also quite clear about employees getting pregnant. As an older woman (60's) I'm never out of work because I know what I'm doing and won't get pregnant. I get every job I go for.
You think there are laws against this kind of discrimination but quite frankly employers only care about you making money for them.
I work in the NHS now and non binary people are in abundance here so maybe that would be a place to start.

If your daughter is saying that to interviewers, then the interviewers may worry about her becoming an HR nightmare.
If it's on her CV or she starts her covering letter with "As a non-binary person" that might also apply.
Male names (Sid, Phil, Charlie) are often shortenings of female names (Sidney can be either, Philomena, Charlotte). I can imagine a colleague (I work in a university) saying "oh it's a funny nickname" or even "oh I was fed up of being Lucy so I call myself Peta now".

But I did get a cover letter for an RA post which started more or less "as a gender-expansive person" which was supposed to make them more attractive for the post (I'm a STEM researcher but deal with people as part of the research, so they were showing off their diversity qualifications). However, I didn't interview them not because of the cover letter (or not entirely because of the cover letter) but because the cover letter and the CV were written in 3 point font.

So it might be nothing to do with the haircut, unfeminine name, or thrusting of pronouns where nobody asked, and more to do with the general quality of the applications.

Also, no-ones suing anyone for accidentally calling a Sagittarius a Taurus.

Many companies do seem to be embracing diversity more so OPs fears may be ungrounded.

The place my dd previously worked v recently was all ' bring your authentic self to work'. And many workplaces seem to encourage people to add pronouns to an email signature.

I feel I, with my lack of the need to announce pronouns, and being over 50 would be at a disadvantage in comparison.

So I think it would depend on the company and type of work they want to go into.

Most interviewers are looking for someone who will easily fit into the existing team. Not someone who demands the team fits around them..

Exactly. Why even mention such an irrelevant aspect of yourself?

The 'binary concept of male and female' refers to bodies though. 'Appearance, pronouns, behaviours and the use of language' aren't related to bodies are they? As when you say appearance you're referring to clothing, hair, makeup, modifications etc. What does the second have to do with the first?