mothers with young children are the most discriminated against at work

[paddingtonbear1]

I haven't actually found this in my company, and it's very small - only 18 employees. But I can imagine if I looked for another job, I might find it hard to get one, being a mother still under 40. I couldn't believe some of the comments in the 'have your say' on the bbc website though - most people seem to think that women who can't afford to stay at home shouldn't have kids at all! That would be me then! I don't think in this day and age, with mortgages and other rising costs, that's practical. I don't take advantage though, fortunately dd isn't sick very often, and dh does his share.
I think most of the people making the comments were men, or people with no kids...

This is from the BBC have your say page

"Id suggest as a young british male who has never recieved any benefits, has never been on the dole and has to drive to work 40 hour weeks that i am most discriminated against by the government!"

I would like to ask him who he think is going to wipe his a**e when he is languishing in a nursing home with no off-spring to visit him?

LadyMac - is there any way you can start your own business using your previous skills? That's what I did because I had an employer who didn't want to let me work flexible hours (despite the fact that 3 months after leaving and going freelance, they wanted to hire me back with whatever hours I chose - i said no).

But it means that I can now work part time but use my brain and still bring in a decentish wage - nothing compared to what I was earning, but then I'm working half the hours.

It was a lot easier to set up than I originally thought it would be and didn't require huge amounts of capital.

Speedy
I'd ask him where he's going to be donating his state pension, then, if he's so set against anyone receiving benefits.

I had a boyfriend like this.

Dumped him PDQ.

Xenia - I find it hard to imagine which normal, caring woman, when faced with a sick child wouldn't prioritise them over their job on a particular day - but that shouldn't mean the end of their career per se. The words 'appalling sickness record' are yours. I don't think my friend has an 'appalling' sickness record - probably just the same number of days off as the prat next to her has spent 'working' (sic) at his desk with a mega hangover!

Sadly not everyone can afford a nanny, and nurseries shut at 6 pm usually - something my boss just didn't seem to understand when he used to roll into my office at 5.45pm to begin a long discussion (in retrospect, I think he used to do it deliberately just to point score )

Where are husbands in all this? Why oh why are the women being bad employees and ducking out when children are sick and turning up late? Why not as many fathers as mothers because the women let their careers take second place and because of sexism in the home. If half the time the women who couldn't get emergency childcare when the child is sick take unpaid leave adn the other half of the time their husbands do employers would be much less likely to see women with children as some kind of liability.

You see why there is a rise in the male nanny in London at least - they don't take maternity leave. I have had w nannies off on maternity leave and it takes a huge lot of time and cost on people like me - small employers of one. Better the aged Mrs Doubtfire or deliberate hiring of the infertile....

On the question of best employees I do think I got that job when I was 5 months pregnant in part because I could show I'd had children before and a nanny and stable home, rather than about to give up work and be a housewife and those of us with big mortgage and school fees are not likely to be changing jobs all the time or taking years off round the world.

Legacy - working mothers often have sick children. If it's life threatening mothers nad fathers dash to the hospital. If it's a cold or even chickenpox you leave the nanny to deal with it offering comfort and succour when you get back from work and in the night etc. It's how it goes if you have a proper job. I never felt conflicted by that at all and nor do many parents, male or female. As long as the child off school is well cared for it doesn't have to be the mother mopping the fevered brow.

I have a perfectly proper job. It is only Improper in that I have not used a nanny: I have, for a number of reasons not all of them financial, used a childminder. Who doesn't do sick children.

I also have an older daughter, and yes I have had to juggle/work at home from/take time off from my Apparently Improper Job when she's been ill.

J&J - I am currently exploring that option as it seems it may be the only viable solution for me. I do however think you need to be very brave to do it and I have a slight lack of professional confidence due to not working now for three years. (HOWEVER I fully appreciate that is my problem.) I would prefer to go back to working for an employer at least until I am up to speed - the industry in which I worked changes quite rapidly.

I just have never seen in 22 years of being a mother why an employee thinks they have any God given right to let their family life overly interfere with work and then assuming they are often not there before of sick children, their commitments to family or Olympic running or whatever then to think the employer will then prefer them over someone who turns up on time, however ill their aged mother, dog or child might be. It's just common sense and nothing whatsoever to do about sexism.

Why does 'proper' job have to = one which pays enough to employ a nanny (assuming that is a childcare option you'd choose?)

Neither a nursery or CM will 'mop the fevered brow' of a sick child I think you'll find (or obviously not, as you've never foudn yourself in that lowly position).

FWIW DH did share childcare with me if the kids were sick, but even then I couldn't compete in an office with a bunch of blokes with traditional 'wives at home'.

I still remember a senior exec being asked what the secret of his success was at some Senior Mgt training event, and he said "having a wife willing to follow me around the world, iron my shirts, and raise my children". As you can imagine he lost the support of about 30% of his managers that day... (he went on to shag his secretary and leave his wife...but that's another story )

In response to someone else's post - I definitely think setting up your own business is the way to go - then you can delegate what you want, enjoy the nice bits of children and work odd hours if you need. that's what I do anyway.

Xenia, most childcare providers do not take sick children. And that's all there is to it. So when you witter on about leaving said sick child 'with the nanny' you are completely disregarding the situation faced by most working parents.

So the only two options appear to be a nanny or a non-working parent (and we know how you feel about that...)

Perhaps fertility should be means-tested?

There are nanny agencies all round the country which will get you someone for the day even if your child if off sick. It m ay be expensive but it may be worth working at a loss for a few days just to keep your job and your employers' good will (this applies to both mothers and fathers and sick children should never be a mother's issue only).

This thread illustrates why many employers can't be in their right mind if they choose to hire women of childbearing age. Now that we have any agesm laws there may be commercial merit in making sure all applicants have passed the menopaus but their parents are already dead!

I couldnt disagree with you more Xenia generally, but specifically regarding everyone being entitled to "time off" with 90% pay etc irrespective of whether you have children.

This "Time off" is not a holiday. It is there to enable women to raise and nurture their babies. If they didnt, like you, then you would have to pay someone else to do the job, wouldnt you? The point is, this "time off" to nurture young ones is paid back thousandfold by these young ones when they grow up, and start making their own contributions to NI and tax, and underpinning the pitiful pension scheme and NHS services that exist in this country. People who choose not to have children arent contributing to the future in the same way.

What do you reckon the daily cost of a supply nanny would be then Xenia?

I'm afraid I can't imagine anything more stressful and detrimental to my productivity and emotional health than leaving a screaming, sick, young child with a complete stranger for the day....

Xenia, unfortunately, not everyone has the luxury of a nanny... sheesh Perhaps if we did we could meet your impossibly unrealistic expectations! So you know (as clearly this is a different world to you) nurseries and childminders don't look after sick kids 'cos of the obvious disease vector.

It's not a case of "God given right" to take time off when the kids are sick, it's a reality of living in an alienated and sexist society where we no longer have huge extended families to take the strain and husbands still expect wives to do most of the childcare. That and the lack of a massive bank balance to pay for a nanny, of course...

It is sexist for husband's not to help out when the kids are sick, but if you want to address sexism I suggest you join NOW and stop attacking hardworking mums!

That aside, my previous employers had an utterly dire track record with regard to discrimination against working mothers. They were treated as an underclass. I suffered at the hands of this culture, and subsequently left my job under duress, and only recently successfully settled my case.

My current employers couldnt be more geared towards working parents. They have bank staff to cover in emergencies, they have flexible shifts across the board, they have overtime available always for those that want it, or want to make hours up.

The people I am moving on to in a couple of weeks have also been utterly flexible and have suggested I could revert to term time working when my DD goes to school - and I havent even started there yet - let alone asked.

Well I've had 5 and I bet they are all higher rate tax payers so I should be getting some special Government prizes in that case - a 20 year tax holiday would be nice, Mr Blair for my contribution to the country.

BUT we can easily import immigrants to deal with the falling birth rate. They tend to appreicate this country better and work harder and set more store on hard work and education too so may be better than support directed at English born parents to ensure future pensions are provided for. I suppose if we keep getting so fat we'll end up with a fall in the OAP death age so we might sort things out that way. The Xenia Burger solution. More sugar ads on TV perhaps as a way to solve the pension crisis.

None of my gay male friends sadly have chosen to have children so I suppose I could add workers who hate children, the infertile, women over 50 and gay men (and feminists who don't believe in maternity rights) to my putative ideal workforce.

You wouldnt take a holiday if it was offered Xenia - you wouldnt know what to do with yourself for all that time

Seriously though...."tend to appreicate this country better and work harder and set more store on hard work and education too" justify this statement please.

You are fortunate that you have a nanny Xenia. If my job had paid enough for me to employ a nanny I would have returned to work without hesitation. I actually worked out that if I had returned to work I would have spent more time at home than at work as ds and myself were constantly sick last winter and this winter, nothing major but still too sick for a nursery to have taken him. It would have been impossible for me to perform my job at a competent level.

Once I have completed my family I am hoping to return to work on a freelance basis, I just hope that being out of the workplace for X number of years does not mean that I will be considered unemployable and therefore discriminated against......

"feminists who don't believe in maternity rights"

Is that like Nazi Jews?

presenteeism is a curse. So mothers, or fathers, should drive themselves insane trying to find emergency childcare every time their child is sick (or the nanny is ill, of course) in order to preserve 'employer goodwill'???

So many offices are staffed by utterly useless, permanently hungover twentysomethings. Especially the men.

I remember from when I worked in banking, the useless IT dept (one of many useless depts) who would turn up to your call 4 hours late unshaven and haggard, spend the time answering phone calls with 'yeah get the beers in for me mate' and then snarl at you when you asked them what was wrong with the computer.

And the new dads in the office who would turn up from 9-5, brag about how they weren't sleeping cos of the baby, do sh** all and delegate all day then go home to their 'non-working' wife.

But hey, there were THERE, so they must be good employees, right?
it stinks...

I could afford a nanny when my children are sick, I suppose, but there's no way on earth I'd leave them with a stranger when they're feeling ill. God, it's about one day every other year on average through a child's school days (obviously if you have lots of children it's harder). My employers just trust me to deal with it. People should just grow up and realise that it's a tiny amount of time off, not necessarily any more than a childless worker who's prone to stomach upsets, and let people deal with it the way they see fit.

being a supervisor at work i have to deal with people phoning in sick all the time

give me a working mother who knows about responsibility any day, compared to the hungover, lazy, students who i ahve to rely on at weekends

in fact, the most reliable person i have in my team is a young single mother (21) who has a 2yr old daughter, a mortgage, etc etc

if her daughter is sick she goes to the ends of the earth to find someone who can either fill in her shift at work or take care of her daughter