Losing my job because I'm a parent

[Luaper]

Since the C-19 pandemic began I have felt that the 'new normal' is likely to include a disadvantage to parents. My employer made an early decision not to furlough any employees and offered parents the option to cut their working hours - but the expectation is still there that the same amount of work as a full time employee is delivered. As such, over the past 4 months I have worked every evening including weekends to keep up whilst still trying to give my primary age school children some structure / home school in the day and normality and fun at the weekends. It has however been pointed out at work that I am less effective than my colleagues without children because I have too many distractions and answer emails at inconsiderate times of the day.

At present that are the following protected characteristics under employment law (set out in the Equality Act); age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. I think that parenting of young children should be added to this list and would ask the reader to sign the petition below.

Ask yourself this - if you were an employer would you employ a parent knowing that whilst C-19 circulates there will be frequent school closures that mean the individual has to quarantine for 14 days? And that whilst they are quarantining they will be looking after children which will mean that they cannot effectively work from home. At present there is little to prevent employers discriminating against parents in redundancy programmes and those same individuals may find it hard to find a new job. This has a serious knock on impact on families and children and is why parents as a group need this enhanced employment protection.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/319813

@Jellycatspyjamas

Why should the business carry the financial burden though?

For the same reason they should carry the financial burden of employee sickness. Because it isn't the employee's fault or the employee's choice.

No I didn’t plan to have kids during a pandemic, but I did consider that one of us could become unwell and unable to work

This is why we have sickness payment protection on our mortgage. Doesn't cover us 'choosing' unpaid leave oddly.

that one of us might lose our job

Obviously then one could try and get another one; and you would have the other parent's salary/savings to rely on as a stopgap. There is NO INIDICATION how long this could last.

that our kids might not cope with childcare provision

This is why I made sure my child was well-settled in nursery provision long before I returned to work (started settling sessions when she was about 8 months, didn't return to work until she was just after 1. If she had struggled, I woulfn't have gone back to work and we'd have cut our cloth accordingly. As we did when it turned out she could cope.

and the strategies we had in place for those eventualities covered much of what happened in lockdown.

So what, did one of you quit your job? Take unpaid leave? Or did your employer actually accept that you would not be as productive and continue to pay you anyway? Because that's all anyone is asking for here.

I certainly didn’t expect to be paid for not working, and I expect to pull my weight while I am working, for the hours I’m contracted to. My employer shouldn’t need to take a financial hit because I have kids.

So presumably you've never taken sick leave, or carer's leave, or any other kind of paid leave? And presumably you think all the people who have been furloughed should just have been sacked/not paid? After all, the government didn't MAKE them choose to do a job that can't be done from home - why should they take the financial hit for those people's career choices? Shouldn't they have planned better?

@Zombot

While I totally agree that working parents have had it much harder than many of their child free colleagues, discrimination against parents, 'single parent' should definitely be recognised as a protected characteristic. If there are two of you then you should be able to work as a team to cover childcare needs (though I realise the reality is often very different). But a single parent is really up against it, especially if they have no childcare support from the ex or family nearby to help. Or does that come under indirect sex discrimination (as it mostly affects women)?

A better way to phrase this would that if there are two of you, you might be able to work as a team, rather than should be able to. That recognises that the possibility exists, and there are at least some couples who are able to do it, unlike a single parent. But also doesn't pretend that we have a system or structures that are actually set up for two parent units to work that way or that employers have any obligation to facilitate it.

There are some jobs which have zero flexibility, not many though, most are choices either the family makes, or men who don't think they they should have to risk their career development for an inconvenience such as children, it's best to be honest. Making it purely a women's issue is just giving more weight to that argument, that we should be the ones to take it all on.

Pregnancy does not (Necessarily) impact your ability to carry out your work or adversely impact output in the same way. I have sympathy but what you describe is not discrimination it is equal expectations being placed on parents as those without children which is fair and reasonable for a company to do IMO.

@RoseTintedAtuin

Pregnancy does not (Necessarily) impact your ability to carry out your work or adversely impact output in the same way. I have sympathy but what you describe is not discrimination it is equal expectations being placed on parents as those without children which is fair and reasonable for a company to do IMO.

It isn't equal expectations though. Not when the parents are being forced through exigent circumstances to also do full time childcare. That's double the expectations.

No-one is suggesting parents should be able to bunk off when they feel like it 'because htey chose to have children'. This is not that situation. All 'alternative arrangements' they could possibly make have been nixed. There is no choice. How long is it sustainable to expect them to do double the work or take home half the pay?

@VeniceQueen2004 the state provides statutory sick pay and many employers don’t enhance this in any way - it’s at the employers discretion to pay anything above SSP so no, in many cases they don’t carry the cost.

This is why we have sickness payment protection on our mortgage. Doesn't cover us 'choosing' unpaid leave oddly.

But the option of taking a break on mortgage payments is there, so some immediate, short term relief.

So what, did one of you quit your job? Take unpaid leave? Or did your employer actually accept that you would not be as productive and continue to pay you anyway? Because that's all anyone is asking for here.

My DH took unpaid leave, I mothballed my business, and adjusted I working hours in my part time job to fit with my DHs reduced hours. Which we could manage because we have had an eye to what might happen if our circumstances were to change.

The current situation is a nightmare and I’ve been very open about my fear that I would need to give up my job if schools don’t go back in August. While I would be angry about that, I’d be blaming the governments shambolic handling of the pandemic, not expecting my employer to give me a free ride. I think it’s good if employers can carry their staff a bit, but they don’t have a responsibility to do it (and simply might not be able to), and I don’t think we should be legislating allowances for parents as a protected characteristic.

Basically the expectation is that every working parent produce on demand a housewife who can allow them to continue to function as if Covid is not happening/as if they don't have children who need to be looked after.

I'd be willing (for example) to sacrifice what I usually give up in childcare costs for the time I need to look after my child. But as it so happens due to the government's bizarre approach to furlough in daycare provision we have been paying as much as we normally pay to retain our child's place, while the nursery continue to receive our 'free' childcare hours from the government. So I don't have that money to sacrifice, I just have the time cost of the childcare.

@Jellycatspyjamas

My DH took unpaid leave, I mothballed my business, and adjusted I working hours in my part time job to fit with my DHs reduced hours.

Aaaah, you're a business owner. Suddenly your position becomes clear.

I absolutely don't think employers should bear the cost of this alone; it's for the government to support them to support their workers. And I will happily pay for this out of my taxes, I would anticipate the support package to properly get the country through this would be huge and would accept a tax increase happily. But employers rely on their workers turning up for them and showing them loyalty, even when it isn't convenient or profitable for them (my contract and all contracts above a certain grade in my organisation are 'indeterminate hours', and I take that commitment seriously - when a job needs doing urgently, I put the extra in and willingly, even to my own detriment as it was back in December when I crashed and burned from overwork). This should be a two way street.

Parents chose to to have children and arranging childcare is a part of that which a company cannot be expected to pay for therefore from the companies perspective it is equal.

Aaaah, you're a business owner. Suddenly your position becomes clear.
My business is a one man band, I don’t have and never will have employees because of the nature of my work, so my position isn’t about me not wanting to carry the cost here.

The government made it an all or nothing with regard to furlough - I would have supported a more flexible scheme that subsidised employers for reducing workers hours but in the absence of government support employers shouldn’t be obligated to pay staff for work that they aren’t able to do. Some employers would be able to afford that, many won’t particularly where their income is reduced due to the same circumstances impacting their employees.

It’s fine to say I can’t do as much as normal because I have kids at home, but where does the work go? Who carries the shortfall - either everyone else (childless employers?), the employer needs to get additional staff to do the work or it just doesn’t happen possibly affecting the viability of the business down the line (meaning everyone is out of work).

Basically the expectation is that every working parent produce on demand a housewife who can allow them to continue to function as if Covid is not happening/as if they don't have children who need to be looked after.

Essentially. And for the majority of families who don't have this, something is going to give somewhere.

@RoseTintedAtuin

Parents chose to to have children and arranging childcare is a part of that which a company cannot be expected to pay for therefore from the companies perspective it is equal.

There hasn't been any childcare available for most workers for four months this year. Childcare providers only started opening their doors this month and with limited places.

@RoseTintedAtuin

But there is no childcare to arrange on lockdown! You are literally NOT ALLOWED to arrange childcare! What do you propose people do - break the law or lose their jobs?

@MadMadMad

Sorry, but although being a parent is hard it does not give you a free pass to work less for the same money and to expect your colleagues to do extra at short notice because you have a child issue. I accept that circumstances can change but generally if you choose to have a child or children you have to expect that one of you will (usually) have to sacrifice career prospects to raise them.

Well all was fine before the C-19 lockdown, but I think that the world will look different the other side and there should be a debate as to whether parents have a place in a work setting in the 'new normal'. if they do then I think they need some employment law protection so that they are treated fairly - otherwise the perception that you espouse that parents 'work less' will mean that they are unfairly treated.

@Jellycatspyjamas

My heart obviously bleeds for the corporations, but you keep identifying the problem without indicating you are remotely bothered about finding a solution for families who don't have your options. For a family where both work full time in paid employment and their employer isn't giving an inch on what's expected of them, what is supposed to happen to the kids?

I think this petition is aimed at putting pressure on government to support businesses to support their staff. Surely if you agree that's what they should be doing you would be in support of that aim?

And I think it is naive to assume that it's a case of going bust for most businesses. Not while there are executives and shareholders taking home six figure salaries. For a small business it's a different ball game, but for many industries it's a case of where they choose to spend their money. I work in HE and it's a case in point. More and more pressure and job insecurity below, bigger and bigger salaries and benefits packages at the top.

@Luaper this isn't "a child issue" FFS. It's not like little Jimmy has the squits. It's a national and global shutdown of everything that made it possible for mothers to have entered the workplace in the first place. People taking this line are clearly perfectly happy to see other women forced back into the kitchen and into economic dependence on a man because "you chooooose to have children (nernernernerner)". It's smug, childish and very unfeminist.

Basically I think there a lot of people here for whom childcare is not an issue taking who are taking certain ghoulish delight in watching their colleagues who are parents struggle, after getting what they've bitterly perceived to be "an easy time" due to increasingly family-friendly policies in the work place. Quite possibly thinking this is their opportunity to slip into a better role of necessity vacated by one of those stupid breeders who for some unbeknown reason has been perceived as better at the job than them hitherto.

Not signing. I’m a working mother so now know it’s tough (but hopefully temporary). I think what your petition suggests would make it harder for young women to get jobs, and creates the impression that parents (especially women, unfortunately) might do less work - and ‘play the parent card’. You can’t expect to do less work and get paid the same!

It's a national and global shutdown of everything that made it possible for mothers to have entered the workplace in the first place.

Again, what's stopping their partners? Oh, they don't want the burden of children to affect their careers. The more it's made a woman issue, the more of an issue it becomes for women. There should be something for parents in this situation, but let's not make it fully a woman's issue.

What need to focus on is decent childcare & flexible working!

You ask me what should people do? I completely agree this is not an easy problem to resolve and everyone’s situation will be different but what do you expect your employer to do? Pay you to take care of your children without any benefit? This appears to be what is being suggested. Most companies where possible have offered flexible working and reduced hours for those needing it... I’m really not sure what more you can expect.

but you keep identifying the problem without indicating you are remotely bothered about finding a solution for families who don't have your options.

I’m not - I’ve had to make hard choices about work and home life that don’t particularly suit me and my DH, but when we had kids we knew we couldn’t rely on us both being able to work full time all of the time so put different contingencies in place to accommodate either of us needing to be home with the kids. We don’t have any family support so we knew it was down to us to work it out.

While we never predicted a pandemic, we could reasonably predict our circumstances might change while we had young children. It’s not for me to work out how other families might make it work.

The petition is asking for parenthood to be a protected characteristic for equality purposes, which is a nonsense, it’s unenforceable and open to abuse and would lead to organisations not employer people (predominantly women) of child bearing age.

I think the assumption that you can have kids, both parents working full time without one of those role suffering is a fallacy at the best of time’s, and leaves no room for things going wrong - which they often will because that’s how life goes.

It is concerning that the new normal could be a decision between: have children or have a job.

This is hilarious and very entitled. I thought it was a wind up, lol.

It's concerning you think having kids should give you special treatment in the workplace. You need to sort out parenting with you dh, not expect an employer and colleagues to suck up your childcare issues.
You sound very princessey and entitled.

@RoseTintedAtuin

Well I favour socialism - from each according to his ability to each according to their need; so yes, if it comes down to a family losing their livelihood and home vs a company making less profit, I'd be in favour of the latter. But I understand this is a highly unpopular view on MN, percieved very starkly as "other people wanting our things".

I think if nothing else COVID is highlighting what s heartless, fragile and unsustainable system rampant neoliberal capitalism is. Unfortunately the people with any power to change that are not the ones suffering the consequences.