I want a team of working mums - am I being sexist?

[MagicalHamSandwich]

Please feel free to tear me to pieces if I am! I'm really torn on this one:

I'm in charge of running an offshore software maintenance team, whose primary job it is to keep things uneventful and basically do as little as possible in terms of changing things around. There are strategic reasons why this is a good idea but they're not really relevant to my dilemma.

The team will have to be reduced in size in the coming year (they're currently severely overstaffed) and I'm considering keeping on the three mums we've got and having the guys move to other stuff. My reasoning is basically that each of the women works part-time, so I basically get more actual person per full-time position (good for securing know how and to cover unplanned absences). They're also all in a position where they currently put family before the job (not an assumption, I've spoken with them about this). As stated, their primary objective is to keep the wheels turning - not to re-invent the concept - so people whose primary current ambitions are not in fact to get ahead career wise suit me perfectly at this moment. In fact, the (misguided) ambitions of one of the men is my biggest headache with them at present.

It's basically the perfect solution from a business perspective. However, I have a nagging voice at the back of my head telling me that there's something inherently wrong with selecting people on the grounds that they are women with kids (as in sexist against women, not the men on the team). Am I being paranoid or is there really something horribly sexist about this? And if so: what?

I said they generally gained these skills through being a parent. Is this wrong?

As opposed to people who are not mothers who haven't got them? (You only referred to mothers, not parents)

I need to create a department with highly driven individuals who can really put the hours in. They will need to have a single focus on the job in hand. I'm going to select fatherless men only. Anyone have a problem with that?

Childless!

Dunno, will you give equal consideration to working mothers who are equally focused, single minded and driven?

noneed OP didn't say she was only going to select part time mothers. She said the team members with the qualities she wanted were all PT mothers. Subtly different.
I need to create a department with highly driven individuals who can really put the hours in. They will need to have a single focus on the job in hand. I'm going to select fatherless men only. Anyone have a problem with that?
Yes, if you had female applicants who would put in the hours, regardless of whether they have children, then you deserve getting the arse sued off you if you picky the men purely by virtue of their sex and parental status. Obviously. Ffs.

"As opposed to people who are not mothers who haven't got them?"

Not what she said, Lass.

If I say "people with a French degree generally speak good French", that is not a statement that "people who don't have French degrees do not speak good French".

Lots of ways to develop skills.

If one of the men were to take the case to an employment tribunal, and the employer's defence is that the three retained employees were the best suited to the role, there is no problem. If the defence is that the decision was taken by "selecting people on the grounds that they are women with kids", the company will definitely lose: discrimination by virtue of sex. Not subtly different. OP's exact words.

And, by the way, the same argument applies equally for the women. If one of them claims discrimination for being held back in a dead-end role while the men were allowed to progress in the firm, the fact that they were not selected for advancement on the grounds that they were women is precisely what sex discrimination legislation is intended to cover. The prevalence of this sort of characterisation of women with children explains why the pay-gap between men and women opens up after child-birth. It seems amazing to me that virtually no one on this thread can see it.

The prevalence of this sort of characterisation of women with children explains why the pay-gap between men and women opens up after child-birth. It seems amazing to me that virtually no one on this thread can see it

The whole tone of the opening post struck me as doing exactly that.

Yes - this is why the OP is agonising over whether she is guilty of sexism. She is also basing her decision on the self-declared wishes of the people in the team, rather than just assuming the part-timers would prefer to stay in the less stressful and less creative gig - although I would still be concerned they are limiting themselves unnecessarily.

Just to stress, it is incredibly unusual to be in the situation where you actually have women to choose from in IT. I don't think I have ever worked in a team where I haven't been the only woman. And quite honestly I can see them wanting to stay working together as much as anything.

I can see why you're worried, but you do have different needs from a team - and reliable, multiple workers, who can be trusted not to go off-piste are all business needs, and in this team, these people are all mothers.

I actually think that there should be more of a holistic approach to this sort of thing. I'm also a remote consultant, I look to hire people who fit a role - both in qualifications and aspirations. I'm actually looking forward to my current project going into maintenance so I can sit back and take a rest, look at what's new, whilst letting that chunter over. I've hired people for supporting roles, who, for instance, have young kids, so whilst they can do some hours in the day, the need to do some of their hours in the evening when the kids are in bed, or at a weekend when their partner is around - and that all works perfectly when you're trying to stretch the support hours you cover, and also happens to fit in with a parent. Similarly, I, too, am happy for them to work their hours, and not get too creative with re-writing old code, or using the newest and brightest new frameworks, so, again, an ambitious student who'll stay until midnight for fun generally doesn't fit, but a jaded, experienced person who will work their hours is perfect.

Thanks to everyone for your responses! Many really insightful voices here that have really helped me understand why I'm struggling with this decision. Having mulled this over some more I'm still tending towards the set-up I originally had in mind, i.e. keeping the women and letting the men move on. It's just the only scenario which makes any sense, TBH.

What I really do want to do, though, is to try and find ways and means of leveraging growth potential within the role. I'll be short of a team lead - so obviously either one of the women will have to take over or they'll have to become jointly self-organising. I'll also try and think of ways to move some of the more interesting stuff offshore if at all feasible.

Luckily, a final decision won't have to be made until November, so I'll have some time to think of ways to alleviate my concerns.

I definitely wouldn't allow them to become self-organising, you need to be giving at least one of them a leg up in terms of responsibility. I would also meet with them again one-to-one and talk about whether they are limiting their options because they feel anything else would be too difficult to manage part-time - it really shouldn't be.

A part time software job! Can I have one! I've worked as a programmer for a decade and never seen a part time role - ideally I'd like to go part time in about ten years time.

Dr - the only way I've managed it is leveraging contacts to get freelance work.

The problem is that it always seems to snowball into more work than I have time for once it gets started!

We have some who are PT, but they do seem to be first in the firing line if we need to make redundancies.

In terms of redressing the balance, it's a drop in the ocean, but it is still the teensiest of '.fuck yous' to the patriarchy.

Do it.

A part time software job! Can I have one! I've worked as a programmer for a decade and never seen a part time role - ideally I'd like to go part time in about ten years time.

DH has had one for about a decade and works with a lot of PTers. Go in to the public sector, flexibility is the only way they can retain people who could earn more elsewhere.

In terms of redressing the balance, it's a drop in the ocean, but it is still the teensiest of '.fuck yous' to the patriarchy

The OP wants a group of non ambitious part time staff - how is that redressing the balance or socking it to the patriarchy?

If anything it's reinforcing the view that after having children women aren't interested in a career.