I actually think he has a point...

[Gonzo33]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1362589/Lord-Sugar-says-women-looking-job-tell-employers-plan-baby.html

I would be happy declaring whether or not I am going to have any more children and my child care arrangements. I am exceptionallly organised when it comes to these things though because I was a single parent who worked full time for many years.

What do you think?

Apart from the breast feeding dh always took an equal if not greater share of the night time care (although to be fair, ds was one of those wonderful babies who slept through from only a few weeks old).

Even now, dh is the one to go upstairs to get ds up (they then come back to bed for a family snuggle) before they get up, get breakfast ready and then come and get me up (I am so not a morning person )

The reason for the anti-discrimination legislation and why Alan Sugar is talking a load of complete and utter crap rubbish is that you can't assume who will be "looking after baby" after the initial "birthing" bit (I agree with KateMiddleton about making parental leave shared).

When ds was 3 and starting nursery, it was dh who took a redundancy package and began to develop his own business and I was the one who continued working full-time. He was the one who had the flexibility to deal with the pick-ups etc (our child minder didn't do them) - and once ds started school, was the primary contact with the school.

I remember years ago reading statistics that showed then even with maternity leave women stayed at companies for longer than men - repaying comapnies' investment in them. People from the dark Ages like Alan Sugar convenienently forget that there are many reasons other than maternity for leaving a job. At least if a women goes on maternity leave, she is not leaving for the competition. A company that treats emplyees fairly has a far lower "churn" rate than companies that make life difficult for thier employees.

Very interesting thread. Especially as just recently I've had direct experience of this.

A promotion came up af work at beginning on Jan. Me and dp had half heartedly started ttc no2 in November. I ummed and ahhed but stuck my cv in for the interview experience not really expecting to get it. Also knew it could take a year plus to conceive. Interviewed end of jan. Found out a week later I was 5 wks pregnant. Decided not to pull out as they would have wanted to know why and didn't want to disclose pgncy so early on uneccesarily.

Last Monday I was offered the promotion. It's a 10k payrise and comes with a company car. I decided to tell them I was pg and turn it down as I didn't feel it was fair to the company, the role or the new team to be nearly 7mths pg by the time I started properly. I work for a large retail bank and they are very hr conscious and made it very clear they weren't retracting the offer but they did (I thought) gladly accept my turning it down.

Fast forward 4 days and I received a call saying despite my 'situation' they wanted me to take the job. So in this case it was honesty is the best policy but I did not expect it to turn out that way if I'm honest. Interestingly though I still feel very bad about the whole situation and wish I had never applied.

Unpaid leave still costs the company - income not earned, things not produced (and therefore not sold), money in paying a temp agency for emergency cover etc etc etc (as much as I disagree with what Mr Sugar says).

That's very interesting Whatevertheweather

Congratulations on your well-earned promotion, 10K payrise, and company car !

The only thing I'm thinking is

"Why can't a woman be more like a man !"

• And think of themselves once in a while

Don't feel bad for one more minute !

A promotion, a second baby on the way, and spring is in the air

Ah thank you jugglingjo. Tis strange not being completely elated about it all. I just feel uncomfortable with the whole situation now . I had very mixed reactions in RL when I was asking for opinions from family a 1 work colleague who knew about the pregnancy. Some totally understood why I was turning it down and said they would do the same. Others looked at me like I was the most completely bonkers person on earth!

I tried to think of an example of where a man could be in this position i.e applied for a job in good faith but then had to turn it down and I couldn't.

I was once asked what my childcare arrangements would be in an interview. I should have complained but was too shocked to. Funnily enough I didn't get the job although the guy I would have reported to was really keen on me. I am sure I was discriminated more before I had DS than after. An employment consultant told me not to wear my engagement ring in interviews as that might be getting in my way. Soon after I ditched it I got a job. That was after going for lots of interviews.

You should have no worries, Whatevertheweather

Whether advisedly or not you've even told them you're expecting and they still offered you the job - even when you initially turned it down (Quite right too, complying with the spirit as well as the letter of the law )

Really, you've got no worries. Just continue in your present post, start your new post when you're around 7 mths pg as per expected timetable. Then learn new job and do it for a few weeks, before going on maternity leave to have your fabulous new baby ! Then see how it goes from there

What could be better ! You are a lucky person !
Enjoy it all

Frankly I would like to be able to ask in an interview whether a candidate has ever knowingly bought the Daily Mail, so I can try to avoid hiring misogynist fuckwits. However, there is probably a good reason why legislation exists making it illegal for me to do so.

As others have said, intentions to have a family at some point in the future are not plans with definite timescales.

I'd be interested to know how AS would handle the interview though...

AS: Wots yer family situation?
Me: Pardon?
AS: Come on, how old are you?
Me: Late thirties
AS: Got a man at home?
Me: Yes?
AS: Ok so it could happen....
AS: So, any inherited genetic type issues with you or your man? Any disabilities in the family?
Me: WTF?
AS: Well at your age, if you do have kids.... and then you'd need time off. Would you get an abortion if you knew the kiddy was gonna be disabled? Or would you leave yer job to look after it?

Obviously the man's an idiot but where would it end? Preferring employees who have no living parents (elderly parents - loads of potential issues there). No friends (friends = life outside work). Unfortunately I've worked with companies who encourage workaholism and where this type of ridiculous questionning is still very close to the surface and would be used if it weren't illegal.

And in a similar vein - some shameless self-promotion

Oh do fuck off...

I take it that's directed to A.S, Mumcentre ?

"women have far more rights regarding child custody"

Not in my experience, the man holds all the cards and all the control.

I can honestly say I have never turned up at work covered in vomit. I have never been tetchy with a customer either, not even the one threatening to blow my head off with a shotgun.

I lost a job for being a single mother. I was told unofficially I was laid off because being a single mother didn't fit with the ethos of the company (Christian values). My husband had just left me.

I was told when in my first job that I should call off my wedding because senior management would not approve of a woman settling down. I wish I had called off the wedding for different reasons.

I really do think being a woman and a mother are hindering my ability to get a new job.

Fortunately, I had a more enlightened future boss than Jugglingjo. When I made the move from marketing to sales, the guy who had been asking me to make the move (to work for him) was the first person, outside of dh, that I told I was pregnant (only 8 weeks at that point). His reaction: to give me big hug and say congratulations :)

He did, however, advise me not to tell anyone else in the company until he had negotiated a salary increase for me .....

As it was, I began working formally for him 2 months later (although I did a fair amount of overlapping work in betweentimes), went off on holiday then maternity leave 4 months later, and was back at work 4 months after that (all you got back then with the guarantee of going back to the same job)

8 years later I was made redundant after the company was taken over (unfortunately, my nice boss had himself moved in within the company and I had then spent 4 years working for a bully :( but because I still wanted another kid I didn't want to leave). During that time, many male colleagues left to go to the competition, taking their knowledge, contacts and training with them (which is expensive to replace) whereas the women (just as successful re achieving sales targets) tended to stay.

So who offered the company the better value?

what if someone plans to have a lovely big family, they get turned down for work, they are upset but its not the end of the world because they will have a lovely big family.....except, they don't fall pregnant or suffer repeated miscarriages. They then have no family AND no job.

In the same way someone could plan not to then change their mind or have an unplanned pregnancy.

I think it is a terrible idea, just because someone PLANS to have children doesn't mean they will.

Yes juggli..lol

People have lives outside of work.. it's just one aspect of many parts..how dare anyone more-less my employer ask me about my personal business?..fuck off..you don't own me..

what next are you going to have to declare you may go to a foreign country?..might catch something dodgy...you are going skiing?..might break a leg...you have a low immune system?..might get the flu..what do you weigh?..miriad of issues..marital problems ..may be getting stressed and divorced soon..

By AS's (and some other's) logic, my entire working career should have beenw writtend off

Graduated at 23, wanted to have kids at 26.

So that's my 20s out the way as unemployable

As it happens, only met (future) dh at 32, got married at 37, had ds at 39.

So at a pinch, I could have had a short career in my early 30s

Of course, my 40s should be written off becasue not only do I have a younbg child but I want another one

However, two MMCs later and approaching 50, I have finally give up hope :(

However, it is possible to have a child in the mid/late 40s - if I had been successful, then that would have been me written off all the way up to retirement age :(

So much for my expensive university education

Fortunately, I always managed to work for more enlightend employers :)

Well said, meggins. It will be interesting to see how many businesses refuse to employ "men of childbearing age" as well as "women of childbearing age". There won't be anyone left for them to employ! :o

"From April, men will be entitled to take any part of the last 6 months of maternity leave as paternity leave, so really men are just as likely to require time off when they start a family!"

I wish we could name and praise, actually.

I was interviewing for a job when I (sort-of unexpectedly; had been trying unsuccessfully for a while) got pregnant with DD1.

I withdrew my application because I wanted to go on maternity leave indefinitely, and to the company's eternal credit, they tried very hard to talk me into taking it, emphasising their generous maternity benefits, had chats with other mothers employed there etc etc etc.

This was a Swiss bank, so not an industry known for being female-friendly.

Just thinking about it, I think AS is overlooking a big counterpoint - loyalty.

My current employer is an excellent place for a woman to work, and there are many very senior women. I was recruited by a friend who has two DCs and told me it was a great place for a woman to work. I have actually just recommended them to a very highly qualified acquaintance who is looking for a less sexist workplace than the mining giant in which she currently works.

When I return from maternity leave after DD2, I fully intend to stay at my company until I retire, so for the one year they've lost me, they'll get 25 years of loyal service in return. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

Groan. Read this from the Guardian in 2008:

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/01/gender.women/print

"Then there are all the signs about attitudes to women and work. Flicking through the newspapers one day, I came across an interview with Theo Paphitis, who appears on the TV show, Dragon's Den, as well as on the country's Rich List each year; he is easily one of the UK's most prominent business people. "All this feminist stuff," he said, "are we seriously saying that 50% of all jobs should go to women?" Paphitis went on to note that women "get themselves bloody pregnant and ... they always argue that they'll be working until the day before, have the baby, go down to the river, wash it off, give it to the nanny and be back at work the following day, but sure enough, their brains turn to mush, and then after the birth the maternal instincts kick in, they take three months off, get it out of their system and are back to normal". On the subject of paternity leave he suggested that he thinks "it's a bit soppy".

And, sadly, Paphitis isn't alone in his unreconstructed views. In interviews earlier this year, Alan Sugar, Amstrad founder, Apprentice star and government business adviser, repeatedly challenged a law instituted more than three decades ago. This law was one of the big wins of the 1970s feminist movement, making it illegal for women to be asked at interview whether they plan to have children, on the grounds that it is clearly discriminatory: a chance for employers to weed out any woman who wants to combine a family with work. "You're not allowed to ask, so it's easy," said Sugar, "just don't employ them.""

What a bunch of old arseholes.

to be fair, my boss is a equal opportunities arsehole. He is looking to hire both male and female staff without families.

Well, I personally wouldn't talk about anything that personal in an interview. To keep it to the children question: I believe that if they are asking, it means they already have preconceived ideas about employing mums. And somehow I do not believe that means those ideas are in our favour. I would think that in an interview they should only ask if you can do your job. OK, having a child may mean that your performance may change. But there are many other factors that can change that performance (like a crappy manager). Plus, what may be your genuine opinion at the interview (on children or travelling or anything) - the opinions change. And as so many other have said - there are many men that go part time when become dads.