Discrimination during maternity leave
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
It appears that you do not understand what a glass ceiling is. It is nothing to do with selection on merit. It is about an invisible barrier to advancement based on gender.
At the risk of starting you off again, how can you tell an invisible barrier exists if it's invisible?For instance, is there an invisible barrier to my becoming a world-class saxophonist? I can confirm that I have failed to become even a very good player, so from this I can deduce that there is indeed such a barrier, and that it's not visible.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Maybe it does provide evidence that companies do better with women on their boards, but it does not provide evidence that glass ceilings exist.You rely on the T word instead of actually addressing the issue, and to say that your premise is 'accepted' and that it is up to me to disprove it is pretty much the same as claiming at it's generally accepted that God exists, and that I didn't agree I would have to prove otherwise.
I don't believe that women (in general) make worse employees than men. But one thing is for sure, it doesn't matter how good an employee if he or she isn't at work. Although I wouldn't do it myself, and I would discourage anyone else from doing it, I can well understand the reluctance of some employers to give jobs to any class of person who is likely to take long periods of legally protected absence from work.
But the bloody law has changed! From now on, men are just as able to take a significant chunk of time off for parental leave. You cannot, therefore, justify your misogyny on purely practical grounds.
It'll take a while, granted, for social norms to catch up but they will eventually. As I said earlier, I'd certainly be taking advantage of parental leave if we hadn't decided that one child is plenty.
It'll take a while, granted, for social norms to catch up but they will eventually. As I said earlier, I'd certainly be taking advantage of parental leave if we hadn't decided that one child is plenty.
RobinOakapple said:
Breadvan72 said:
It appears that you do not understand what a glass ceiling is. It is nothing to do with selection on merit. It is about an invisible barrier to advancement based on gender.
At the risk of starting you off again, how can you tell an invisible barrier exists if it's invisible?For instance, is there an invisible barrier to my becoming a world-class saxophonist? I can confirm that I have failed to become even a very good player, so from this I can deduce that there is indeed such a barrier, and that it's not visible.
jimbobs said:
But the bloody law has changed! From now on, men are just as able to take a significant chunk of time off for parental leave. You cannot, therefore, justify your misogyny on purely practical grounds.
It'll take a while, granted, for social norms to catch up but they will eventually. As I said earlier, I'd certainly be taking advantage of parental leave if we hadn't decided that one child is plenty.
Why do you claim that businesses making choices for the betterment of the business rather than the potential employee as misogyny? It isn't.It'll take a while, granted, for social norms to catch up but they will eventually. As I said earlier, I'd certainly be taking advantage of parental leave if we hadn't decided that one child is plenty.
I commented on the likelihood of fathers taking extended paternal leave earlier in the thread so won't again.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Why do you claim that businesses making choices for the betterment of the business rather than the potential employee as misogyny? It isn't.
I commented on the likelihood of fathers taking extended paternal leave earlier in the thread so won't again.
It could be construed as discriminatory, however.I commented on the likelihood of fathers taking extended paternal leave earlier in the thread so won't again.
What hasn't been discussed here, though IanA2 mentioned it pages ago, is the possibility of quitting the job and then suing for constructive dismissal - it is a tougher route as far as I can gather (and to be clear absolutely not something my wife has considered), but I wonder if the damages might be higher?
PurpleMoonlight said:
Breadvan72 said:
We all are. The thread ran its course 87 bazillion pages ago. Arguing over the corpse of a dead claim is the current S,P&L thing (see the private school thread).
Hey, you brought up the horse, the rest of us are just flogging it ...Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff