Discrimination during maternity leave
Discussion
Jasandjules said:
Mikeyjae said:
I only find out about new positions if I look at the job board (rarely) or a colleague mentions it (often lol). OP does your wife's company email or do they have a job board? Word of mouth tends to get around.
And there you set down just one reason why the company should contact her about any such role.IF she was in the office she would find out about it, however she is not. She therefore is at a disadvantage compared to those in the office.
Nigel Worc's said:
I don't think that is true, and I think you are being unkind.
I run a business to make money for me and my family, I pay my taxes, my business pays its taxes.
If society wants all this namby pamby s
te, then society can pay for it, not me directly.
Do you feel that is unreasonable ?
If women wish to be treated equally, then they can behave equally.
L O fI run a business to make money for me and my family, I pay my taxes, my business pays its taxes.
If society wants all this namby pamby s
te, then society can pay for it, not me directly.Do you feel that is unreasonable ?
If women wish to be treated equally, then they can behave equally.
king l.Nigel from Worc's please step up and claim your prize.
Nigel Worc's said:
I don't think that is true, and I think you are being unkind.
I run a business to make money for me and my family, I pay my taxes, my business pays its taxes.
If society wants all this namby pamby ste, then society can pay for it, not me directly.
Do you feel that is unreasonable ?
If women wish to be treated equally, then they can behave equally.
I presume you carried your kids for 4.5months, so as to share things equally with your wife?I run a business to make money for me and my family, I pay my taxes, my business pays its taxes.
If society wants all this namby pamby s
te, then society can pay for it, not me directly.Do you feel that is unreasonable ?
If women wish to be treated equally, then they can behave equally.
desolate said:
jimmybobby said:
My clients are public sector. I work with many many female staff and every time one of them gets pregnant the other staff have to take up the work they are meant to be doing.
In the companies i work for when a member of staff goes on leave maternity or otherwise other staff are expected to pick up the slack. This has been the case with most most businesses I have come into contact with.
Loving your work jimmybobby, In the companies i work for when a member of staff goes on leave maternity or otherwise other staff are expected to pick up the slack. This has been the case with most most businesses I have come into contact with.
Edited by jimmybobby on Saturday 18th July 22:11
Keep it up.
The f
k you are!! Whatever happened to taking personal responsability for your own actions. The world has gone completely mad. jimmybobby said:
On the flip side I suspect there will be case law meaning that if they did contact her while on maternity law she could probably raise a case against the company for contacting her whilst on maternity leave. Therefore damned if they do and damned if they dont.
Are you also implying that if a company such as hers which has 70000 employees has a position open internally they are obligated to have someone waste days calling eeryone in the company who is on leave to advise them of the post?
No there is a duty to keep her apprised of such matters. There could potentially be an exception (I would need to look up more to be sure) if the woman stated she did not want to be updated during her maternity.Are you also implying that if a company such as hers which has 70000 employees has a position open internally they are obligated to have someone waste days calling eeryone in the company who is on leave to advise them of the post?
There is also of course the "Keeping In Touch" days which a company may undertake, though we do not know what arrangement the OP's OH had with her work in respect of those.
And again no not every job at all, but a promotion. If there was a redundancy situation then it would be any suitable alternative position that but is another question.
ETA - and Mandat, how do you propose she did that? Pop into work every day to check the notice board?
Actus Reus said:
Nigel Worc's said:
I don't think that is true, and I think you are being unkind.
I run a business to make money for me and my family, I pay my taxes, my business pays its taxes.
If society wants all this namby pamby ste, then society can pay for it, not me directly.
Do you feel that is unreasonable ?
If women wish to be treated equally, then they can behave equally.
I presume you carried your kids for 4.5months, so as to share things equally with your wife?I run a business to make money for me and my family, I pay my taxes, my business pays its taxes.
If society wants all this namby pamby s
te, then society can pay for it, not me directly.Do you feel that is unreasonable ?
If women wish to be treated equally, then they can behave equally.
I did continue working though, and enabled my wife to be warm, dry, fed, and housed whilst she raised our children, because that is my role.
Jasandjules said:
And there you set down just one reason why the company should contact her about any such role.
IF she was in the office she would find out about it, however she is not. She therefore is at a disadvantage compared to those in the office.
Indeed she may be in a position where she would be disadvantaged for not being in the office, what I would be thinking thou is why is she not in contact with her work friends or vise versa.IF she was in the office she would find out about it, however she is not. She therefore is at a disadvantage compared to those in the office.
A few people I work with will go home and shut off from work, turn phone off and not give 2 hoots until the next day. Other people I work with like to stay in contact and help others, or just have a friendly chat once in a while. My phone is always on and even If I have 2 weeks off I can pretty much be sure that I will be aware one way or another whats happening when I return. Maybe its just me and I like to stay in touch with friends.
If society wants factories to have guards around machines, and wants there to be a limit on child employment, and wants there to be protection from arbitrary dismissal, and so on, should society pay for that and not employers? How? By taxpayer subsidy to employers? By direct welfare benefits? Gosh! Sounds like dangerous lefty nonsense, very un PH! But, er, wait, employers are part of society. Social policy spreads some costs across businesses in order to achieve certain objectives.
Nigel Worc's said:
Not at all, as you know nature has decreed they do that.
I did continue working though, and enabled my wife to be warm, dry, fed, and housed whilst she raised our children, because that is my role.
I love it that they have the internet in 1350! How's that Black Death working out for you guys?I did continue working though, and enabled my wife to be warm, dry, fed, and housed whilst she raised our children, because that is my role.
wolf1 said:
No intent to go back but wants compo anyway! 
No I wouldn't I have morals. I would have resigned instead of taking maternity leave if I had no intention of returning.
Hmm, this has a certain whiff to it. It's all very easy to say when frothing in indignation about the audacity of couples wanting kids and to be treated fairly, but I bet it if was you and your wife/ partner contemplating starting a family, there's no way you'd turn the maternity deal down.No I wouldn't I have morals. I would have resigned instead of taking maternity leave if I had no intention of returning.
And whilst all the important things have been said by BV already ( and the swivel eyed loony stuff by most others) one thing I'm not seeing is any views from women on here.
Ok probably not unexpected on a car forum, and I've no interest in mumsnet, but the rabid male views on here seem to forget 2 crucial things:
1. Equating parenthood with the effectives banishment of a women out of the workplace is mental - there are lots of mothers I know who can work damn hard, plus the fact that seeing as we're not in Victorian Britain, couples need 2 salaries.
2. I hear lots of business resilience stuff saying the key to success is developing staff. By writing off mothers (bear in mind one poster has asserted they should be jailed if they don't return) the company is writing off all the accrued knowledge and experience, plus the good 20-25 years beyond.
Finally, you're quite lucky there's no mums on here, as they'd no doubt tear people a new one for suggesting caring for a new born is on a par with sitting round watching telly all day.
Ps
Nigel worcs- sorry to read about your dilemma of taking over a new business with staff. Why don't you ask them if they have any children who could work for you? I'm sure there may be some chimneys that need sweeping in your area, or maybe picking apart old computer equipment for precious metals? Or how about plain old fashioned scavenging through the midden for anything useable.
Tsk, these new fangled employment rules are just such a strangleholdon entrepreneurship.
Pps OP, hope you get satisfactory outcome.
jimmybobby said:
I should probably step away from the keyboard but this is a subject that severly pisses me off because it falls into that whole entitlement/discrimination thing. I am entitled to...
The fk you are!! Whatever happened to taking personal responsability for your own actions. The world has gone completely mad.
Don't stop now. Each post oozes insight.The f
k you are!! Whatever happened to taking personal responsability for your own actions. The world has gone completely mad. We need more of your type to take us forward into the Brave New World.
Ian Geary said:
Hmm, this has a certain whiff to it. It's all very easy to say when frothing in indignation about the audacity of couples wanting kids and to be treated fairly, but I bet it if was you and your wife/ partner contemplating starting a family, there's no way you'd turn the maternity deal down.
And whilst all the important things have been said by BV already ( and the swivel eyed loony stuff by most others) one thing I'm not seeing is any views from women on here.
Ok probably not unexpected on a car forum, and I've no interest in mumsnet, but the rabid male views on here seem to forget 2 crucial things:
1. Equating parenthood with the effectives banishment of a women out of the workplace is mental - there are lots of mothers I know who can work damn hard, plus the fact that seeing as we're not in Victorian Britain, couples need 2 salaries.
2. I hear lots of business resilience stuff saying the key to success is developing staff. By writing off mothers (bear in mind one poster has asserted they should be jailed if they don't return) the company is writing off all the accrued knowledge and experience, plus the good 20-25 years beyond.
Finally, you're quite lucky there's no mums on here, as they'd no doubt tear people a new one for suggesting caring for a new born is on a par with sitting round watching telly all day.
Ps
Nigel worcs- sorry to read about your dilemma of taking over a new business with staff. Why don't you ask them if they have any children who could work for you? I'm sure there may be some chimneys that need sweeping in your area, or maybe picking apart old computer equipment for precious metals? Or how about plain old fashioned scavenging through the midden for anything useable.
Tsk, these new fangled employment rules are just such a strangleholdon entrepreneurship.
Pps OP, hope you get satisfactory outcome.
Ppps there was no sarcasm intended or implied in my post above.And whilst all the important things have been said by BV already ( and the swivel eyed loony stuff by most others) one thing I'm not seeing is any views from women on here.
Ok probably not unexpected on a car forum, and I've no interest in mumsnet, but the rabid male views on here seem to forget 2 crucial things:
1. Equating parenthood with the effectives banishment of a women out of the workplace is mental - there are lots of mothers I know who can work damn hard, plus the fact that seeing as we're not in Victorian Britain, couples need 2 salaries.
2. I hear lots of business resilience stuff saying the key to success is developing staff. By writing off mothers (bear in mind one poster has asserted they should be jailed if they don't return) the company is writing off all the accrued knowledge and experience, plus the good 20-25 years beyond.
Finally, you're quite lucky there's no mums on here, as they'd no doubt tear people a new one for suggesting caring for a new born is on a par with sitting round watching telly all day.
Ps
Nigel worcs- sorry to read about your dilemma of taking over a new business with staff. Why don't you ask them if they have any children who could work for you? I'm sure there may be some chimneys that need sweeping in your area, or maybe picking apart old computer equipment for precious metals? Or how about plain old fashioned scavenging through the midden for anything useable.
Tsk, these new fangled employment rules are just such a strangleholdon entrepreneurship.
Pps OP, hope you get satisfactory outcome.
Jasandjules said:
Mikeyjae said:
I only find out about new positions if I look at the job board (rarely) or a colleague mentions it (often lol). OP does your wife's company email or do they have a job board? Word of mouth tends to get around.
And there you set down just one reason why the company should contact her about any such role.IF she was in the office she would find out about it, however she is not. She therefore is at a disadvantage compared to those in the office.
Breadvan72 said:
If society wants factories to have guards around machines, and wants there to be a limit on child employment, and wants there to be protection from arbitrary dismissal, and so on, should society pay for that and not employers? How? By taxpayer subsidy to employers? Gosh! Sounds like dangerous lefty nonsense, very un PH! But, er, wait, employers are part of society. Social policy spreads some costs across businesses in order to achieve certain objectives.
As much as I admire you as a person, you and I are never going to agree on this type of topic, I was even on the side of the MOD during the stuff you eluded to earlier.In small businesses these things matter a lot, and whatever the law says, these sort of concessions lead to the groups of people that the concessions are aimed at being less desirable to employ.
jimmybobby said:
desolate said:
jimmybobby said:
My clients are public sector. I work with many many female staff and every time one of them gets pregnant the other staff have to take up the work they are meant to be doing.
In the companies i work for when a member of staff goes on leave maternity or otherwise other staff are expected to pick up the slack. This has been the case with most most businesses I have come into contact with.
Loving your work jimmybobby, In the companies i work for when a member of staff goes on leave maternity or otherwise other staff are expected to pick up the slack. This has been the case with most most businesses I have come into contact with.
Edited by jimmybobby on Saturday 18th July 22:11
Keep it up.
The f
k you are!! Whatever happened to taking personal responsability for your own actions. The world has gone completely mad. So people can bang on about personal responsibility and lifestyle choices all they like, but the reality is that if as a society we make it viable for women to have children as well as a career then in the long run we all benefit.
Nigel Worc's said:
Not at all, as you know nature has decreed they do that.
I did continue working though, and enabled my wife to be warm, dry, fed, and housed whilst she raised our children, because that is my role.
To be fair, Nige, it's probably best you don't hire any women - because you are definitely going to be sued if you do.I did continue working though, and enabled my wife to be warm, dry, fed, and housed whilst she raised our children, because that is my role.
Breadvan72 said:
It is apparent from this and many threads that many PH'ers don't much care for women, but quite a few also don't seem to care much for humans. Babys, eh? Yuk!
Breadvan it has nothing to do with care for woman. Nothing at all. I am all for treating woman equally and with respect. I am all for woman having babies hell the survival of humanity depends on it. What i am not in favour of is this bizarre idea of equality. Its like those morons arguing its only fair the rich should pay higher % taxes.How is that fair?
Someone earning £100000 paying 10% tax will naturally be paying more tax anyway than someone earning £10000 so at that very basic point not only is the system fair but those earning more pay more tax. Somehow though people have got it into their heads that such a system would be unfair.
And this goes to the same issue. Somehow someone has got it into their head that the disruption to a business caused by a member of its female staff making the personal decision to have a child and go on leave for up to a year is the businesses decision and not the decisiom of the woman getting pregnant.
A company cannot ask a female if she intends to have a baby. A company cannot ask a female to have a child at a set point that would be least disruptive to the company or its finances. They have no say at all. They are simply held to ransom by a persons personal decision.
Roo said:
'Job board' as in intranet. At my wifes employer all vacancies are advertised on the company intranet. If you want to know what's available you have to go and have a look. They don't go around telling each member of staff of each vacancy.
Yea the Intranet, Its the only way we find out about vacencies too. Other then talking to work friends who mention new jobs. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff