U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-05-2019, 11:48 AM
 
6,596 posts, read 1,361,653 times
Reputation: 16663

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74 View Post
You treated a subset of women differently on the basis of their marital and parental status. That is considered discrimination on the basis of sex.
Did you even read the above? Yes, it is discrimination, but it is NOT illegal in most cases. (Unless the above-linked article is wrong.) Anyway, I am through arguing with you. I stated my position, and you are free (of course) to disagree with it, and it is also your right to disagree with facts -- however, doing so does not change the truth of those facts (if they are, indeed, facts).

Last edited by katharsis; 06-05-2019 at 12:05 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-05-2019, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Coastal New Jersey
56,105 posts, read 54,597,263 times
Reputation: 66501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surfer Guy View Post
That is what I believe too. Men have historically provided support for the family (in the caveman days, it was by hunting; in modern days, it is by working at a job), and historically the women have stayed home to raise the children. That system has worked for mankind for millenia. Why change that?
That's just not true.

Even in hunter-gatherer days, the women put the babies on their backs and toted the kids along to go out and find plant food, prepare the food, etc. They (and the children) were part of the support system.

In agricultural times, the kids were out in the fields with the moms.

And even in more modern times, that system didn't always "work".
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2019, 12:31 PM
 
Location: Coastal New Jersey
56,105 posts, read 54,597,263 times
Reputation: 66501
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissLizzie85 View Post
The point is, it's just not that hard to accommodate employees within reason. PLENTY of people sit at their desk doing not much at all or spend too much time visiting with co-workers - no one really works a solid 8 hours at an office job, with or without kids. I'm a working parent myself and I've employed working parents. I could not care less if someone leaves early from a salaried position, as long as they've done their work. Why should I force someone to miss their kid's soccer game to sit at their desk for two hours when they've already accomplished what they needed to accomplish for the day? People are much more loyal to your company and are much better employees when you trust them to do a good job without micromanaging them at every turn. The whole policy of PTO and vacation makes no sense and rewards busy work.

Treat people like humans, mind your own business if your coworker's schedule is merely an annoyance to you (providing you're just irritated and not saddled with their projects), and do your work in an efficient way. If someone isn't finishing their assignments on the regular, then they should lose their job. It's not that difficult.
^This.

Too much emphasis is placed on time. We all know those people who show up on time and leave on time and do as little as possible during the day. Then there are others who might come in late occasionally but who run circles around the others as far as getting work done.

Granted, there are jobs where the time put in is really related to the actual tasks at hand, but in management positions, there are people who get done in 2 hours what someone else gets done in 6, and everyone knows who those people are.

In my case, I had to work full time but because I had a generous vacation time allotment, I was able to take off when my kid got sick or there was a school activity to attend What did happen is that my career slowed down during her youngest years because I wasn't able to stay late and put in the extra time that would have helped me move ahead. When she became a teenager, I was able to do that, and that's when things took off for me professionally and financially. No regrets over the slowdown years.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2019, 12:38 PM
 
2,658 posts, read 1,552,373 times
Reputation: 3207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
^This.

Too much emphasis is placed on time. We all know those people who show up on time and leave on time and do as little as possible during the day. Then there are others who might come in late occasionally but who run circles around the others as far as getting work done.

Granted, there are jobs where the time put in is really related to the actual tasks at hand, but in management positions, there are people who get done in 2 hours what someone else gets done in 6, and everyone knows who those people are.

In my case, I had to work full time but because I had a generous vacation time allotment, I was able to take off when my kid got sick or there was a school activity to attend. What did happen is that my career slowed down during her youngest years because I wasn't able to stay late and put in the extra time that would have helped me move ahead. When she became a teenager, I was able to do that, and that's when things took off for me professionally and financially. No regrets over the slowdown years.
Couldn’t agree more! I’m in the young child phase do my career and still work 45ish hours most week, some with far more some with a little less. But some of that isn’t physically in the office so I’m sure at times it seems like I’m not pulling my weight but my job is done on time, correctly and I make every meeting I’m slated for. I still get to do that and be a mom which includes working from home when they’re sick, leaving at 345 to drive to soccer/swim/etc. but to do that I come in by 6 am every day. It’s kind of hard to judge how much someone else does or doesn’t work unless performance becomes an issue.

Last edited by Mightyqueen801; 06-05-2019 at 03:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2019, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Denver CO
21,177 posts, read 11,797,310 times
Reputation: 32193
Yeah, I used to work with someone who showed up at 7 am or even earlier, and made sure the boss knew it. Literally the only thing he did between when he got there and when the boss got there was drink coffee and read the newspaper. But oh boy did he boast about being the early bird and how many hours he put in!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2019, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Saint John, IN
11,043 posts, read 3,994,985 times
Reputation: 13559
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
If people have young kids and take that responsibility seriously, they are going to miss more work than most other people who don't have kids. For that reason, if I knew that a woman had at least one very young child and was a single parent, I would not hire her unless she lived with her mother who agreed to be a full-time babysitter. (This was about 30 years ago, btw, when I was an office manager responsible for hiring secretarial staff, and back then, all the secretarial applicants I interviewed were women.)

I did feel bad about that, but I believed then (as I believe now) that women should not have kids unless they are married and can afford to have children without both spouses having to work 40 or more hours a week. Yes, that is a very old-fashioned attitude, I know, and I also know that life doesn't always turn out the way people expect it to even when they plan well, but nevertheless, it is what I believe.

[And, to emphasize, I know that I am in the minority with this opinion! The older I get, the more it seems that most of my opinions these days are as antiquated as manual typewriters!]
In a perfect I would agree; however, it is very hard to have a family in this day and age on one salary. We were able to do it until my kids went to school full time, but we cut back on a lot of things because of it. Now that my kids are in middle school I still work because sports are expensive, kids usually need braces, I'm saving for their college and my retirement. My part time salary helps with that. I was very fortunate and still am. I feel for single moms who have to do it all and then come across employers who don't understand!

At any rate, it IS discriminatory to not hire a woman just because she has kids.

Like I said previously, I think there are more and more employers becoming flexible for working moms than there used to be. And honestly, I work more hours at home than I would in an office setting because I'm checking my emails at all hours of the day and night and handling client issues on off office hours. I understand both sides of the argument; however, working moms are going to increase moving forward. That is fact. I also understand that some jobs need to be done onsite, but many can be done remotely. Not to mention, a flexible employer is going to retain good employees. As long as the work is being done it's a win for everyone in my eyes!

Last edited by CGab; 06-05-2019 at 02:58 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2019, 02:52 PM
 
6,586 posts, read 2,379,668 times
Reputation: 15142
https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/inquiries_marital_status.cfm


Questions about marital status and number and ages of children are frequently used to discriminate against women and may violate Title VII if used to deny or limit employment opportunities.
It is clearly discriminatory to ask such questions only of women and not men (or vice-versa). Even if asked of both men and women, such questions may be seen as evidence of intent to discriminate against, for example, women with children.
Generally, employers should not use non job-related questions involving marital status, number and/or ages of children or dependents, or names of spouses or children of the applicant. Such inquiries may be asked after an employment offer has been made and accepted if needed for insurance or other legitimate business purposes.
The following pre-employment inquiries may be regarded as evidence of intent to discriminate when asked in the pre-employment context:
  • Whether applicant is pregnant.
  • Marital status of applicant or whether applicant plans to marry.
  • Number and age of children or future child bearing plans.
  • Child care arrangements.
  • Employment status of spouse.
  • Name of spouse.
You're not even supposed to ASK the questions. To do so opens up the possibility of fines and getting sued.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2019, 05:40 PM
 
998 posts, read 303,498 times
Reputation: 2182
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74 View Post
Yeah, I used to work with someone who showed up at 7 am or even earlier, and made sure the boss knew it. Literally the only thing he did between when he got there and when the boss got there was drink coffee and read the newspaper. But oh boy did he boast about being the early bird and how many hours he put in!
We have a friend who used to get to work late at 10 am, fool around until noon, go for a two hour lunch and didn't start serious work until 2 pm. He bragged about working late every night. He was fired. Never really had another decent job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2019, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
10,782 posts, read 10,195,889 times
Reputation: 14312
When it gets down to it, my employer only cares about productivity. The person who works 6 quality hours can easily be more valuable than the 8 hour worker who socializes a lot at the office, goofs off on the internet while at the desk, takes long breaks outside of the office, etc.

I give my employer quality hours every day. That is why me having kids and everything that goes along with it has never been an issue for me. My direct report understands that I am a professional and clearly have the aptitude to do the job and the work ethic.

We working moms get hit from both sides and it sucks. We are chided for not staying at home on the one hand and then on the other, we're derided by cranky colleagues for having to honor parental responsibilities.

The solution is to offer the ability to work remotely to more people. It's outmoded and dumb to have people chained to a damn desk anyway. Many jobs can easily be done at home. Again, the bottom line is productivity and that's affected when people use leave time (and thereby not work) to handle legitimate things such as a sick child, etc. etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2019, 08:56 AM
 
6,346 posts, read 3,479,084 times
Reputation: 5744
Quote:
Originally Posted by riaelise View Post
We working moms get hit from both sides and it sucks. We are chided for not staying at home on the one hand and then on the other, we're derided by cranky colleagues for having to honor parental responsibilities.
As do many working dads unfortunately. Men are expected to always be available, to not have any "personal issues" and are derided not only by cranky colleagues but also by management when there are parental responsibilities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top