Discrimination

[pennyk]

I think its also good to think about what you could be missing out on, by automatically knocking people out of the running because of prejudice... whether its prejudice related to their gender, family status, or whatever.
I can think of 3 times where I have nearly done this to people who turned out to be complete gems.
The first one was quite a long time ago.. I was doing the first cull of a batch of applications, in what I thought was a very professional manner. Second read over them, I realised I'd culled a really good applicant. When I reviewed her CV, I realised her name was the same as a relative who I didnt' get on with very well, and I think I subconsciously held that against her... its the only reason I can think of that I would have culled her application. She ended up getting the job and was fantastic.
Second time, I thought the person had a learning difficulty and maybe ADHD.... I was very worried about how they would fit in and perform in the job. They turned out to be fantastic, an extremely effective sales person.
Third time, I interviewed someone with a slight physical disability... not serious, but certainly noticeable. The job is quite physical, so I had some legitimate concerns. Again, they got the job, and have been great.
I can also think of many times where I've employed someone who ticks all the boxes and looks like they would be perfect, and they've been complete losers.
What I've learned in 20 years of managing people.... often the best person isn't the most obvious one.
cheers
Pen

 

[geoffw]

Employing is a really difficult job.

And I don't even need anybody skilled.

I just need good speed, attitude and aptitude.

A high dropout rate amongst applicants

 

[evand]

Maybe you need to stop employing low paid teenagers Geoff LOL

Employing is a really difficult job.

And I don't even need anybody skilled.

I just need good speed, attitude and aptitude.

A high dropout rate amongst applicants

 

[willair]

I just need good speed, attitude and aptitude.

A high dropout rate amongst applicants

Then it only comes back to 2 items,the management or the wages and assuming you are talking about members of the human species,and from what i've seen in some fast food outlets as we eat at one once a week after the movies ,, the way some of the people that run the out-lets treat those young people no wonder they give food away to their mates and don't turn up..

 

[pennyk]

we went to Max Brenner's Chocolate shop a few weeks ago, on a busy Saturday night. We could only get a seat at the "bar", so we were watching the young people prepare the food and drinks. They were amazing. Fast, consistent, careful in what they were doing, making sure everything looked good etc. It seemed like they had really good systems in place....... and the staff seemed to be really enjoying working there (not so much the wait staff, but definitely those who were cooking/ preparing).
We were really impressed. It would be interesting to know what they do differently to other food chains.
Pen

 

[jaycee]

penny, my complete guess is,. that the businesses like the one you visited, implment their own policies, i.e the owners/managers do with input from staff etc if/as needed, sometimes from scratch.... whereas with the bigger chain stores, the new franchise owners are given a program and steps to follow, they get trained, but not tho the extent that the owners etc in the smaller business train the staff (cause they probalby ran it before theselves the way that they teach their staff)... the new fast food chain owners don't know the buisness they are running etc as well as the smaller business owners and that is reflected in the way they train and therefore manage their staff.

Why is it that can I not think of a star restaurant "chain store" ?

 

[BayView]

Biggles,
Maybe only discriminate when it doesn't affect you? You stated you are female but you wouldn't want to be discrimated on the fact you are ofchild bearing years. By informing an employer you won't be having children, you are asking them to pick you over another woman, and discriminate against her.

Sadly - for the woman who wants to have kids - this is a very important factor for the employer.

But thankfully, the laws have seen to it that the employer can't ask the question - a question that may just make the difference between whether the business survives or folds down the track.

Some of you (ones who have never been employers I'd suggest) will think this is cr@p; "how can a business fold purely due to this expense?" (paid maternity leave)

Easily.

Labour is a business's highest expense (other than purchasing stock, possibly. At least; this is the case in my business).

This is compounded through having an employee NOT there due to having a child, who has to be replaced by another person to run the business as it was before the employee went on maternity leave.

It's a bit like holiday pay...don't get me started on that little beauty.

The wage cost for that employee on maternity leave has immediately jumped up to almost double by the time you add in super, workcare premiums etc.

The businesse's turnover more than likely won't increase during this time (you may get lucky and snare the employee of the century to replace the worker on mat/leave).

Now, insert all of this into me interviewing an 18 year old male mechanic and an 18 year old female mechanic for a position. You could even add in an interviewee who is a 45 year old female mechanic who's had a historectomy. (she is actually a better prospect than the other two - less likely to go out with the mates and then take a sicky the next day, less dangerous as a driver, probably more settled and in need of a steady income etc, and less likely to cost me maternity leave)

Forgetting every other factor such as appearance, diction, intelligence, aptitude, attitude, health, living location to work, driving record, smoker or non smoker and so on and so on....which interviewee do you think is financially worse for me based on that one factor alone?

Now, keep in mind that it is only ONE factor in the decision I might make, but I think you can all see where I'm coming from.

And, the laws don't think this is a relevent thing to be able to factor in and therefore can't be asked, or hinted at???

It's politically correct, it's socialist, it's all warm and fuzzy and protective of the (potential) "victims"....and it doesn't work.

Or, I could employee the girl, and then raise prices accordingly (we all would if we could) to cover the extra labour costs.

Let's pass on those savings to the consumer...

"oh; hang on...you want cheap product, Sir? Sure; I'll just move my factory over to China where labour is cheap first... What's that; you don't want something made in China? I'm sorry Sir that you don't like things that are "made in China" but there it is."

This is the path we are on.

Look, I am totally sympathetic to the desire of all woman to want (and need to have) babies, but as a business owner I need to keep the business alive; to provide jobs for those that are already working there; to live.

Once the right of an employer to choose who they wish to employee is undermined and restricted, the end result is less jobs for everyone, and/or the cost of living jumps even higher.

This is why we see so many businesses pulling up stumps and moving overseas, or the little local businesses folding.

 

[evand]

I think if a business goes to the wall because a female employee is on maternity leave. It probably is close to going under anyway.

Its also a tax deduction.

 

[Sheryn]

Here's an interesting one for ya's...

Yesterday my shop Manager at the workshop resigned. Finishes up next friday.

I am terribly sorry to see him go, and he will be missed.

When we discussed why he was leaving, he mentioned issues with childcare, school drop offs etc. Our shop hours are 8-5, monday to friday. His first answer was "I want to step back".

He found the role of manager not really to his liking; wanted to go back "on the tools" and get away from dealing with customers, less responsibility and ease to accommodate the kids. Fair enough too.

Have you found a new Manager?


Cheers
Sheryn

 

[BayView]

Its also a tax deduction.

Correct, but it is an expense which affects the cashflow initially, so the business has to survive until the tax deduction can be enjoyed later.

On the topic of whether the business would survive with or without the maternity leave participants, have you ever wondered why so many hospitals have no beds available?

Slightly different issue to surviving or thriving, but you see what I mean - the hospitals are ALL labouring under the weight of staff costs, and staff shortages.

It is not simply a matter of replacing an employee who goes off on leave with another employee - it is damned hard to find employees who are willing and able to fit into the hospital schedule (most nurses and support staff are women and mothers).

 

[BayView]

Have you found a new Manager?


Cheers
Sheryn

Yes;

I kept all the resumes from the original ad applicants, and I had a short list of two from them.

I rang one to see if he was still interested, and explained the situation with our Manager leaving, and he was still interested.

He came for an interview last Friday week ago, and he starts this Monday.

It will be interesting to see how he goes - the job is a mix of tools and admin - all sorts of different things to do in a day - never a dull moment. Some are up for it; some aren't.

As it turned out the last guy found it tool much and wanted to go back "on the tools" and live a peaceful life with no responsibility - fair enough.

Being a Manager of any business sounds glamourous, but there is a fair degree of responsibility and pressure. It's why they get paid the big bucks isn't it?

 

[Luv2Travel]

Whether a company can afford it or not, I don't see why it's their responsibility to pay maternity leave or work their business around employee's families.

However, I do believe that a smart employer would value a loyal, hard working and dedicated employee and may choose to provide these benefits in order to keep this employee, if it won't be deterimental to the business.

By this, I'm not referring to Bayview's manager, as that is someone who needs to put the business first and not go running off on family matters as required.

An example of my point is a friend of mine works in a small business in an office environment. Most of their staff are women, and some have gone off to have children (or will do in the future), however have come back. This office has a spare room set aside, so if one of the women has to have their child home from school they can set them up in this room, and work hours (within reason) can fit in with family. This is an industry where work can be flexible and it does not affect the business at all. Instead, this business has a handful of very dedicated, hard working women who have been and will be around for a long time. Another big cost to a business is high staff turnover, so by providing these benefits they have eliminated this, so I believe this example is a win win for both employer and employee.

 

[BayView]

An example of my point is a friend of mine works in a small business in an office environment. Most of their staff are women, and some have gone off to have children (or will do in the future), however have come back. This office has a spare room set aside, so if one of the women has to have their child home from school they can set them up in this room, and work hours (within reason) can fit in with family. This is an industry where work can be flexible and it does not affect the business at all. Instead, this business has a handful of very dedicated, hard working women who have been and will be around for a long time. Another big cost to a business is high staff turnover, so by providing these benefits they have eliminated this, so I believe this example is a win win for both employer and employee.

A fantastic idea; I reckon every hospital should do this as just one example.

You could also add in schools - many teachers are mothers.

 

[wylie]

A fantastic idea; I reckon every hospital should do this as just one example.

You could also add in schools - many teachers are mothers.

I would just like to add that my son's years 6 and 7 were memorable for the fact that his male teacher had one day off each week, often the same day. We wondered if his wife was back working one day a week. They had a new baby and we thought perhaps he was minding the baby. It was only a guess, but we will not know for a while what impact missing one fifth of those two years of school has had on our son and ever other child in that class.

Complaints from parents went nowhere.

Teachers (and parents) might think that the relief teachers simply took over, but this was not the case. Some days it was quiet reading, other days it was the relief teacher telling his life story or learning to count in another language. Interesting possibly, but not helpful for preparing the class for secondary school.

It was not acceptable but nothing was done by the male principal to ensure either a "permanent" relief teacher was available or that the job be shared on a full time basis.

I was told of another male teacher with 47 absences. That is more than once a week.

This is not a male bashing post, but just to point out that, like Marc has found, it can be a problem for a man to be at work for whatever reasons (family reasons are obvious, but not always the driver for a day off).

I would not have minded in the least had the children actually not "lost" one day a week, but that seems to be what happened, for two years.

 

[travelbug]

This is not a male bashing post, but just to point out that, like Marc has found, it can be a problem for a man to be at work for whatever reasons (family reasons are obvious, but not always the driver for a day off).

Can't really see the point of male/female ideology. Same problems when a woman takes a day off.

When I started reading your post I thought you were overreacting but if the teacher was off and not replaced with a permanent ongoing teacher I see your point.

So it seems the teacher just kept taking the day off each week without notification? I find that strange because I know teachers are followed up if that happens (or is it a private school?). I worked with a teacher that was away every second Friday. I put my foot in it and asked how her therapy was going (she did hurt her foot). I thought she was going to a specialist every fortnight. They fixed her the next year by giving her her programming time on a Friday. haha

Maybe the school didn't/couldn't get a teacher to commit to one day a week? I hate taking days off for that reason. When I take LSL I'm very picky about who takes my class and I spend a lot of time organising everything. The casuals love me.

 

[wylie]

Can't really see the point of male/female ideology. Same problems when a woman takes a day off.

I didn't really want to make a male/female point as such, but just showing that it is not always females who are away for family and/or health reasons.

Maybe the school didn't/couldn't get a teacher to commit to one day a week?

This is quite possible. I don't know what went on behind the scenes. I am not a pro-active parent at all, but by the end of the two years, I was pretty disgusted with the principal and the teacher. I was not alone. And it is a state school, so I don't know if that makes it easier or harder to find someone who is happy to do one day a week. I would have thought many contract teachers would have jumped at it, but I have no idea really.

I hate taking days off for that reason. When I take LSL I'm very picky about who takes my class and I spend a lot of time organising everything. The casuals love me.

This was what really bothered many of the parents, who did complain. I am just not the type to kick up a stink. Others did, but nothing happened. My son loved the day off each week.

 

[Amadio]

This was what really bothered many of the parents, who did complain. I am just not the type to kick up a stink. Others did, but nothing happened. My son loved the day off each week.

I doubt that there will be long term harm done. The maximum amount of learning done in any classroom day is about 7 minutes. Everything else is fluff.

Whoops, thread diversion. ..sorry.

 

[travelbug]

I doubt that there will be long term harm done. The maximum amount of learning done in any classroom day is about 7 minutes. Everything else is fluff.

Whoops, thread diversion. ..sorry.

I have heard that about Queensland schools.

 

[lizzie]

as a person about to enter business, i totally agree with bayview. however, i actually want someone who will do admin work during school hours for a few flexible days per week.

but - just this morning was reading an interesting article by peter strong, ceo of the national retailers association, regarding a meeting he had with the federal department of health about oh&s of employees and healthy workplaces - focussing totally on the health and safety of workers and employees.

"... i mentioned to them that no one ever considers the health of the small business owner. they sat in silence as the impact of the statement struck home. they agreed this was true. after they took in the whole conept of a small business owner actually being a human being with "health" issues they then asked how to include the small business owner in the process."

quite an interesting reaction. there is so much legislation about health, safety and rights of workers - but very little that emcompasses the actual small/medium business owner, who these workers reply upon for employment.

back to the maternity portion of the thread. i know it's just american tv, but interesting to see how many of the hospitals, schools etc have a creche or childcare facilities on site. if there was somewhere for a baby to be safe and cared for in close proximately to the mother, suitable for mother's to breast feeding etc, then i imagine a lot of mothers would go back to work sooner.

i know it would only work for large organisations - but if the blokes can take smoke breaks then surely mothers can take feed breaks and make up the time elsewhere!