ChatterBank0 min ago
Can they afford to?
8 Answers
http://www.dailymail....n-boost-Brussels.html
Given the present financial state of most small companies, will they now be able to afford to employ women of child bearing age?
Given the present financial state of most small companies, will they now be able to afford to employ women of child bearing age?
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
This is one of the reasons the UK should pull out of the EU.
Seriously though Oldgit - You constantly harp on about the past and how great it was. I have some sympathy with your underlining attitude towards women. I mean, I think that we should look further into the past before the ill-fated Suffragette Movement, at a time when men would work a 16-hour shift to provide for us women who so need looking after as we are of a delicate supposition. In return we women should be able to look after our men, assauge their desires to the upmost in the bedroom, keep housekeeping to its perfection and provide a throughly packed thoughful and caring Ploughman's Lunch in the morning before work.
Our job is to raise the children in our cottages. Later we could both reap the rewards of hard well-earned work by gazing at the voluptuous tulips in the Spring, the sensuous red and pink geraniums in the summer and the hedonistic Honey-suckle in the winter. How the echo's of the past cast a grey, looming shadow over us women in our present lives. Me and you - Oldgit could have got to together along time ago - It's a pity you've past your sell-by-date?
Seriously though Oldgit - You constantly harp on about the past and how great it was. I have some sympathy with your underlining attitude towards women. I mean, I think that we should look further into the past before the ill-fated Suffragette Movement, at a time when men would work a 16-hour shift to provide for us women who so need looking after as we are of a delicate supposition. In return we women should be able to look after our men, assauge their desires to the upmost in the bedroom, keep housekeeping to its perfection and provide a throughly packed thoughful and caring Ploughman's Lunch in the morning before work.
Our job is to raise the children in our cottages. Later we could both reap the rewards of hard well-earned work by gazing at the voluptuous tulips in the Spring, the sensuous red and pink geraniums in the summer and the hedonistic Honey-suckle in the winter. How the echo's of the past cast a grey, looming shadow over us women in our present lives. Me and you - Oldgit could have got to together along time ago - It's a pity you've past your sell-by-date?
Seadragon, did you read the question?
AOG, I'm sure it is a real problem now. If you remove the PC/Political rantings of people like seadragon and look at the hard bottom line I really dont know how small companies can afford to take the risk. The sad reality is that is will take a number of collapses before the loony PC brigade wakeup to the fact there are no jobs let alone ones for chikld bearing women.
AOG, I'm sure it is a real problem now. If you remove the PC/Political rantings of people like seadragon and look at the hard bottom line I really dont know how small companies can afford to take the risk. The sad reality is that is will take a number of collapses before the loony PC brigade wakeup to the fact there are no jobs let alone ones for chikld bearing women.
In short, No, most small companies already look at 'women of child bearing age' and would rather not employ them - this will make it even worse.
A business friend of mine has 5 employees - one of those has been off for the last 4 months and will be back in 2 months time. This is her second child and she will only come back in a part time capacity. This has had financial impacts on his business and he wouldn't employ a woman again. Shame, but that is the problem.
One idea (not one that I agree with) is that both Men and women get exactly the same period off (say 4 months). This then means that it is not necessarily the man who continues working, but could as easily be the woman. As I said - not something I agree with.
A business friend of mine has 5 employees - one of those has been off for the last 4 months and will be back in 2 months time. This is her second child and she will only come back in a part time capacity. This has had financial impacts on his business and he wouldn't employ a woman again. Shame, but that is the problem.
One idea (not one that I agree with) is that both Men and women get exactly the same period off (say 4 months). This then means that it is not necessarily the man who continues working, but could as easily be the woman. As I said - not something I agree with.
Having recently been part of an interview panel, we interviewed 18 very good candidates to fill a pretty well paid (>£40k) position following a retirement.
Of the 18, 7 were women between the ages of 25 and 35 none of whom had children.
Because it was a fairly well paid job involving developing relationships with clients, we chose not to consider any of the 7 purely because we didn't want to run the risk of them getting pregnant, taking a year off, having to employ a temp and running the risk of clients leaving due to a lack of continuity.
This is, of course, completely sexist and illegal, but the greater good of the company outweighs this.
Of the 18, 7 were women between the ages of 25 and 35 none of whom had children.
Because it was a fairly well paid job involving developing relationships with clients, we chose not to consider any of the 7 purely because we didn't want to run the risk of them getting pregnant, taking a year off, having to employ a temp and running the risk of clients leaving due to a lack of continuity.
This is, of course, completely sexist and illegal, but the greater good of the company outweighs this.
-- answer removed --
1 to 8 of 8
