FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > As a small business enterprise
As a small business enterprise
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
"
In a word no the reason being that I find women try harder than men in a male orientated work place |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
In a word no the reason being that I find women try harder than men in a male orientated work place "
In which case they haven't got "exactly the same strengths" have they ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
"
As an employer you cant discriminate on age/sex etc - but im pretty sure it must go on
Id have no problems employing you though if your experiences/professional / career qualifications where on my wish list ....plus you look sexy lol  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
"
It should be a no brainer. If you accept that there is a risk - however small - that an employee can go absent on full pay, while you have to pay for a replacement, then you will shun that risk. Unless you are not a real businessman.
Now if the woman was *better* than the man, there's a possible offset. But in the case you suggest, where their strengths are equal - man every time. Sorry, that's business. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Isn't it illegal to discriminate on that basis?"
If it could be proved, yes. However it's hard to prove, unless the employer is a bit thick, and actually admits it, or can be shown to reject women out of hand. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Isn't it illegal to discriminate on that basis?"
Very much so. But the question is based upon many conversations I've had that choose to not employ, purely from the strain it puts on the payroll. Large companies like the one I work for can suck it up, the work can get spread around. But if there are four people in a company and one is out for a year having a baby, it puts a a huge burden on the rest of them still there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
It should be a no brainer. If you accept that there is a risk - however small - that an employee can go absent on full pay, while you have to pay for a replacement, then you will shun that risk. Unless you are not a real businessman.
Now if the woman was *better* than the man, there's a possible offset. But in the case you suggest, where their strengths are equal - man every time. Sorry, that's business."
Thoroughly agree. As wrong as it is.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Who is to sway that the bloke won't get signed off long term sick and the woman isn'tiinterested in having children??"
Good point. I wonder what the stats are ? However, there's no obligation on a company to pay sick leave at all, let alone for a long period. Whereas there *is* an obligation to pay maternity leave. So the outcomes of the risks are not equal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just a thought here. But don't blokes get PATERNITY leave nowadays?? Lol
I believe they are entitled to six weeks after the birth."
6?! Until last year it was 2 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just a thought here. But don't blokes get PATERNITY leave nowadays?? Lol"
Yes and I believe that they can split it with the mother now making it fairer and allowing the woman to return to work sooner. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just a thought here. But don't blokes get PATERNITY leave nowadays?? Lol
Yes and I believe that they can split it with the mother now making it fairer and allowing the woman to return to work sooner. "
Which was brought about to combat the discrimination that was going on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Who is to sway that the bloke won't get signed off long term sick and the woman isn'tiinterested in having children??stats
Pardon?"
Look at the statistics available. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Isn't it illegal to discriminate on that basis?"
Yes it is illegal all employers have to go for the best candidate for the job regardless of age/sex/colour/sexual preference etc.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *xodussxMan
over a year ago
sheffield |
"Isn't it illegal to discriminate on that basis? Yes it is illegal all employers have to go for the best candidate for the job regardless of age/sex/colour/sexual preference etc."
How would you prove the discrimination? Very hard to do. It is like equal opportunity. All what a company need to do is hiring all kind of people and give the lower jobs to who may complain about equality |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Given the very tough climate, if you were the owner of a small company, would you shy away from employing a woman with exactly the same strengths as a man, if she were of child-bearing age, I know they can be much later these days, but lets just say below 45.
I have employed 2 woman in the past, but they just cant manage the heavy lifting other wise yes I have and would if they could cope.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don't have a problem with it ... but women with a family are very, very good employees ... I suppose it depends very much on whether you treat people as statistics and objects, or whether you value them for the specific skills they bring to the table and take the longer view ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *londeCazWoman
over a year ago
Arse End of the Universe, Cumbria |
I'm sure it must happen and yes I know it's illegal but as has been said it'd be difficult to prove. Personally I'd take on the bloke, but that's probably also cos I've always worked better with fellas anyway (and not for any sexual reasons, just I relate better in the workplace with men) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Sad to admit it but it would be man over woman for me. The potential scenario of baby, time off, followed by baby followed by a quick return before realising job and kids are too much would make me very wary. That said, a lot of blokes are useless so it is never black and white. Obviously a lot easier in large businesses with less pressure on cash flow etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I mainly employ women (Six Vs. Two)
The main reason being that women are lighter of touch and much of our work is intricate. "
Is yours a small company Jane?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
