Current Events > UK employers breaking the law during interviews.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-employers-continually-breaking-law-asking-one-question-082800242.html

When you apply for a job, it should not matter what you plan to do with your body or your personal life. This is why there is a likelihood of breaching employment law by asking potential staff about how many sick days they have taken in their last employment, what their marital status is, or whether they plan to have any children.

But according to a study by science and technology recruitment firm Hyper Recruitment Solutions (HRS), a bulk of companies subject candidates to illegal questioning such as if they were planning go on maternity or paternity leave.

Of the 1,000 managers polled for the study, 40% said the question is acceptable and 80% managers do not think the question is potentially illegal, even though it could be heavily perceived as biased or discriminatory.

Ricky Martin, who set up the recruitment firm after winning the BBC reality TV show The Apprentice in 2012, said: Its pretty shocking to unearth that such practices are happening every day in the hiring process. It is imperative British bosses are educated on workplace practice, to put a stop to such shocking interview practices which lead to unprecedented inequality.

Official training should be mandatory across all business sectors for anyone involved in the process of interviewing prospective candidates.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) commissioned a poll by YouGov earlier this year and it showed that businesses were decades behind the law. Out of a survey of 1,106 senior people at private companies that have the authority to make recruitment decision, a third of those thought it was reasonable to ask a woman about her plans to have children in the future during the recruitment process.

Other stats from the survey are equally depressing:

59% think a woman should disclose if she is pregnant at the time of the recruitment process.
46% think its reasonable to ask a woman if she had young children already.
40% claim to have seen at least one pregnant woman in their workplace take advantage of their pregnancy.
The discriminatory attitudes seem to stem from, among other reasons, the belief that pregnancy places an unnecessary cost burden on the workplace, which has been perpetuated by high-profile business people.

Sir Alan Sugar, the host of The Apprentice said in 2008, everything has gone too far. We have maternity laws where people are entitled to too much.

If someone comes into an interview and you think to yourself there is a possibility that this woman might have a child and therefore take time off it is a bit of a psychological negative thought.

If they are applying for a position which is very important, then I should imagine that some employers might think this is a bit risky. They would like to ask the question Are you planning to get married and to have any children?.'
---

I was always taught to answer any unlawful questions with "How would that affect my ability to do the job?"
---

It's impressive how employers don't give a shit about their employees
---

SageHarpuia posted...

I was always taught to answer any unlawful questions with "How would that affect my ability to do the job?"

And you'll get a response along the lines of "we're looking for someone willing to commit to the job".
---

immaWHOOPdatASS posted...

It's impressive how employers don't give a shit about their employees

It's not surprising that the majority only care about their bottom line. It's very rare to find a boss who actually cares about the people who work for them.

Of the 15 years I've spent in the work force (21 if you count the time I spent delivering newspapers and time keeping hockey as a kid), I've only just now found a boss who treats me like a person and not just as a disposable employee. Surprisingly enough I found said boss in China. The man treats his employees as if they were family and that's a very rare trait in a boss.
---

This is shitty, no doubt.

However, I can sympathise with some employers on this. I'll never sympathise with some big law firm or giant retail outlet that's just protecting profit margins, but my current company has had to put nearly 20% of its workforce on maternity and long term sick and then bring in extra stuff to cover the gaps. We're just about ok, but I can imagine for a small business that would mean absolute bankruptcy.
---

Workforce hiring policy in general has to be completely revamped in the West.
---

pinky0926 posted...

This is shitty, no doubt.

However, I can sympathise with some employers on this. I'll never sympathise with some big law firm or giant retail outlet that's just protecting profit margins, but my current company has had to put nearly 20% of its workforce on maternity and long term sick and then bring in extra stuff to cover the gaps. We're just about ok, but I can imagine for a small business that would mean absolute bankruptcy.

You say this like big law firms or giant retail outlets don't have competitors who will press every advantage they have.

KhanJohnny posted...

pinky0926 posted...

This is shitty, no doubt.

However, I can sympathise with some employers on this. I'll never sympathise with some big law firm or giant retail outlet that's just protecting profit margins, but my current company has had to put nearly 20% of its workforce on maternity and long term sick and then bring in extra stuff to cover the gaps. We're just about ok, but I can imagine for a small business that would mean absolute bankruptcy.

You say this like big law firms or giant retail outlets don't have competitors who will press every advantage they have.

Imagine defending this shit.
---

DK9292 posted...

Imagine defending this shit.

Calm your ham, I'm not defending this shit. Just raising the point that for a small business having a couple of employees on maternity leave is absolutely decimating. Like we're not talking about evil corporations with CEOs having to buy a small plane instead of a big one. We're talking about the coffee shop round the corner or the 8 person software agency losing 20% of its staff and still having to pay for them. It's more than something you can handwave away.

Obviously they still should and legally have to, but I can also appreciate why if you're running a small company that's surviving off the skin of your teeth, having someone who is effectively dead weight in your company can legitimately bankrupt you.
---

Maternity Leave isn't paid out by the company the employee works for though
---

DK9292 posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

I was always taught to answer any unlawful questions with "How would that affect my ability to do the job?"

And you'll get a response along the lines of "we're looking for someone willing to commit to the job".

More likely, you'll get a "Fair enough, next question", followed by the rest of the interview, followed by a "Sorry, we chose someone else for this job. Would you like us to keep your CV on file so we can call you if something else comes up?" (They won't call.)

You can't prove they even asked that question, let alone made their decision based on your answer (it's just as likely that someone else legitimately was more qualified, and you have no way of knowing which it was). If you were to record the interview without their consent, you'd get hit much harder than them; and if you asked to record the interview, almost guaranteed they'll use that as a reason to avoid the tricky questions but decline you the job anyway.

This is not a problem that laws can solve without going full authoritarian - and possibly, not even then.
---

MuayThai85 posted...

immaWHOOPdatASS posted...

It's impressive how employers don't give a shit about their employees

It's not surprising that the majority only care about their bottom line. It's very rare to find a boss who actually cares about the people who work for them.

Of the 15 years I've spent in the work force (21 if you count the time I spent delivering newspapers and time keeping hockey as a kid), I've only just now found a boss who treats me like a person and not just as a disposable employee. Surprisingly enough I found said boss in China. The man treats his employees as if they were family and that's a very rare trait in a boss.

In fucking china of all places? wow

Congratulations, dude
---

DK9292 posted...

Ricky Martin

Ricky Martin... You BASTARD!
---

It really shouldnt be illegal to base hiring decisions off this.
---

pinky0926 posted...

DK9292 posted...

Imagine defending this shit.

Calm your ham, I'm not defending this shit. Just raising the point that for a small business having a couple of employees on maternity leave is absolutely decimating. Like we're not talking about evil corporations with CEOs having to buy a small plane instead of a big one. We're talking about the coffee shop round the corner or the 8 person software agency losing 20% of its staff and still having to pay for them. It's more than something you can handwave away.

Obviously they still should and legally have to, but I can also appreciate why if you're running a small company that's surviving off the skin of your teeth, having someone who is effectively dead weight in your company can legitimately bankrupt you.

IDK about the UK, but in Sweden parental leave is paid by the govt. And frankly, of course it can be tricky to replace workers, but it's not like it happens out of the blue. There's plenty of time to recruit subs, unless the skill set is very specific.

And asking about kids is illegal in Sweden, yet interviewers do it all the time. When they're interviewing women. And it's not so simple as replying "what does that have to do with my ability to do my job?" as someone here suggested, because that will essentially just mean you don't get the job. It's a big problem, and one of the most blatant instances of male privilege.
---

It's stupid but isn't anymore a bullshit question than "What's your biggest weakness?".
It's just bs and annoying in a different way.
---

When I worked in the UK I was asked a bunch of these questions including "Are you gay?" and "Do you plan to have kids?"

I never really thought it was odd as all employers there did it but CE freaked out when I mentioned it.

So if it's illegal then for sure, tons of people in the UK are doing it.

And to be fair to them, I kinda get it about maternity leave. I understand why the laws are the way they are but they are way too generous. I've seen women work in a job for 2-3 years where they've spent over a year of it on maternity not including holidays.

I've known women on maternity leave openly publically say as soon as their leave is up they are going to quit the job. Actively while they are being paid to sit at home and the work is understaffed because they can't afford replacements until she's gone.

I can see why a fiscally minded employer like Sugar would ask about that and even potentially turn sexist.
---

I actually had no idea this was illegal
---

I mean... it kinda does matter though. You train a person for so long as suddenly that person has a timer on whether or not she's gonna be readily available. It can take like a year for the person to be truly considered an asset, and the side that has the most to lose is ultimately the company, not the expecting mother. I mean come on, a lot of other types of people in the world are suffering from a lack of sympathy and nobody bats an eye
---

MuayThai85 posted...

immaWHOOPdatASS posted...

It's impressive how employers don't give a shit about their employees

It's not surprising that the majority only care about their bottom line. It's very rare to find a boss who actually cares about the people who work for them.

/topic
---

https://imgur.com/gallery/dTcAHZct

The uk is livin la vida loca
---

DK9292 posted...

But according to a study by science and technology recruitment firm Hyper Recruitment Solutions (HRS), a bulk of companies subject candidates to illegal questioning such as if they were planning go on maternity or paternity leave.

scummy as fuck
---

But capitalism definitely isn't exploitation