Work sexism

Specialun

I work in a multinational..standard joint

I applied for aTeam management role internally..not on my team but a new team

Today i got a mail from a lad in HR to go for a cuppa to discuss my application..i know him a while so i knew he would be honest

He told me that i shouldnt bother pushing my application as the powers that be have said that the role must be filled by a woman..at the moment they only have one external female applicant who nobody knows of

Iget that they want to increase the amount of women in tech companies to make them less of acockfest but isnt this just reverse discrimination/sexism

Stheno

How do you know that he wasn't making something up as he knows you well enough to make it easier to tell you you weren't getting the job and blame it on something other than a fault you have/skill you are lacking?

Any proper HR professional would quit rather than make a statement like you said he'd made, it's discrimination and actionable.

Barry Badrinath

Just be more gender fluid, sorted.

The Backwards Man

Specialun wrote: »

I applied for aTeam management role internally..

If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them...

SeanW

Ah, but it's the right kind of sexism.

OneOfThem

Yeah my first thought was he's making sh1t up.

Tazium

Reads as if you are being discriminated on the basis of gender which is a no-no for any HR department. Ask for it in writing.

Specialun

Stheno wrote: »

How do you know that he wasn't making something up as he knows you well enough to make it easier to tell you you weren't getting the job and blame it on something other than a fault you have/skill you are lacking?

Any proper HR professional would quit rather than make a statement like you said he'd made, it's discrimination and actionable.

Ive known the guy over 3 years both in and out of work. Zero chance he was telling porkies. It was off the record, he knew well i would do nothing about it

KungPao

Everyone knows you can't be sexist against men or racist against white people.

ygolometsipe

Back when I used to work in Porn it was the most sexist place
you could imagine. many time's I was told its a woman's role.

Boom_Bap

You should take it up with HR that HR are leaking potentially un HR-y sensitive information over a cuppa in the canteen rather in the HR office within proper HR guidelines in and proper HR setting. HR.

Stheno

Specialun wrote: »

Ive known the guy over 3 years both in and out of work. Zero chance he was telling porkies. It was off the record, he knew well i would do nothing about it

Well if you choose to do nothing about it, that sort of behaviour will persist, and nothing will change tbh.

Your choice.

KungPao

Boom_Bap wrote: »

You should take it up with HR that HR are leaking potentially un HR-y sensitive information over a cuppa in the canteen rather in the HR office within proper HR guidelines in and proper HR setting. HR.

HR?

Pat Mustard

Stheno wrote: »

How do you know that he wasn't making something up as he knows you well enough to make it easier to tell you you weren't getting the job and blame it on something other than a fault you have/skill you are lacking?

I wouldn't agree that it would make it easier to tell somebody that they are being discriminated against rather than telling them that somebody else was more qualified or more experienced for the position.

Stheno

Pat Mustard wrote: »

I wouldn't agree that it would make it easier to tell somebody that they are being discriminated against rather than telling them that somebody else was more qualified or more experienced for the position.

It sounds like a conversation that was had "off the record, because we're mates" tbh.

cantdecide

Specialun wrote: »

It was off the record, he knew well i would do nothing about it

Except tell the whole internet?

Specialun

cantdecide wrote: »

Except tell the whole internet?

Is everybody on the internet looking in..fooking ell boards popularity is gone sky high

One eyed Jack

OneOfThem wrote: »

Yeah my first thought was he's making sh1t up.

The "HR guy", or the OP? :pac:


I know who my money's on...

wp_rathead

How do you pronounce HR? That's right: Her
ILLUNAMTI CONFIRMED!!!

SeanW

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The "HR guy", or the OP? :pac:


I know who my money's on...

I doubt you'd have the same tune if it were in reverse...

Junkyard Tom

Man up and become a woman.

Fr_Dougal

Stheno wrote: »

How do you know that he wasn't making something up as he knows you well enough to make it easier to tell you you weren't getting the job and blame it on something other than a fault you have/skill you are lacking?

Any proper HR professional would quit rather than make a statement like you said he'd made, it's discrimination and actionable.

We were hiring some time ago and I was part of the interview panel, preference was given to female candidates, we had a 70:30 mate to female ratio.

JupiterKid

What with places to rent and jobs - it seems that young white males are getting short shrift these days.

Well?

Stheno

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

We were hiring some time ago and I was part of the interview panel, preference was given to female candidates, we had a 70:30 mate to female ratio.

Why did you give preference to female candidates?

And was the person who was ultimately hired, the most qualified, experienced fit for the role?

Dave0301

Ah good old reverse discrimination.

Acceptable because it has the word reverse before discrimination.

One eyed Jack

SeanW wrote: »

I doubt you'd have the same tune if it were in reverse...

After reading the thread about the anonymous couple kicked out of the anonymous restaurant for holding hands, I've had to adjust my bullahìt detector down a few notches to account for utter hearsay from anonymous sources about anonymous HR guys in anonymous multinationals making dubious, actionable statements.



TL;DR: Damn right I would!

biko

Ya know, sometimes the best man for the job is a woman.

Fr_Dougal

Stheno wrote: »

Why did you give preference to female candidates?

And was the person who was ultimately hired, the most qualified, experienced fit for the role?

I didn't give preference to the female candidates. When I made my recommendation it was pointed out to me that the particular team was mostly males. You'll never see it written down anywhere, but it is something that senior management have to be mindful of and it is a consideration.

Stheno

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

I didn't give preference to the female candidates. When I made my recommendation it was pointed out to me that the particular team was mostly males. You'll never see it written down anywhere, but it is something that senior management have to be mindful of and it is a consideration.

Never been a consideration in organisations I've worked in at a fairly senior level.

For external candidates experience will trump gender almost all of the time tbh.

KungPao

KungPao wrote: »

Everyone knows you can't be sexist against men or racist against white people.

Seriously, I get sick of this crap.

I didn't get the memo. I never heard of everyone knowing this, or everyone agreeing this. Because everyone doesn't.

The odd nutter, yes. EVERYONE...no.

But lets pretend anyway, right?

Tails up chaps!

Annasopra

Specialun wrote: »

Ive known the guy over 3 years both in and out of work. Zero chance he was telling porkies. It was off the record, he knew well i would do nothing about it

Why did he tell you?

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Why did he tell you?

Because he's apparently the worlds worst HR manager, and lacks the quality most required for the job, discretion.

Fox_In_Socks

Your average HR person lacks a soul. Their human resource that they are looking out for, is not you, you unique snowflakem you, but the company's human pool of which they need to siphon, mine and own.

What would happen would be that all applications are accepted and the "unsuccessful" ones are consigned to the shredder.

Eating processed porkies cause cancer, what do telling porkies cause?:pac:

Specialun

Candie wrote: »

Because he's apparently the worlds worst HR manager, and lacks the quality most required for the job, discretion.

You need to go visit specsavers or else read things properly before trying to be a smart arse. Nowhere have i said that he/she was a hr manager..but hey dont let that get in the way of your thanks whoring

Gone Drinking

I work in a large tech company also. They've the same push on for women in the work place currently. It's well known internally but will never be officially said of course.

Myself and some decent candidates were done out a position in a similar case only six months ago.

All you can do is move on and look for the next one bud.

tritium

Meh, not right, but I've been done out of a promotion for fairly blatant sexism reasons in the past (female hiring head of department wanted to look after her female friend, also had a real problem with men in general....). It took me about 2 months to find a new job and took the company about 5 minutes more to realise that actually they had no-one else who either (i) understood what I did or (ii) could fill my role. Unfortunately I had to point out that they were unsuccessful in their application to keep me, in spite of my being very impressed by their credentials they weren't the successful candidate A few years on and most of the employees in the former role have left (I may have taken a few) or are miserable. Meanwhile the new role turned out to be a gateway to a career path I absolutely love and where my skills are really respected.

If that's how a company treats people you need to ask if you want to be there. In spite of the recession it's still relatively easy to move

Peter Anthony

Is this not common knowledge? Multinational companies have "quotas" to be filled, so in cases like this a woman will get the job even if 20 men are more qualified. It's the same with different races/minorities.

It is discrimination but I bet they cover themselves, also most of the time they would never tell you this because Legal action would be taken. Not sure why your pal bothered to tell you. You could ask a solicitor about it.

Peter Anthony

tritium wrote: »

Meh, not right, but I've been done out of a promotion for fairly blatant sexism reasons in the past (female hiring head of department wanted to look after her female friend). It took me about 2 months to find a new job and took the company about 5 minutes more to realise that actually they had no-one else who either (i) understood what I did or (ii) could fill my role. Unfortunately I had to point out that they were unsuccessful in their application to keep me, in spite of my being very impressed by their credentials they weren't the successful candidate A few years on and most of the employees in the former role have left (I may have taken a few) or are miserable.....

If that's how a company treats people you need to ask if you want to be there. In spite of the recession it's still relatively easy to move

I agree I wouldnt be part of any organisation that discriminates against you. Lifes too short and they need to be called on their bull****, it isnt legal

hatrickpatrick

Specialun wrote: »

I work in a multinational..standard joint

I applied for aTeam management role internally..not on my team but a new team

Today i got a mail from a lad in HR to go for a cuppa to discuss my application..i know him a while so i knew he would be honest

He told me that i shouldnt bother pushing my application as the powers that be have said that the role must be filled by a woman..at the moment they only have one external female applicant who nobody knows of

Iget that they want to increase the amount of women in tech companies to make them less of acockfest but isnt this just reverse discrimination/sexism

I wish people would stop using the phrase "reverse sexism". It's sexism. Who it's directed at doesn't change the meaning of the word.

I'd suggest taking them to court, but the trouble is that you don't have any concrete evidence to go on, unless the HR lad would back you up.

Azalea

tritium wrote: »

Meh, not right, but I've been done out of a promotion for fairly blatant sexism reasons in the past (female hiring head of department wanted to look after her female friend)

But was it because of sexist reasons though? I mean, what if she wanted to look after her male friend?

I did freelance work for a company a few years back and then they stopped calling me because the manager wanted to give the hours to his male friend. I know I didn't have any rights because I was freelance, but it never struck me that it was for sexist reasons - just nepotism reasons.

I don't like the idea of gender quotas at all either by the way - should be best person for the job.

Peter Anthony

Azalea wrote: »

But was it because of sexist reasons though? I mean, what if she wanted to look after her male friend?

I did freelance work for a company a few years back and then they stopped calling me because the manager wanted to give the hours to his male friend. I know I didn't have any rights because I was freelance, but it never struck me that it was for sexist reasons - just nepotism reasons.

I don't like the idea of gender quotas at all either by the way - should be best person for the job.

Good point there, youre most likely right on that scenario

shanered

Sure they're doing the same thing with the dail, its a top down thing really isnt it.

BrianD3

This is not news, unofficial gender quotas favouring females are now common in large organisations and the public sector. Hiring females is good PR and good PR is of great importance in today's world. Google the numerous articles about the need to achieve gender balance in various organisations eg Intel, Easyjet, the US Army and others. Also look at comments from various sources on how the banking crisis wouldn't have been as bad if there had been more women and less men in senior positions in the banks.

Apparently, the banking crisis was "very male" - quote from the European Commission
http://www.nwci.ie/?/news/article/gender_balance_should_have_been_priority_for_the_banking_inquiry_from_the_o

While no company is going to have a documented procedure to discriminate against males in a illegal manner, once companies start getting into the realm of "encouraging" women and "aspiring" to a certain gender ratio, its inevitable that females are going to be favoured, maybe subconsciously and based on "feelings". Companies can get away with this as interviews are subjective anyway and it's human beings not robots that are doing the interviewing.

However in small business the exact opposite is the case - any woman who might get pregnant is likely to be discriminated against. Again, no business will be stupid enough to have a written policy stating this.

Paulzx

Why are people surprised?

Sure haven't we enshrined a gender quota system into our democratic process and decided to force political parties into selecting candidates based on gender.

Why then should the workforce be any different?

I don't give a sh*it about someones gender in either politics or the workplace. I do give a sh*t that the best person gets the position irrespective of gender.

To me quotas are just another form of discrimination replacing the existing or historically unacceptable ones.

RDM_83 again

Candie wrote: »

Seriously, I get sick of this crap.

I didn't get the memo. I never heard of everyone knowing this, or everyone agreeing this. Because everyone doesn't.

The odd nutter, yes. EVERYONE...no.

But lets pretend anyway, right?

Tails up chaps!

Stheno wrote: »

Never been a consideration in organisations I've worked in at a fairly senior level.

For external candidates experience will trump gender almost all of the time tbh.

Its nice and easy to go with the idea that its simply angry bitter MRA's being paranoid but is it true.

Look at this study

Contrary to prevailing assumptions, men and women faculty members from all four fields preferred female applicants 2:1 over identically qualified males with matching lifestyles (single, married, divorced)

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.full

If there was evidence of such a systemic bias against female candidates there would be outcry and deep heartfelt debate, so yeah I would go with the idea that its ok to be sexist against men, unless of course you want to completely rework the modern meaning of sexism.

Azalea

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Its nice and easy to go with the idea that its simply angry bitter MRA's being paranoid but is it true.

Look at this study

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.full

If there was evidence of such a systemic bias against female candidates there would be outcry and deep heartfelt debate, so yeah I would go with the idea that its ok to be sexist against men, unless of course you want to completely rework the modern meaning of sexism.

That's not what Candie is saying at all from what I can tell - just that the "Everyone knows it's ok to be sexist against men" stuff brings nothing to the table. I'd bet nobody on this thread agrees it's ok to be sexist to men.

Satts

Why wouldn't employers pick women first ?

Aren't they working two months for free, undercutting men.

Stheno

Satts wrote: »

Why wouldn't employers pick women first ?

Aren't they working two months for free, undercutting men.

Where you getting that from?

Mesrine65

KungPao wrote: »

HR?

RDM_83 again

Azalea wrote: »

That's not what Candie is saying at all from what I can tell - just that the "Everyone knows it's ok to be sexist against men" stuff brings nothing to the table. I'd bet nobody on this thread agrees it's ok to be sexist to men.

Everybody knows it not "ok" in theory, but everybody also knows that its actually ok in practice because unless it ridiculously blatant there is no consequence to it.

(Two male sexism threads at the same time, we just need a false rape accusation thread and we have the ball rolling on a nice entertaining Gender War O:-) )

Satts

Stheno wrote: »

Where you getting that from?

Irish Examiner 3 days ago.

Google "women working two months for free"