What's with women and HR (bloody ridiculous)

Frank101

jimgoose wrote: »

A Gentleman is someone who will debate your position vigorously, vehemently and occasionally robustly, ideally over a snifter of Courvoisier, and defend, with a flintlock, your right to argue that position. He is not a lickspittle nodding-dog who'll agree with everything you say like a ninteen-year-old trying to Go Ugly Early.

go ugly early?

jimgoose

Frank101 wrote: »

go ugly early?

Look it up!

tomwaterford

Frank101 wrote: »

go ugly early?

Guessing nights out and getting your hole :P

Frank101

tomwaterford wrote: »

Guessing nights out and getting your hole :P

Going ugly early is the act of admitting to yourself that you will not hook up with a good looking girl/guy no matter how long you hang around the night club.

You always end up taking the ugliest girl anyway, so why not just go ugly early and get it over with.

flutered

jimgoose wrote: »

In my experience it is quite common to have separate HR and "technical" interviews during the whole New Job rigmarole. The HR interview is, in simple terms, to verify that you a) are human, b) can dress yourself appropriately when leaving the house c) can speak and act in a manner most would regard as "normal". A majority of HR people I've encountered are women, but I wouldn't say anywhere in the vicinity of 90%.

i came across a few of the female ones, women no, stuck up my way or the highway harradians certainly

Carlos Orange

Wibbs wrote: »

Figures from the OECD show that in Ireland the Gender Pay Gap for women with no children is -17% but this increases significantly to 14% for women with at least one child

It really shows the nonsense of the modern feminist concept of equality when going from a 17% gap to a 14% gap is described as an increase.

fits

Wibbs wrote: »

True, except in Ireland today women on average earn more than men on average if they have no kids, regardless of these job choices.

Is that not a cause for concern? Women on average do better in school and university and earn more in their early career, and then it collapses to a 14% gap after children come into the equation.

Is there not something radically wrong there? Surely we should be encouraging men to share the burden.

Pawwed Rig

fits wrote: »

Is there not something radically wrong there? Surely we should be encouraging men to share the burden.

Agree with this completely. Make a Father equal to a Mother and these 'gaps' would disappear in a couple of generations.

jackinthemix94

fits wrote: »

Is that not a cause for concern? Women on average do better in school and university and earn more in their early career, and then it collapses to a 14% gap after children come into the equation.

Is there not something radically wrong there? Surely we should be encouraging men to share the burden.

So we should encourage men to ask for less? Or we should encourage them to drop out the work force?

What we need is government policy that supports 2 working parents (Scandinavian style government childcare).

fits

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

What we need is government policy that supports 2 working parents (Scandinavian style government childcare).

I completely agree with you thats what we need. Ive worked in a Nordic country and the contrast is stark. My male colleagues regularly take months long paternity leave. Their max childcare cost is approx 300 euro per month.

The attitude in this trend that well its fine until they have kids, is staggering, frankly. Children have two parents. Why does the burden fall to one? There is a major problem.

cantdecide

fits wrote: »

Is that not a cause for concern? Women on average do better in school and university and earn more in their early career,

You're right. Our feminised education system is failing boys.

tomwaterford

fits wrote: »

I completely agree with you thats what we need. Ive worked in a Nordic country and the contrast is stark. My male colleagues regularly take months long paternity leave. Their max childcare cost is approx 300 euro per month.

The attitude in this trend that well its fine until they have kids, is staggering, frankly. Children have two parents. Why does the burden fall to one? There is a major problem.

I think the view is more so that with some the careers stall
a certain extent with maturity leave etc and are put on the long finger
(I see this happen with relatives of mine who were reluctant parents but took v.well to it)


I've seen noone argue that it's rught/fair that it falls to one (that opens a whole other cluster fcuk of fathers rights)

fits

tomwaterford wrote: »

I've seen noone argue that it's rught/fair that it falls to one (that opens a whole other cluster fcuk of fathers rights)

Absolutely, the gender pay gap and fathers rights are two sides of the same coin.

quadrifoglio verde

jimgoose wrote: »

A Gentleman is someone who will debate your position vigorously, vehemently and occasionally robustly, ideally over a snifter of Courvoisier, and defend, with a flintlock, your right to argue that position. He is not a lickspittle nodding-dog who'll agree with everything you say like a nineteen-year-old trying to Go Ugly Early.

Jimgoose I bow to your knowledge

If you don't use this as your sig....may I? :pac:

Carlos Orange

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

What we need is government policy that supports 2 working parents (Scandinavian style government childcare).

If there are 2 parents involved then surely the way they parent is up to them as parents. If women want to more equally spread the roles they should have children with people who agree.

Frank101

cantdecide wrote: »

You're right. Our feminised education system is failing boys.

In what way? Or was that sarcasm?

fits

psinno wrote: »

If there are 2 parents involved then surely the way they parent is up to them as parents. If women want to more equally spread the roles they should have children with people who agree.

The supports arent there in this country. Childcare is astronomical in cost.
2 weeks paternity leave is pathetic.

Speaking as a person with slightly higher earning capacity than my husband in recent years, in precarious work (Academic), and expecting twins. I am only too conscious of my career prospects in the years to come and its certainly not just down to choice.

jackinthemix94

psinno wrote: »

If there are 2 parents involved then surely the way they parent is up to them as parents. If women want to more equally spread the roles they should have children with people who agree.

What jobs that men work in support it being equal?

jimgoose

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Jimgoose I bow to your knowledge

If you don't use this as your sig....may I? :pac:

Most certainly!

HamsterFace

fits wrote:

Is that not a cause for concern? Women on average do better in school and university and earn more in their early career, and then it collapses to a 14% gap after children come into the equation.

It absolutely is a cause for concern and we need to ascertain why but that's a completely different conversation to "women getting paid less cos they're women"

fits

HamsterFace wrote: »

It absolutely is a cause for concern and we need to ascertain why but that's a completely different conversation to "women getting paid less cos they're women"

I dont think it is though. Fairly inextricably linked. Like having children is going to come into the equation for the majority of people, and women are paying a heavy penalty in terms of careers and pensions because of it.

Carlos Orange

fits wrote: »

The supports arent there in this country. Childcare is astronomical in cost.
2 weeks paternity leave is pathetic.

Speaking as a person with slightly higher earning capacity than my husband in recent years, in precarious work (Academic), and expecting twins. I am only too conscious of my career prospects in the years to come and its certainly not just down to choice.

When it comes to burden sharing between the parents why isn't it a choice (leaving aside maternity/adoptive leave and guardianship where motherhood is favoured). Subsidised childcare is sharing the burden with society not the other parent. What external impediments are there to your husband taking a greater share of the parental workload than you?

Wibbs

fits wrote: »

Is that not a cause for concern? Women on average do better in school and university and earn more in their early career, and then it collapses to a 14% gap after children come into the equation.

It's hardly a "collapse" Fits. Never mind that we're not informed how those stats are analysed. Mothers vary a lot. Are these women with children middle class degree corporate ladder types, or are they no leaving cert single mothers, or all shades of motherhood lumped in together? The latter seems to be the case. How about removing the early age mothers and see how that affects the "pay gap", or the women who choose to leave the work force when they start a family or go part time. I know of quite the number of those among the middle earner groups. Including women whose "career" was something to do until Proinsias from Foxrock popped the question and after that the round of coffee mornings while pretending to write children's books, or post grads in BS or becoming "interior designers". That's another aspect not spoken much about, nor is one advantage that women have on the labour market if they do take time out. OK climbing the greasy pole of cubicle land will take a major hit, but a 55 year old woman with a big gap in the CV from family life can get a part time job/reenter the market easier than a 55 year old man. The latter is essentially on the scrap heap.

psinno wrote: »

It really shows the nonsense of the modern feminist concept of equality when going from a 17% gap to a 14% gap is described as an increase.

Feminism is nada to do with gender equality and hasn't been since the radicals gained traction in the 1970's. It is more about bolstering women's rights(oft without attendant responsibilities) and is quite rapidly disappearing under the weight of its own bullshít. Consider that the feminist gospel pushes the comparison between a tiny minority of elite men and the average woman should tell us much. Suggesting modern feminism concerns itself with gender equality is akin to suggesting communism concerns itself with market forces.

HamsterFace

fits wrote:

I dont think it is though. Fairly inextricably linked. Like having children is going to come into the equation for the majority of people, and women are paying a heavy penalty in terms of careers and pensions because of it.

Well I certainly agree that it is unfair to women on that point. The reality is, couples cannot make a decision between them as to who will be the primary carer , in most circumstances, as they cannot share the parental leave.

cantdecide

fits wrote: »

I dont think it is though. Fairly inextricably linked. Like having children is going to come into the equation for the majority of people, and women are paying a heavy penalty in terms of careers and pensions because of it.

So;

1) women should have their pay increased across the board regardless of the preceding choices and sacrifices.

2) Men should be sharing more of "burden" of parenting despite the fact that they're making greater sacrifices to support the household.

3) The state should do more to support families so that women don't have to 'sacrifice' the careers they've built through being better educated than men.

All from a woman in academia who earns more than her husband.

Charizard

Why is it 90% of threads turn into men are sexist or men get all the perks, men are the devil on this forum

Charizard

livedadream wrote: »

okay im out, i earn more than the men i work with because im better at my job then them.

is that discrimination no. its fact.

im not going to sit here and argue with people who think the gender pay gap is either made up, or that its fair.

there are studies and action to prevent it for a reason.

enjoy your gentlemens club lads is seriously lacking any actual gentlemen.

You seem to enjoy ranting about certain facts, then ignoring others presented. Then go Im out because someone says something you dont agree with, thats pure crazy

Annasopra

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

So we should encourage men to ask for less? Or we should encourage them to drop out the work force?

What we need is government policy that supports 2 working parents (Scandinavian style government childcare).

I think the suggestion is that where there are families with 2 parents that we should encourage caring responsibilities to be shared equally.

fits

cantdecide wrote: »

So;

1) women should have their pay increased across the board regardless of the preceding choices and sacrifices.

The reasons why women seem to drop out of the workforce after having children should be examined and addressed. Its certainly not by choice for many of them. Yes parents should be supported to stay in the workforce if they wish to do so.

2) Men should be sharing more of "burden" of parenting despite the fact that they're making greater sacrifices to support the household.

I am saying that both the parenting and childcare duties, and the earning should be more equally shared where people wish to do that.

3) The state should do more to support families

Yes Better support for families. Childcare costs at present are amongst the highest in the world. This is forcing parents (usually women) out of the workforce.

All from a woman in academia who earns more than her husband.

Yes who has worked in a Nordic country and is very dissatisfied with how far behind we are in this regard, even compared with Germany and France we are in the dark ages.

anewme

Frank101 wrote: »

I remember being interviewed by two women once.

Once?

You're stressing out a lot over something that happened once, be it once as in one time, or once upon a time, fado fado.

Maybe invest some interview and personal development coaching if you can't answer the basic interview question..."tell me about yourself".

This old chestnut is a staple of interviews, so not being able to answer it indicates a lack of preparation on your part.

15YemenRoad

The function of HR is to protect the company and minimize risk.

If you go to HR complaining about your depression, dead dog etc. it's better to be able to talk with a woman as Irish men are very emotionally stunted. BUT it's dangerous to assume that HR actually care. They are all about the company bottom line, not employee welfare. I feel like women are better at this duplicity.

El_Duderino 09

Frank101 wrote:

I remember being interviewed by two women once. One was probably a year younger than me, she seemed so naive and gave me a handshake like a robot. The other probably in her 30s. The first question was 'tell me about yourself?' I, like a lot of people, didn't really know where to start, so at one point I remember stopping myself in order to try and address the question better. A slight moment of dead air, and as I looked across the table, they were both looking at each other with a smile. I didn't make me feel good. I had no choice but to still give 100% effort, just in case, was something that irked me.

Basic interview technique. If they ask a question that's too broad you say 'would you like me to start with my educational background or experience relevant to the job?' both of which are prepared answers.

This being the gentleman's forum was I supposed to blame women rabble rabble?

Pawwed Rig

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

This being the gentleman's forum was I supposed to blame women rabble rabble?

You're not too familiar with this forum are you?

bee06

HamsterFace wrote: »

Well I certainly agree that it is unfair to women on that point. The reality is, couples cannot make a decision between them as to who will be the primary carer , in most circumstances, as they cannot share the parental leave.

I assume you mean maternity leave? Parental leave is for both parents. It's a valid point about maternity leave but that's only the child's first 6ish months. Plenty of child rearing to be done after that and nothing stopping the father from being the primary caregiver if that's what works for the family. I earn more that my husband and I know when (hopefully) we have children he'd like nothing more than to be a house husband and for me to "bring home the bacon".

El_Duderino 09

Pawwed Rig wrote:

You're not too familiar with this forum are you?

No.

I gather that's the response the OP was looking for

Ben Gadot

I've never enjoyed interviews, be it by man or woman. Someone actually used the phrase once while I was waiting to be called that I "looked like I was going to the gallows." And that was for a bloody internal interview so imagine what I'm like on unknown territory. :P

When I was leaving an internship a few years ago, after 2 years of hard graft and numerous failed interviews, one manager pulled me aside without me asking him about it and kindly gave me the following advice: you have to make the interviewer think they need YOU, and not that you need them.

To put it simply, you need to play the game. Some people are all show and interviews come naturally to them, so they're always going to have the advantage (well at least until they start the job and prove how useless they are, I do love seeing the range of emotions on the people that hired them when that happens ).

But if you have confidence in yourself, at ease and most importantly are PREPARED and know your own CV, you'll always have a fighting chance.

Believe me when I say HR, everywhere, consistently make mistakes when hiring people. Just don't worry about other candidates and focus on yourself.

anewme

To be honest, following a reference here, ive looked up another thread on Op regarding interviews.

It involved putting on a strange deep fake voice during an interview.

When questioned on it the OP said they made up the story.

So on this case also maybe the Op also put on that deep voice at some stage in this interview and that's why the women smiled to themselves or alternatively the op made up this interview situation also in which case the OP may have a phobia about interviews.

Ben Gadot

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Basic interview technique. If they ask a question that's too broad you say 'would you like me to start with my educational background or experience relevant to the job?' both of which are prepared answers.

This being the gentleman's forum was I supposed to blame women rabble rabble?

What if they ask, which they often do, where ever you think is relevant? Handholding never really occured in the interviews I've done. Interview technique is all well and good but there comes a point where authenticity is more important.

Tell me about yourself is an easy enough one if you're prepared. It's the more technical questions that "technique" will get you no where if you don't know the answer. Better just to say I don't know than try to waffle your way out of it.

El_Duderino 09

Ben Gadot wrote:

What if they ask, which they often do, where ever you think is relevant? Handholding never really occured in the interviews I've done. Interview technique is all well and good but there comes a point where authenticity is more important.

If you give them 2 good options like relevant experience and or education, you have to be prepared to talk about those things. You're narrowing it down so you say 'ok I'll start with X and if you would like to heat about my Y (which is also prepared) let me know'.

Being prepared to speak doesn't mean being robotic. Before an interview i prepare all this information and spend time each day having conversations with myself so I'm prepared to speak about it in a natural conversational way.

Annasopra

15YemenRoad wrote: »

The function of HR is to protect the company and minimize risk.

If you go to HR complaining about your depression, dead dog etc. it's better to be able to talk with a woman as Irish men are very emotionally stunted. BUT it's dangerous to assume that HR actually care. They are all about the company bottom line, not employee welfare. I feel like women are better at this duplicity.

Hahahaha who are you trying to insult more, men or women?

Wibbs

15YemenRoad wrote: »

Irish men are very emotionally stunted.

I feel like women are better at this duplicity.

Glenbhoy

bee06 wrote: »

I assume you mean maternity leave? Parental leave is for both parents. It's a valid point about maternity leave but that's only the child's first 6ish months. Plenty of child rearing to be done after that and nothing stopping the father from being the primary caregiver if that's what works for the family. I earn more that my husband and I know when (hopefully) we have children he'd like nothing more than to be a house husband and for me to "bring home the bacon".

What is parental leave and in what circumstances can it be shared?

bee06

Glenbhoy wrote: »

What is parental leave and in what circumstances can it be shared?

This is parental leave http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/leave_and_holidays/parental_leave.html

And it's not shared. Each parent is entitled to 18 weeks unpaid leave per child up to the age of 8 (terms and conditions apply of course).

anewme

Sprint Double wrote: »

How is his "light" relevant? Play the ball, not the man.

His behaviour is very relevant because he seems to have a problem with his behaviour in interviews.

So in this case maybe the man has a problem playing the ball.

jcon1913

livedadream wrote: »

sorry, have you actually just tired to claim that the gender pay gap doesnt exist?

are you on drugs?

the European Commission
PWC
JP Morgan

have all done studies proving it exisits.

hold on are you one of those people that believe we didnt land on the moon? that elvis and 2pac are working in McDonalds in Texas and that the grassy knoll shooter was CIA?

simple figures: For the economy as a whole, in 2014, women's gross hourly earnings were on average 16.1 % below those of men in the European Union (EU-28) and 16.5% in the euro area (EA-18). Across Member States, the gender pay gap varied by 25.4 percentage points, ranging from 2.9 % in Slovenia to 28.3 % in Estonia.

like im all for people saying men are better at some things etc etc the usual equal but different. but trying to say something as serious as the gender pay gap doesnt exist is just riduclious...

So why dont busineses just employ women?

jcon1913

livedadream wrote: »

no it doesnt women without children do not earn more than men.

i agree that the gonvernment does not encourage equal shar eof childcare but the fact of the matter is women are penalised for reproducing and men are not.

Oh boy selective belief in statistics

Carlos Orange

Sprint Double wrote: »

How about we treat adults like adults, they can choose between them how domestic responsibilities are shared.

We should be enabling people to make decisions not telling them what to do.
Obviously it only applies to very few people but it is nuts that adoptive leave can only be taken by the mother [except where there is no mother].

cantdecide

fits wrote: »

I am saying that both the parenting and childcare duties, and the earning should be more equally shared where people wish to do that.

Agreed.

fits wrote: »

Yes Better support for families. Childcare costs at present are amongst the highest in the world. This is forcing parents (usually women) out of the workforce.

Just to put this conversation fully in context;

What are the reasons your husbands earning power is less than yours?

Will you take a career break when you've had children and what might be your reasons for doing so?

fits

cantdecide wrote: »

Agreed.

Just to put this conversation fully in context;

What are the reasons your husbands earning power is less than yours?

Will you take a career break when you've had children and what might be your reasons for doing so?

I am working on a contract/freelance basis. This sector is very precarious at the moment and I have tried and failed to find anything more secure. My plan at present is to return to work next June, five months after my due date. But my current paymaster could decide to just drop me in the meantime as they have absolutely no legal obligation to me. I feel its important for me to get back to work asap even if it has few financial benefits in the shorter term.

cantdecide

fits wrote: »

I am working on a contract/freelance basis. This sector is very precarious at the moment and I have tried and failed to find anything more secure. My plan at present is to return to work next June, five months after my due date. But my current paymaster could decide to just drop me in the meantime as they have absolutely no legal obligation to me. I feel its important for me to get back to work asap even if it has few financial benefits in the shorter term.

Would your new circumstances make you consider changing to a career with more dependable prospects?

If your current job prospects improved, would your husband choose to stay at home?