Discover your dream Career
For Recruiters

The Inbetweener: Should banks ask about babies?

I have a friend who has recently been considering returning to the workforce after having her first child. Looking to go back full time, she was interviewed at one firm and was dismayed at the questions asked.

Although it wasn't phrased quite as transparently, the main question was whether or not she was planning to leave prematurely to expand her brood again. I didn't realise asking that was even legal.

Australia will soon launch the Paid Parental Leave Scheme. This is an excellent law for those already in the workforce, but what about women like my friend who are looking to get a new job after having a child?

I have no doubt I am showing impatience in wanting to see change immediately, but it disheartens me to think that women may be overlooked for employment due to a perception that they will leave to "spawn" again.

However, I must admit that I'm also somewhat torn. Although the thought of such discrimination angers me (and I don't want to betray my sisterhood), I have been in a position where a former colleague (who was on a short-term contract) pushed to be made full time, but didn't disclose she was pregnant.

She was eventually made permanent, and after ascertaining that she couldn't be fired, she let her work lapse. I was left to fill the void. It was an ugly situation which nobody knew how to deal with, hence I have some empathy for employers who face such difficult dilemmas.

A question for you...

Which brings me to my own key question: are employers today still hesitant to hire new mothers?

I know from first hand experience that they were in the past. Many moons ago, an old (and I mean really old) colleague of mine told me that the firm never hired women of child-bearing age because the cost of them leaving for long periods was just too high (and clients would become irate because of staffing instability). Is this still the case today?

Again, I must stress for fear of reprisal that I am very glad that we now have a Government-backed Paid Parental Leave Scheme, but what is the real mindset in some areas of the finance sector? Have you or your partner ever been asked similar questions? Have you asked such questions?

Is a woman leaving soon after being hired a real concern for employers out there? And if so, what are the real break-down costs involved to the firm when this happens? What is an acceptable time for a woman to be with a firm before she starts or extends her family, without causing too much stress for her employer and workmates?

Please share your thoughts, but remember, even though this is a topic needing discussion, it is a touchy subject. I therefore take no responsibility for any smug remarks made about a woman's place being in the kitchen!

Click here

to subscribe to our weekly newsletter.

author-card-avatar
AUTHORAnonymous Insider Comment
  • AB
    ABC
    18 August 2010

    Some women will have children and MOST of those women are often VERY GOOD employees (I'm a chap by the by). Regardless of when they join and take maternity leave personally if they are good I want them back on the team. I find mothers give the most (unfortunately 1 or 2 abuse our trust) as they need flexibility and give back by frequently outperforming other team members; they have better time management, focus and so on.

    As managers we must ensure a balanced team membership, men and women and ages and backgrounds. Resource planning and risk management basics 101!!

    It is disappointing that some business leaders are still so obsessed with the numbers that their treatment and consideration of employees falls by the wayside. If as business leaders we truly value our employees and diversity in the workplace then our recruitment practises will reflect that and it affords a more vibrant, creative, productive and generally happy workplace.

  • Jo
    John
    15 August 2010

    While it is poor for companies to discriminate against women who want to have children, you only need to look as far as london to see that legislation is not the answer. In the UK, asking any questions about religion, age or family plans is an instant tribunal win for the candidate. If a woman is hired, who then gets pregnant just 3 months later, then she can leave for 1 whole year! six months of which have to be paid at full amount. The job then has to be held for that person until she returns and if she gets pregnant again - ad infinitum.

    The cost of having to bring in temps for maternity cover combined with the lack of productivity that usually occurs means that companies are very wary about employing women in "high risk groups". A good friend of mine at a tier 1 who was an excellent bond trader, transfered to prime brokerage after getting married as she was given hints that she would be forced out rather than have her go onto maternity.

    It just makes women between 25 and 35 a liability for employers and thus less likely to be considered for any position more senior than PA.

  • Ba
    Balius
    12 August 2010

    I agree with Andrews comments that employers don't want staff to have alife outside of work, and that it's almost impossible to find senior work that offers flexibility.

    The problem is that all the legislation in the world doesn't help, because no women in their right mind is going to take their employer to court, which for most, is the only way to get employers to do the right thing.

    Employers are typically companies, who have access to legal resources, financial respources, and then claim it all as a tax deduction anyway. Employees typicaly have none of those options. It is like David verses Goliath, except Goliath always wins

  • Ma
    Marie Ferguson
    11 August 2010

    TBC If being female means that you cannot work it may as well be another Islamic country again where women who do work full-time can still have their wages docked just because the employer doesn't feel like paying them. Not to mention the other atrocities that go on to people of my country of origin. I think industries will simply have to rethink the way people work and the level of productivity that one can get out of them so that all people can get the opportunities they deserve. Women will constantly be the poorer sex given their ability to continue humanity. Anyway, I have to go back to work have two jobs at the moment. Still loving the juggling act must be that need to f.eel needed

  • Ma
    Marie Ferguson
    11 August 2010

    Its a tough one. Workers get rewarded for working and I guess if developing a family and increasing the population to create more workers is a hindrance to society and the community which includes the corporate world then governments/tax payers will have to bear the brunt of the costs of developing the population. Creating more humans to create a more diversified workplace should not be considered simply as a cost. When you hire a human being you have to take them warts and all. This includes their ability to bear children. Countries such as Canada and Nordic countries have been aware of this for quite sometime. Australia is quite a small country and being a self-employed mother of one and previously working in this industry I am beginning to think working behind a laptop with internet connection, crying baby on the bed beside me in a room near the kitchen is becoming an ideal lifestyle and being beyond broke.

Sign up to Morning Coffee!

Coffee mug

The essential daily roundup of news and analysis read by everyone from senior bankers and traders to new recruits.

Sign up to Morning Coffee!

Coffee mug

The essential daily roundup of news and analysis read by everyone from senior bankers and traders to new recruits.