Is this sex discrimination?

Bitsy_Beans

I can't believe there are people who think anyone should just suck up p!ss poor behaviour. I don't think anyone should be sacked but that the policy on rental for evening wear should be revised. If her manager already has it "in" for OP and her H I don't think keeping quiet about this would keep her job anymore secure.
It's all very well saying pick your battles but if everyone had that attitude no battles would ever be fought. OP has decided to stand up for herself and I think that's right.
I look forward to hearing the outcome.

patchwork_cat

Ohhh Jimmyay - that was a sexist comment. No one likes a woman who rocks the boat! But ofcourse we all love bolshy men!

Bitsy - yes - I agree 100%, but kicking off over this might sign teh redundancy notices of 2 people. I don't think I have read anyone who thinks what management did was right and that is itself a victory for equality.

Sportbeth -looking at the time of your posts etc. are you posting this at work? If so I would be very wary.

Bitsy_Beans

The your point is it MIGHT. I haven't read that the company is in trouble and just because they have merged doesn't mean that redundancies will happen. She hasn't been made redundant and neither has her H. I don't agree with using the fear of losing your job to encourage people to stay quiet. Proportionate response I think is appropriate and I trust that the OP has done so. Just because she rants on here doesn't necessarily mean she's gone guns a-blazing at work. People speak more freely on here but in real life can be more reserved.

skintchick

jimmyay wrote: »

i would just have done what Grace Jones used to do at parties in New York - turn up naked with just high heels and a fur coat against the cold.


seriously though it is a kind of discrimination but not worth losing 2 jobs over. there is obviously a bigger picture to this and no one likes a woman with a load of attitude that rocks the boat pver a small thing like this. partic if her hubby works in the same office - it just stinks of politics. she was offerered to claim expenses. i dont see what the big deal is.

:eek: Jimmyay - you're as bad as her manager. That's such a sexist thing to say. Interesting that if a woman dares to question something misogynistic then she is said to have 'attitude'.

And why does it stink of politics? She simply wants to be treated equitably, which I'm sure you would be too.

Also, she was NOT offered the chance to claim it on expenses - that is part of the point.

Idiophreak

skintchick wrote: »

:eek: Jimmyay - you're as bad as her manager. That's such a sexist thing to say. Interesting that if a woman dares to question something misogynistic then she is said to have 'attitude'.

I think you've missed the point a little. I don't think it has anything to do with sexism, just a general point.

I (as a man) have been treated (i thought) unfairly a few times in the past...I had two options..1) to "rock the boat" and try and iron out this injustice. 2) to keep quiet.

The times I rocked the boat, it honestly caused more trouble than it helped...I got a reputation for "having an attitude" and missed out on things as a result. Might not be how it should work, but it is how it works.

Everything's about balance. If you get a quick win here, by rocking the boat, you'll miss out down the line. If you take a hit here, just keep quiet, you might get better opportunities later on. It's just swings and roundabouts, really.

sportbeth

jimmyay wrote: »

i would just have done what Grace Jones used to do at parties in New York - turn up naked with just high heels and a fur coat against the cold.


seriously though it is a kind of discrimination but not worth losing 2 jobs over. there is obviously a bigger picture to this and no one likes a woman with a load of attitude that rocks the boat pver a small thing like this. partic if her hubby works in the same office - it just stinks of politics. she was offerered to claim expenses. i dont see what the big deal is.

Morning all,

For the record, I wasn't offered the opportunity to claim expenses, i was strictly told that I couldn't claim on expenses.

I'm not seeking the dismissal of the manager concerned, and I didn't report it to get him in trouble, however knowing that the policy stinks as it does, I feel that it's not the norm to be given cash in an envelope and I don't want to be caught with it if it was less than an honest gesture, that would make my position even worse.

However, I did go last night, I used every opportunity to rise above it and network, and i did put on a brave front in front of everyone else. i need to think carefully about what to do next.

The principle still remains. It's not about the cash its about the unfairness, however my female colleagues who are on occasion in the same position don't seem to care as much as me. So my question is whether or not its worth raising my head above the parapet enough to put myself in the firing line.

Thank god I'm not hungover as well as tired!

mymatebob

How does your Union react to this inequality in the workplace?

Errata

A bit of history. Once, women were required to resign their jobs when they married. Once, women were asked at interview if they planned to become pregnant within the next two or three years. Once, women were not allowed to wear trousers at work. Once, women found it well nigh impossible to find a part time job. Once, women were treated badly if they took time off work to look after a sick child or take a child to the doctors during work hours.

Once, there were no women bank managers, heads of large departments.

One, women wore bustles !

We've moved on because some women stuck their heads above the parapet and protested.

skintchick

Errata wrote: »

A bit of history. Once, women were required to resign their jobs when they married. Once, women were asked at interview if they planned to become pregnant within the next two or three years. Once, women were not allowed to wear trousers at work. Once, women found it well nigh impossible to find a part time job. Once, women were treated badly if they took time off work to look after a sick child or take a child to the doctors during work hours.

Once, there were no women bank managers, heads of large departments.

One, women wore bustles !

We've moved on because some women stuck their heads above the parapet and protested.

:T :T :T

Well said.

Idiophreak

Errata wrote: »

Once, there were no women bank managers, heads of large departments.

Ah, happier days

Seriously, though...the women that died and suffered for all of these things did so with a "greater good" in mind. They knew they were helping women all across the world and felt their personal sacrifice was worth it.

Would they have done the same things if they were the only ones bothered?

The OP's the only person in their firm that seems upset about this, so she's only going to help herself. If in doing so she makes herself a target for possible redundancies in an economic climate where it's tough to find work...maybe it's not a price worth paying.