MONEY MORAL DILEMMA. Should Ian hire a waitress who may want kids?
Options
Comments
-
I guess the flipside to this is that the potential employee can be as devious as the potential employer and then it simply comes down to who is the best liar as to who gets the job.
I would be very careful to not show anything or inform the interviewer of anything I feel they could take in a negative light. I don't smoke but I certainly wouldn't accept a cigarette off an employer and I've been advised of such in the past. I do enjoy going out on the weekends but I'd never express this just incase they saw me as someone who potentially took Monday mornings off or wasn't able to do the job until 12.
At the end of the day you need to look after number one and if that means a few white lies or being devious to get a job then so be it. I'd have no issues with lying to a potential employer.
David Cameron, how would you react if someone refused your cigarette, therefore by your logic was a non smoker and then when they started their employment made it obvious they were a smoker?
Gavin, it would not worry me that you go out at weekends, but it might if you went out REGULARLY on week nights, because that might (probably would) affect your performance. We stop our week at lunchtime on Fridays so that people have a good start to their weekend. Some of the girls love it because they have so much time to get ready to go out on Friday nights.
We tend to have internal meetings on Monday mornings, because customers don't start their week until their staff have got through telling their friends about their great weekend.
Refusal of the cigarette is a good start and I would tell you so at that point. I would explain that we don't employ anyone who smokes, so if you are offered the job, you need to understand that your fellow workers will demand that I dismiss you if they ever see you smoking because they believe that would lower your performance to such an extent that they would be partly 'carrying' you. I would also tell you that I would not fire you the first time. I would tell you that I firmly believe that the person who never made a mistake, never made anything, BUT, the person who made the same mistake twice, doesn't work here !
Gavin, it seems to me that the biggest obstacle to your being employed and working your way up to the top is that you are prepared to lie to your employer. I try to run an open and honest business, so I don't like being lied to. If I didn't sack you for it, I would certainly be disappointed to such an extent that you would be passed over for promotion.
If a potential employer wouldn't like the truth that you tell him/her, then better to find out now than when he sacks you for a failing which you declared you didn't have ! To turn up UNFIT for work through your own lifestyle choices, is completely disrespectful of your fellow workers who have to carry you. You would also really be taking money under false presences as you are not giving a fair days work for a fair days pay !!
Maybe you should reconsider your choice for Sunday nights and the honesty thing. Other than that you seem to be quite nice and you have competent use of language, an excellent starting point for very many jobs ! 0 -
Taffybiker wrote: ».... I have all the qualifications and experience your company would ever need ...
Well, interesting ...Taffybiker wrote: ».... I fit all of your criteria...
Again, you demonstrate your UNFITNESS ...0 -
What a load of Sh*te!!! Do you even work with any women???? Do you know any????? Utterly blinkered and prejudiced.
I can't believe some of the views expressed on this site! Like something out of the dark ages.
As a soon to be married woman of childbearing age I would be horrified to be turned down for a job because the employer thinks I might have children in the future. I have made an active decision not to have any children and will be of no additional burden to an employer.
Or of course it could be that the other single applicants that are not of childbearing age are just better applicants and don't happen to be in a position to claim discrimination of any sort - that'll be healthy white males with all their limbs then...0 -
David_Cameron wrote: »
You have already dug yourself into a pretty deep hole of uninformed and ridiculous unfounded claims.
Pot, kettle, black0 -
my understanding is that with small business, legislation is there to protect them. The Government realises that whilst good employment practices are the way forward, not all employers can afford to pay it or even to administer it.
There is however, small business compensation which allows the small business employer to reclaim any statutory maternity pay it has paid to an employee AND 5% on top of the amount for administering it.
If I were the cafe owner and Diane was the best person for the job then I would employ her. Better to have a great employee for even a short amount of time than someone not so good all the time. Oh, and I'd also keep a note of candidate no. 2's details in the event that I need a temporary replacement if Diane gets pregnant.0 -
-
I'm all too painfully aware that the fact I'm a 29 year old woman who lives with a partner but has no kids sends alarm bells ringing for a lot of small businesses when I apply. I'm actually childfree by choice, but since that's an illegal question, they aren't to know this, and I probably get turned down for a lot of jobs just because of my age and sex.
it's an illegal question... but it's not illegal for you to randomly volunteer the information....0 -
hardup_and_grumpy wrote: »my understanding is that with small business, legislation is there to protect them.
Ah, you mean like putting them at the end of the queue to be paid when a customer goes bust on them ? The Government is at the FRONT of the queue as are the banks and other 'secured creditors'. So, those who can AFFORD to lose the money (but have the power to ensure that they don't) are right at the front, whilst those being 'protected' by the government get little or nothing. Hmmmm, seems fair enough, doesn't it ?hardup_and_grumpy wrote: »The Government realises that whilst good employment practices are the way forward, not all employers can afford to pay it or even to administer it.
Absolutely !! Just as they will be protected against a failure to be able to do accurate accountancy on their valid expense claims set against tax! Might be a good idea to employ members of your own family --- you wouldn't want to be paying for actual work, or giving money to strangers !hardup_and_grumpy wrote: »There is however, small business compensation which allows the small business employer to reclaim any statutory maternity pay it has paid to an employee AND 5% on top of the amount for administering it.
BUT, did you know that ON TOP of the NI contributions deducted from your pay, there is an NI charge on the employer (which you never get told about!). I call that a 'payroll tax'. If you employ someone over retirement age, THEY DON'T PAY NI, but the EMPLOYER STILL DOES !! So let's try to get a balance between give and take in relation to our wonderful government --- the 'mother of all parliaments' --- 'TAKE' seems to me to be the winner here. What do you think? Democracy is in safe hands, then. :rotfl:hardup_and_grumpy wrote: »If I were the cafe owner and Diane was the best person for the job then I would employ her. Better to have a great employee for even a short amount of time than someone not so good all the time. Oh, and I'd also keep a note of candidate no. 2's details in the event that I need a temporary replacement if Diane gets pregnant.
I agree that the BEST candidate should get the job, but I do not agree that it should be a legal requirement. Neither do I think that the employer should ever have to justify their decision about who is the best candidate for them. What if the theoretically best candidate is someone that the employer just doesn't like? Should he/she be forced to employ them? Or pay some penalty if taken to an employment tribunal over it?
I think we always need to remember who OWNS the business, who PAYS the bills, who CARRIES THE CAN for any transgressions made by the business (and its employees in the course of business), who PAYS the TAXES, the NI, the VAT ---- and who SHOULD have the CHOICE !!
By the way, I like you ! I too can be grumpy ! hahahaha0 -
I'm all too painfully aware that the fact I'm a 29 year old woman who lives with a partner but has no kids sends alarm bells ringing for a lot of small businesses when I apply. I'm actually childfree by choice, but since that's an illegal question, they aren't to know this, and I probably get turned down for a lot of jobs just because of my age and sex.
it's an illegal question... but it's not illegal for you to randomly volunteer the information....
ABSOLUTELY !!! 100% !!! :T0 -
David_Cameron wrote: »Gavin, it would not worry me that you go out at weekends, but it might if you went out REGULARLY on week nights, because that might (probably would) affect your performance. We stop our week at lunchtime on Fridays so that people have a good start to their weekend. Some of the girls love it because they have so much time to get ready to go out on Friday nights. We tend to have internal meetings on Monday mornings, because customers don't start their week until their staff have got through telling their friends about their great weekend.
Refusal of the cigarette is a good start and I would tell you so at that point. I would explain that we don't employ anyone who smokes, so if you are offered the job, you need to understand that your fellow workers will demand that I dismiss you if they ever see you smoking because they believe that would lower your performance to such an extent that they would be partly 'carrying' you. I would also tell you that I would not fire you the first time. I would tell you that I firmly believe that the person who never made a mistake, never made anything, BUT, the person who made the same mistake twice, doesn't work here !
Gavin, it seems to me that the biggest obstacle to your being employed and working your way up to the top is that you are prepared to lie to your employer. I try to run an open and honest business, so I don't like being lied to. If I didn't sack you for it, I would certainly be disappointed to such an extent that you would be passed over for promotion.
If a potential employer wouldn't like the truth that you tell him/her, then better to find out now than when he sacks you for a failing which you declared you didn't have ! To turn up UNFIT for work through your own lifestyle choices, is completely disrespectful of your fellow workers who have to carry you. You would also really be taking money under false presences as you are not giving a fair days work for a fair days pay !!
Maybe you should reconsider your choice for Sunday nights and the honesty thing. Other than that you seem to be quite nice and you have competent use of language, an excellent starting point for very many jobs !
I like you, your honest enough and put across your view well. I can respect what your saying in your posts and I do believe that a personality clash is a good enough reason not to employ someone. You do have to share the majority of your week with these people after all, it's important that you can actually get along with them. I don't necessarily agree that smoking will be that big a liability though as long as they're aware that no smoking breaks are allowed. Are you legally allowed to sack someone for smoking? When I typed my original post I didn't think you could but something in the back of my mind is telling me it's the only descrimination your allowed to hold.
I'm still young but fairly successful in what I do (Im an accountant), I would never allow my personal life to cause issues at work. I wouldn't directly lie to an employer but like many people I have lifestyle choices that an employer wouldn't necessarily agree with and therefore I'd keep them to myself. As long as it didn't cause problems at work my employer would be none the wiser and I really don't see why it would be there business to know. Granted if I started turning up to work unfit to do my job they'd be right to have a problem but I try and maintain a professional image so this wouldn't happen.
I may have been a bit heavy handed in my original post, I was just trying to say that an employee wouldn't necessarily tell an employer everything about them and I think an employee is within his rights to keep certain things from his employer.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.8K Spending & Discounts
- 235.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards