We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
is this sexism?
Comments
-
Tosh..... attendants in female changing rooms can be male?
It would be reasonable not to employ males in this role, however if it's for example a shop specialising in lingerie and they're looking for a general assistant, for which one of the duties is changing room attendant then excluding male applicants would likely not be allowed due to the reality of there always being someone else available to do that part of the role.
It's all a bit silly really, the reasons for not having a male in a female changing room is obvious, but surely the "issue" is the exact same with a lesbian female attendant?
Do you mean changing rooms as in a gym/sports centre or fitting room like in a shop btw? Don't really see any issue with the latter now that I think about it since the attendants tend not to jump in the cubicles to watch you undress...terra_ferma wrote: »He's definitely asking for trouble, and he deserves it too!
I don't think the OP specified the sex of the recruiter in question. Is this your own sexism creeping in?Bought, not Brought0 -
Our recruitment is done online & I have a list of x number of application forms to print off (280 last time) and read through.terra_ferma wrote: »However it would be interesting to hear from anyone who works for an organisations with the two ticks and can say if it works like that in practice.
All the specific demographic info, inc names, race etc are not seen by me. All I have are the person's reference number, the supporting statement, education and previous jobs.
HR will then email me a list of x reference numbers and tell me that these have indicated they are disabled and that I will need to consider them under the two ticks scheme.
The rest of the applciations then get reviewed in line with the essentials of the person spec, taking into consideration spelling, written English and attention to detail. If we have too many (which we mostly do) we then use the desirables to whittle them down - shortlisting as the afternoon and chocolate goes on: applicants who demonstrate meeting most or all of the essentials; then applicants who demonstrate meeting all of the essentials; then applicants who demonstrate meeting all of the essentials and most of the desirables; then applicants who demonstrate meeting all of the essentials and all of the desirables.
The two ticks applications then are different as we guarantee an interview if they meet the minimum criteria for the post - for me it's taking extra time the others wouldn't get, when you are actively trying to get the numbers down, to see if they demonstrate meeting all of the essentials, or in a poor field, most of the essentials. What I find some of these applications is that they don't take the time to demonstrate how they meet the person spec & I have had to set a person right when they threatened to sue me because I hadn't granted an interview to a disbaled person "in breach of human rights & the DDA!":rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
The final shortlist is emailed to HR who then send me back the list of names & we agree dates / times for interviews. In the meantime, I then have to individualy log online to reject the other applicants and note a reason on the application form in case they ring in wanting feedback."This is a forum - not a support group. We do not "owe" anyone unconditional acceptance of their opinions."0 -
I don't usually shortlist myself. But I have had to both remove the personal info and shortlist afterwards, never on my own however and I keep quiet about anything I've gathered from the personal details. Race and religion is kept entirely separate and anonymous: gender is usually female because we have exemption under the sex discrimination act for most posts and we don't actually ask that question on the application form!I've assumed from your wording that you do not shortlist yourself? But your company has provision for removing personal info so that those completing the shortlisting grid are not aware?
Depends on context - if you're talking about a gym or sports facility then generally both genders would be employed. But have you never seen "Male / Female cleaner in attendance" signs outside toilets eg at motorway service stations? And in clothing shops, there have certainly sometimes been female assistants at the entrance to the male changing rooms. Since the men tend not to come out in their undies, and the attendants tend not to go into the cubicles, what's the problem?Tosh..... attendants in female changing rooms can be male?
Anyway, I can still see no reason for not employing men on makeup counters. There is no genuine occupational reason why a chap couldn't do it.
We don't offer that guarantee, although I guess we might in the future. Come to think of it, I don't recall anyone ever indicating that they had a disability. One of my managers assures me that we'd do our best to accommodate someone in a wheelchair, for example, although I struggle to see how we're going to get a wheelchair up the stairs to the office space, and we have no private areas downstairs. And as I have a regular 'discussion' with her about whether it's 'essential' to be a car driver with access to own vehicle (thus ruling out anyone with a medical reason for being unable to drive) I'm not sure she's really 'got it' yet!LondonDiva wrote: »The two ticks applications then are different as we guarantee an interview if they meet the minimum criteria for the post - for me it's taking extra time the others wouldn't get, when you are actively trying to get the numbers down, to see if they demonstrate meeting all of the essentials, or in a poor field, most of the essentials. What I find some of these applications is that they don't take the time to demonstrate how they meet the person spec & I have had to set a person right when they threatened to sue me because I hadn't granted an interview to a disbaled person "in breach of human rights & the DDA!":rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:Signature removed for peace of mind0 -
-
I was making the point to Savvy Sue that there are other reasons where employers can legally specify the gender of applicants. Yes, I did mean changing rooms where there are communal changing areas. The example used is deemed reasonable, although as you have noted the sucessful applicant could have a preference for same sex which defeats the reasonableness of specifying gender in the first place. It's quite contradictory that the employer can't get round this by asking the applicants what their sexual orientation is even though that question would be entirely reasonable and pertinent to the situation.It would be reasonable not to employ males in this role, however if it's for example a shop specialising in lingerie and they're looking for a general assistant, for which one of the duties is changing room attendant then excluding male applicants would likely not be allowed due to the reality of there always being someone else available to do that part of the role.
It's all a bit silly really, the reasons for not having a male in a female changing room is obvious, but surely the "issue" is the exact same with a lesbian female attendant?
Do you mean changing rooms as in a gym/sports centre or fitting room like in a shop btw? Don't really see any issue with the latter now that I think about it since the attendants tend not to jump in the cubicles to watch you undress...0 -
The difficulty with asking applicants what their sexual orientation is, is that there is no way of discovering the truthfulness of their reply..................
....I'm smiling because I have no idea what's going on ...:)0 -
It would be reasonable not to employ males in this role, however if it's for example a shop specialising in lingerie and they're looking for a general assistant, for which one of the duties is changing room attendant then excluding male applicants would likely not be allowed due to the reality of there always being someone else available to do that part of the role.
It's all a bit silly really, the reasons for not having a male in a female changing room is obvious, but surely the "issue" is the exact same with a lesbian female attendant?
Do you mean changing rooms as in a gym/sports centre or fitting room like in a shop btw? Don't really see any issue with the latter now that I think about it since the attendants tend not to jump in the cubicles to watch you undress...terra_ferma wrote: »He's definitely asking for trouble, and he deserves it too!
I don't think the OP specified the sex of the recruiter in question. Is this your own sexism creeping in?
No, it's not. It's about how the customers are going to feel: as a female I wouldn't give a monkey's about a lesbian changing room attendant nor feel threatened or peeped on: it's all girls together, so what? If there was a male fulfilling the same role I'd never shop there again.0 -
Scenario: In a field of 280 applicants where, say, 10 exceed essentials and desirables, 40 meet/exceed essetials and some desireables and another 50 meet all essentials and no desirables (the minimum criteria) and the other 180 do not meet all essentials. Applicant knows they can meet minimum criteria but also that many will apply and the panel will likely select the cream (say the top 10) for interview. Simply tick the DDA box and the applicant jumps past 40 better applicants for automatic interview.LondonDiva wrote: »Our recruitment is done online & I have a list of x number of application forms to print off (280 last time) and read through.
All the specific demographic info, inc names, race etc are not seen by me. All I have are the person's reference number, the supporting statement, education and previous jobs.
HR will then email me a list of x reference numbers and tell me that these have indicated they are disabled and that I will need to consider them under the two ticks scheme.
The rest of the applciations then get reviewed in line with the essentials of the person spec, taking into consideration spelling, written English and attention to detail. If we have too many (which we mostly do) we then use the desirables to whittle them down - shortlisting as the afternoon and chocolate goes on: applicants who demonstrate meeting most or all of the essentials; then applicants who demonstrate meeting all of the essentials; then applicants who demonstrate meeting all of the essentials and most of the desirables; then applicants who demonstrate meeting all of the essentials and all of the desirables.
The two ticks applications then are different as we guarantee an interview if they meet the minimum criteria for the post - for me it's taking extra time the others wouldn't get, when you are actively trying to get the numbers down, to see if they demonstrate meeting all of the essentials, or in a poor field, most of the essentials. What I find some of these applications is that they don't take the time to demonstrate how they meet the person spec & I have had to set a person right when they threatened to sue me because I hadn't granted an interview to a disbaled person "in breach of human rights & the DDA!":rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
The final shortlist is emailed to HR who then send me back the list of names & we agree dates / times for interviews. In the meantime, I then have to individualy log online to reject the other applicants and note a reason on the application form in case they ring in wanting feedback.0 -
Depends. I know that some psych hospital wards only want female staff if it's a female only ward.0
-
solodanceparty wrote: »Depends. I know that some psych hospital wards only want female staff if it's a female only ward.
That's because some female patients may have been sexually abused as children by men, and battered as adults by men......................I'm smiling because I have no idea what's going on ...:)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards