Childcare is bloody expensive!

tooldle

I think the preious poster is trying to say that a lot of networking is done at these ‘social events’. I’ve seen it in my own workplace, the event being a distillery tour and a drinking session organised by a senior manager (male). To be fair to my employer who received a number of complaints about the lack of inclusivity, the format of these outings was changed.
In my work place we now have a policy that all meetings are Not to start prior to 9.30 and must finish prior to 3pm. The idea being to encourage career progression of all, allowing those with child care committments to be present at meetings for their full duration.

Comms69

tooldle wrote: »

I think the preious poster is trying to say that a lot of networking is done at these ‘social events’. - Some might even be done when they invite the boss/colleague/client to dinner at their house. Doesn't mean they're invited. I’ve seen it in my own workplace, the event being a distillery tour and a drinking session organised by a senior manager (male). To be fair to my employer who received a number of complaints about the lack of inclusivity, the format of these outings was changed.
In my work place we now have a policy that all meetings are Not to start prior to 9.30 and must finish prior to 3pm. The idea being to encourage career progression of all, allowing those with child care committments to be present at meetings for their full duration.

Why is the employer getting involved in employees social lives??

sulphate

tooldle wrote: »

I think the preious poster is trying to say that a lot of networking is done at these ‘social events’. I’ve seen it in my own workplace, the event being a distillery tour and a drinking session organised by a senior manager (male). To be fair to my employer who received a number of complaints about the lack of inclusivity, the format of these outings was changed.
In my work place we now have a policy that all meetings are Not to start prior to 9.30 and must finish prior to 3pm. The idea being to encourage career progression of all, allowing those with child care committments to be present at meetings for their full duration.

I agree and I noticed this in particular when I had to go to London for a few days for work pre-child, that it seemed almost mandatory to go for drinks after work for "networking" purposes.

That being said, being part-time I do accept that there are some things I won't be able to attend such as meetings and conferences because they don't fit in with my work hours. As I said I accept it, it was my choice to have a child and work part-time.

tooldle

Comms69 wrote: »

Why is the employer getting involved in employees social lives??

Maybe its perculiar to Universities but these events are fairly common place. The example i talk about above was a professors away day.

Comms69

tooldle wrote: »

Maybe its perculiar to Universities but these events are fairly common place. The example i talk about above was a professors away day.

I think it's the terminology.


If it's a work function, I wouldn't call it a social event. And vice versa.


So me and my colleague going for a few beers post work would be social.
Same colleague travelling to a conference would be work.

tooldle

Comms69 wrote: »

I think it's the terminology.


If it's a work function, I wouldn't call it a social event. And vice versa.


So me and my colleague going for a few beers post work would be social.
Same colleague travelling to a conference would be work.

These boundaries are blured in a number of work environments. There is not always a clear distinction.

bugslet

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

The comment I quoted, where you professed cluelessness about what might happen if you employed a woman and she became pregnant. As if that was somehow an exceptional circumstance and you shouldn't be expected to have considered it when setting up in business.

You should have, along with other common employment related issues like long term sickness, or an employee becoming disabled, or how to deal with bullying or conflict etc etc.

Wasn't professed, it is. As comms says, you look at some things as they come up. As with many businesses, when you start out you do everything, cleaning, sales, deliveries, tax and vat, wages, accounts, acting as transport manager, that's a position that carries legal responsibilities, operations. Not going to know everything.

It is exceptional for me to employ a woman. Before you go off on one, only one has ever applied and she was far from a strong candidate. The one I employed is the wife of another driver, so came on recommendation. Comms may think it's stupid, but recommendation works far better for us than wading through a load of wannabes. Yes men recommending men, it'd be awful if it wasn't for the fact that there are few women drivers and fewer that want to spend a week in a cab with twin bunks with a bloke. I like my drivers and I wouldn't want to.

I'm a good employer, I know that because my staff tell me, and they stay for years, unusual in this industry. You telling me how bad I am is ridiculous.

Comms69

bugslet wrote: »

Wasn't professed, it is. As comms says, you look at some things as they come up. As with many businesses, when you start out you do everything, cleaning, sales, deliveries, tax and vat, wages, accounts, acting as transport manager, that's a position that carries legal responsibilities, operations. Not going to know everything.

It is exceptional for me to employ a woman. Before you go off on one, only one has ever applied and she was far from a strong candidate. The one I employed is the wife of another driver, so came on recommendation. Comms may think it's stupid, but recommendation works far better for us than wading through a load of wannabes. Yes men recommending men, it'd be awful if it wasn't for the fact that there are few women drivers and fewer that want to spend a week in a cab with twin bunks with a bloke. I like my drivers and I wouldn't want to.

I'm a good employer, I know that because my staff tell me, and they stay for years, unusual in this industry. You telling me how bad I am is ridiculous.

Oh no not recommendations, I think that’s actually a good way to employ people.

You’re not employing a friend, but a friend/family member of an employee.

When employing friends, it can get tricky with some using that friendship for extra perks.

Apologies that wasn’t clear

Comms69

tooldle wrote: »

These boundaries are blured in a number of work environments. There is not always a clear distinction.

A good reference tool is - can I claim expenses...

bugslet

Comms69 wrote: »

Oh no not recommendations, I think that’s actually a good way to employ people.

You’re not employing a friend, but a friend/family member of an employee.

When employing friends, it can get tricky with some using that friendship for extra perks.

Apologies that wasn’t clear

I'm with you on that one. Made that mistake once and learnt. Did employ a friend's husband as he was desperate to leave his job and we agreed he'd come for a year and then our collective obligation would be over. 17 years later he's still with me and we both feel we are on the winning side.:)