Oops! Trouble at Work!

[Rose71]

I am worried I may be in trouble at work.

We had a talk on ‘equality and diversity’ within the organisation and I decided to speak up and be honest about my beliefs.

The organisation is going through a difficult adn depressing period, with meagre resources and ever-increasing workloads, so people are feeling tense.

I said that I am totally against creating ‘targets’ for the number of women in senior positions, because I wanted to be promoted on merit only and that creating too many concessions for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us.

I also objected to the organisation paying a subscription to a lobbying group for homesexual rights. I explained that an employer should value everyone equally and that employees should be expcted to treat everyone else with courtesy and kindness, regardless of gender or orientation. I said I found it insidious that my employer thought it had a right to act as my moral compass too.

Finally, I said that in an organisation where everybody felt valued and given sufficient resources to do their jobs to a standard that gave them personal satisfaction for a job well done, there would be no bullying or unkindness because such behaviour stems from being miserable to begin with. Rather than wasting time debating ‘diversity and equality’ the organisation ought to focus on bidding for more funding and maybe ensuring a more fair wage system for everyone.

there goes the promotion…but I felt a lot better…

 

[Miss_Felicity]

WOW! I’m glad you feel better, even if you don’t get the promotion. If it were my organization and you were on track for a promotion on your merits my only “issue” would be that you disagree with near about everything in how I run my business but were not talking about me. I don’t think you would be in “trouble” so to speak, as long as your work is beyond reproach and it remains that way there will not likely be a witch hunt.

Were you in an open forum when this happened and elected to give your opinion, as in employees were asked how they feel and to give feedback or did you bogard the discussion? I ask because I have a very dominant personality and had to learn very young how to not overly assert myself.

Either way whats done is done and your opinions cannot be taken back. Continue to do your best work and let that speak for you. Seems like you said a mouthful and I would refrain from doing too much more talking for a while even if you were “right” and “justified”

 

[Em_in_FL]

First off… I’m so very sorry that you have to endure this culture at work.

However, I have to take issue with how you worded this:

women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up

While I entirely agree that setting targets for women in senior positions irks me too… I think you’d be surprised how many women would have LOVED to be able to stay at home with their children. Assuming they “elected” to work is actually stabbing a knife through the hearts of those (many) who did nothing of the like.

Just my thoughts.

God bless and good luck with your company situation.

 

[Lorelei12]

I said that I am totally against creating ‘targets’ for the number of women in senior positions, because I wanted to be promoted on merit only and that creating too many concessions for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us.

I also have an issue with the way this was worded. I am not sure how exactly you meant it, and I agree about the targeting, but when we have children I will need to work unless we win the lottery or my husband gets a huge promotion. I’d much rather stay home, but even if I did “elect” to work there isn’t anything wrong with that either.

 

[Rence]

I said that I am totally against creating ‘targets’ for the number of women in senior positions, because I wanted to be promoted on merit only and that creating too many concessions for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us…

And did you say this with your co-workers present or to your boss alone? Because it was very offensive for many reasons. I wouldn’t promote a person to supervisory position with this attitude at all.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I am worried I may be in trouble at work.

We had a talk on ‘equality and diversity’ within the organisation and I decided to speak up and be honest about my beliefs.

The organisation is going through a difficult adn depressing period, with meagre resources and ever-increasing workloads, so people are feeling tense.

I said that I am totally against creating ‘targets’ for the number of women in senior positions, because I wanted to be promoted on merit only and that creating too many concessions for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us.

I also objected to the organisation paying a subscription to a lobbying group for homesexual rights. I explained that an employer should value everyone equally and that employees should be expcted to treat everyone else with courtesy and kindness, regardless of gender or orientation. I said I found it insidious that my employer thought it had a right to act as my moral compass too.

Finally, I said that in an organisation where everybody felt valued and given sufficient resources to do their jobs to a standard that gave them personal satisfaction for a job well done, there would be no bullying or unkindness because such behaviour stems from being miserable to begin with. Rather than wasting time debating ‘diversity and equality’ the organisation ought to focus on bidding for more funding and maybe ensuring a more fair wage system for everyone.

there goes the promotion…but I felt a lot better…

All very valid points, but organizations are very politically correct these days and I think you need to be aware that not only could you be sacrificing your promotion, but even your own job.

It’s not bad to state these things aloud; in fact, I think the world could benefit greatly if more of us did speak up. But you should be fully aware of the consequences of doing so, and have a Plan B and C ready to go.

:clapping:

 

[JimG]

Sounds to me like you were just speaking in favor of equality for everyone and promotion by merit, and advocating for no politics in the workplace. It doesn’t sound objectionable at all. But in today’s culture it may still be politically incorrect.

 

[Rence]

Sounds to me like you were just speaking in favor of equality for everyone and promotion by merit, and advocating for no politics in the workplace. It doesn’t sound objectionable at all. But in today’s culture it may still be politically incorrect.

for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us

That wasn’t merely not politcally correct. It was the opposite of equal, and disregarded any merit such a candidate (woman with children) might have had. She would have been correct if she would have just left that little bit out. She basically said that they should discriminate against women with children because they should be at home with their kids in her opinion, and shouldn’t have a chance for promotion. That certainly is not advocating for no politics in the workplace, but adding to it from the other end of the spectrum.

 

[agnes_therese]

. . . and that creating too many concessions for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us.

Speaking for myself only, I didn’t “elect” to work when I had a young child to bring up, and I don’t recall getting any “concessions.”

 

[AnnArbor]

I am worried I may be in trouble at work.

I said that I am totally against creating ‘targets’ for the number of women in senior positions, because I wanted to be promoted on merit only and that creating too many concessions for women who elected to work when they had young children to bring up was actually putting an additional burden on the rest of us.

Did you also advocate against “concessions” for men who elected to work when they had young children to bring up? As a woman who works, I certainly don’t remember any concessions made because I had children. And in my office, more men than women take time off for things like sick children, kids’ regular doctor’s appts., etc.

 

[littlenothing]

First off… I’m so very sorry that you have to endure this culture at work.

Assuming they “elected” to work is actually stabbing a knife through the hearts of those (many) who did nothing of the like.

.

Thank you. I am one of those women. I feel deeply grateful to you for your understanding.

That being said, I don’t think the OP meant to offend at all. We keep pretty silent about our pain.

 

[Ophelia23]

Thank you. I am one of those women. I feel deeply grateful to you for your understanding.

That being said, I don’t think the OP meant to offend at all. We keep pretty silent about our pain.

Amen. I am in the silent pain right along with you.

I also agree that I don’t think the OP meant it to offend.

 

[Em_in_FL]

I also agree that I don’t think the OP meant it to offend.

I agree that the OP probably didn’t mean to offend, but wanted to point out that these types of thoughts and ideas are *EXTREMELY *painful and hurtful…
More of just an FYI for the future.

 

[littlenothing]

I agree that the OP probably didn’t mean to offend, but wanted to point out that these types of thoughts and ideas are *EXTREMELY *painful and hurtful…
More of just an FYI for the future.

I’m with you (obviously). Another one? How about people thinking you’re on birth control because you’ve got no kids, or just one. They think that’s always by choice. Nope. And why don’t people think of this as a hardship and a huge, heavy cross?

:imsorry:

Sorry. Obviously a nerve was stuck here. Sorry.

 

[Ophelia23]

I’m with you (obviously). Another one? How about people thinking you’re on birth control because you’ve got no kids, or just one. They think that’s always by choice. Nope. And why don’t people think of this as a hardship and a huge, heavy cross?

:imsorry:

Sorry. Obviously a nerve was stuck here. Sorry.

:hug3:

 

[JimG]

That wasn’t merely not politcally correct. It was the opposite of equal, and disregarded any merit such a candidate (woman with children) might have had. She would have been correct if she would have just left that little bit out. She basically said that they should discriminate against women with children because they should be at home with their kids in her opinion, and shouldn’t have a chance for promotion. That certainly is not advocating for no politics in the workplace, but adding to it from the other end of the spectrum.

Point taken. That phrase struck a nerve and could have been left out. I presume she was talking about women who take too much time off? Maybe. But the same could be said about men who take too much time off.

 

[Rose71]

:hug1: Really sorry to those who found what I wrote offensive - I assure you all that no offence was intended. I made the original comments during a works meeting when we were asked what we thought of the firm’s approach to diversity and equality.

My colleagues, who know me well, would have understood perfectly what I was getting at (and also what I definitley was not driving at)

I used the word ‘elected’ to differentiate between women to genuinely need to bring in a wage to make ends meet and of course I realise that many of these women would dearly love to stay at home and enjoy those precious early years with their babies…and those who I absolutely and honestly believe are ‘playing the system’ to the detriment of everyone else in the workplace.

Having the intelligence and talent to get to the top is a different issue from being in a position where you are able to do so. I don’t know what the maternity rights are for parents in the US, but here, they can (and are) manipulated and it does, absolutely and undeniably, put an additional burden on many organisations.

I know it’s a personal choice and a matter for the individual’s conscience when it comes to determining what an ‘acceptable’ standard of living is (and please remeber I am not talking about women who need the extra wage to just put a roof over the family’s heads and food on the table) and it is also a deeply personal and emotive issue when it comes to whether babies and toddlers benefit or are impaired by spending days in nurseries and with child minders.

However, the situation a number of us at work are really fed up with is this:-

Woman A - in a senior position, takes 12 months off when her baby is born. She chooses (yes, chooses in this case - see above) to return to work. In her absence, her role has been filled by a temporary promotion i.e. not necessarily the best or most competant person for the job because nobody is going to move house or commute long hours for a temporary position.

When she returns, a year later, she is given the same role and level of responsibility. Even a year or so ago, I’d be the first to be shouting, “quite right too:thumbsup:” but now I am starting to wonder, because after 6 months, during which time she has struggled to pick up where she left off and get to grips with all the changes in that period and is actually really struggling. (…and this is where firms could actually give women or anyone who has to take a long period of time away from work - maybe a paid period where they were allowed to read up, catch-up and attend any necessary training to enbale them to fit back in before being expected to just come back and hit the ground running)

The impact of this on her team is that they feel they are without a strong leader and 6 months later, she’s off again to have another child (again, from a moral standpoint, I am against ABC and pro-life)

We have one person among us who has 4 children, 3 at school age but at different schools. She has repeatedly come back to her previous roles, struggles to the point where she really can’t do her job effectively; works such random hours with school runs and nursery runs that her team can never get hold of her when they need her and often falls asleep in meetings.

However, because she is a ‘working mum’ and therefore a flagship of how great the company is for mums - she is deemed beyone reproach.

If I was actually in charge (and I know now which of you guys would resign ) I would change the set-up…

I would allow anyone who has a prolonged absence to return to their position provided they agree to take an intensive pre-return to work period (on full pay) where they are given the time and support to catch up properly.

I would encourage flexible working BUT I would draw the line at “my hours are 6am to 7am…then 11am to 2.30pm…then 6pm to 7pm…then 9pm to 11pm” Seriously, no wonder the poor woman is knackered! How can anybody realistically perform at any level like that? The truth is, this person is not pulling her weight - not through any lack of effort on her part, but because of the burden she has placed herself under.

I would expect women (or men in similar situations) to accept part time positions and equivalent pay and do that well, rather than struggle on and bring others down with them. It really isn’t fair on the organisation otherwise, no matter how PC we try to be. Organisations should be honest and team members shouldn’t be afraid to speak up.

As for targets of X number of women in senior roles, I absolutely stand by that - it is discriminatory and wrong. If a person, male or female, wants to get to the top they have to make it their priority. If women choose to have children and (rightly in my opinion) give up work to be with them as much as they can, they should accept that even if they are super-brainy and talented - they just can’t have it all. Having the ability and having the flexibility to achieve are 2 different things.

I hope that’s explained it a bit better!

 

[TheRealJuliane]

:clapping::clapping::clapping::yup:

No disagreement from me. I think most women would be better off staying at home with their children and I think feminism is to blame for brainwashing women to think that a career is better than having children and raising the next generation. I hope the pendulum swings back toward that model and I think it is, since a lot of the formerly raised by day-care kids are now having their own families.

I despise quotas of any kind. One of the things that has made America a lot less competitive and twisted our entire society into PC knots. Let each work for his rewards.

 

[littlenothing]

Rose71…no worries!

I agree with everything you said! Its hard to explain, but you know hoe a turn of phrase or even a word can evoke something quite unintended? Well, I think that’s what occurred.

That’s why I didn’t raise the point with you. I knew what you were saying. The conversation tok a turn somewhere and I was face to face with my deepest wound. It was not in any way your fault! In fact, you were being the champion of people like me who, because of extreme feminism and quotas and modernism, are not able to live the authentically feminine life to which all women are called!

When a woman has to essentially live a mans life.in the world, without a protective godly man to help her, it is hard for that woman to realize her feminine potential.

You were actually just brining out that point, in a way. The many men and women who chose this for us are the ones who maybe should apologize!

 

[Viki63]

Rose,
In the US, most jobs allow you to have 12 weeks off after childbirth, without pay, unless you have more vacation time saved up. I could be wrong, it’s been awhile, but I think that’s it for most people.
I took 3 days off when we brought our adopted baby daughter home. Looking back, I should have taken much more, but didn’t feel I could afford it. And we weren’t at all sure we would be able to keep her with us.
A year at home with a new baby sounds idyllic. If a woman could afford that, seems like she could skip working and stay home with the child until he starts school. The challenges of the workplace pale beside the challenges of raising children well, IMO.