Owner/managers! - what would make a candidate stand out?

[samlamb]

Completely agree!

I am totally for equality, and I think there are jobs which can accomodate every individuals circumstances. However, for me as a small salon, unless the candidate in question had childcare at the drop if a hat (which some lucky people do) so it wouldn;t affect their work, then I couldn't risk having a full column for someone, and them calling up at 8am to say their child is sick and can't come to work.

I don't have children (or sick days for that matter), for this very reason. Business, for me, comes first. Children are a personal choice, as is who we chose to employ!

But it isn't! You have to, as an employer, adhere to the equality act. There is a reason this act exists, and that is to ensure all people are treated equally. I am shocked that those of you who have openly admitted, on a public forum, that you do discriminate.

 

[samlamb]

Not all salon owners are nasty/bitchy/difficult. Sadly most people have a view of us.

All a salon owner wants is dedicated, talented and reliable staff. The idea that we should bend what we want due to a communist control technique is a bit laughable.

Did you know that political correctness was an invention of Karl Marx to introduce thought control across a population? It makes people frightened to speak, so controls the masses far more effectively than guns do. Quite interesting eh?

It is the law as an employer that you must not discriminate! (unless you have an exemption)

 

[persianista]

so come on, tell us then. ten candidates, all equal. How do YOU choose without discriminating? The act of choosing one in itself is discriminatory.
So come on MRS PC, tell us what to do

 

[persianista]

It is the law as an employer that you must not discriminate! (unless you have an exemption)

You have been very well indoctrinated. Read 1984 By George Orwell. It will open your eyes about the level of thought control you have been subjected to.

All acts of free will and choice are discriminatory. Tis life. Nothing is perfect.

 

[Kate1982]

Completely agree. As an employer it is impossible to not discriminate for one reason or another. We have to look at the person as a whole and that includes their home life.
How bout if you were picking a child minder for your kids. You have two child minders in front of you both have equal experience and qualifications. One is a 20 year old girl with no children the other is a 35 year old woman with a child. Which would you choose?

 

[Katelisa]

It is the law as an employer that you must not discriminate! (unless you have an exemption)

What about 'discriminating' against someone with lesser or no qualifications?

Like persianista has said, all choices discriminate someone somewhere. So laws against it are really a load of bull. I chose a Peugeot, I'm discriminating against ford, Mazda, Citroën. I can't afford a Lamborghini, does this make them discriminatory to me?!

 

[Katelisa]

Discrimination is surely based on something about a person which cannot be changed? Ie, race, sex, age?!

How can someone be discriminated against over a choice they themselves have made and a situation they have put themselves in? You think about your future before you make choices don't you?! ...Going back to my own circumstance, i have chosen not to have children because my work will not allow it. I don't expect the world to owe me anything because of my own decisions.

 

[samlamb]

so come on, tell us then. ten candidates, all equal. How do YOU choose without discriminating? The act of choosing one in itself is discriminatory.
So come on MRS PC, tell us what to do

They would have to be given consideration related to their experience. Not their personal circumstances. They would not all have identical work/ college/ uni/ experience. The law is the law. And there for good reason.

So come on MRS PC, tell us what to do[/QUOTE]

Wow! That is a little aggressive!

 

[persianista]

There was a very interesting case some years ago when the owner of a funky arty salon advertised for a stylist. She wanted a wacky looking young person. One applicant was a young girl who wore no makeup ,a head covering and frumpy clothes, all due to her religious persuasion. The salon owner declined to employ her. She sued and won.

Reality is that the salon owner should have simply said she had better qualified candidates (which was true).
The other reality is that the clients of a funky salon would not have wanted to use this stylist.

Sadly clients also vote with their feet and their purses, which is why salon owners try and match the staff to the clients. A young wacky stylist would bomb in a salon which caters for older ladies in the same way a 45 year old would bomb in a salon aimed at teenagers. Strictly speaking it is discrimination if you take the communist view. In reality it is good business sense to employ the best person for that particular business.
You don't see funky clothes shops employing 50 year olds, they pick young thin people to work on the shop floor.
Models one doesnt insist that designers pick chunky monkeys to model their clothes, as they only want tall thin people.

Armani doesnt use ugly people to model for them. Only the young and beautiful.
All these companies and many more discriminate. Even our own government asks civil servants to pass a test which discriminates against people with a low IQ.

I think people have got their knickers in a twist over laws that really don't exist in reality.

 

[samlamb]

Completely agree. As an employer it is impossible to not discriminate for one reason or another. We have to look at the person as a whole and that includes their home life.
How bout if you were picking a child minder for your kids. You have two child minders in front of you both have equal experience and qualifications. One is a 20 year old girl with no children the other is a 35 year old woman with a child. Which would you choose?

I work, and have an employer who has never questioned my ability. Re the childminder, I have chosen on experience and qualifications and more importantly, how she is with my children!

 

[Katelisa]

I work, and have an employer who has never questioned my ability. Re the childminder, I have chosen on experience and qualifications and more importantly, how she is with my children!

exactly, so you have discriminated against a lesser experienced childminder!

 

[deanosnana]

Wow, this has shocked me. I am a mum, but I absolutly LOVE my job. I am incredicbly hardworking, I am always at work 45 minutes before my shift starts to make sure I am set up, and I would class my self as very reliable. I have a fantastic childminder who has never let me down yet, and i have my mum on hand to have my little girl if she is ever ill, so I can always make it to work. So for you to say that people with kids are unreliable is totally wrong, and i agree with the other posters, It is discriminative, and jobs should be given to the candidate who had the most experience, who fits in with the salon the best, who has the most to give etc. Yes, given, that some mums do not have the help I have, and that yes, sometimes kids are ill, but so are we as adults too. i agree also that some mums may be unreliale for one thing or another but a lot of us are very reliable too!

Unfortunately Rachel, you are an exception. I've known many moms (myself included, when my kids were young) who sometimes struggle to find childcare at the drop of a hat. I have had to miss work on occasion because of it.

Having said that, if I were passed over for a job to someone who didn't have children, I could understand it. Is it fair? Probably not but that IS life.

Rachel, I would hire you in a heartbeat! :hug:

 

[WaxGirl]

I work, and have an employer who has never questioned my ability. Re the childminder, I have chosen on experience and qualifications and more importantly, how she is with my children!

O come on be honest - it would have been based on more than that!!

Are you telling me that you would have employed someone if you knew they had a major committment outside your job?

A committment that may involve them being called away at short notice, turning up late for the job and bring a host of other problems that they would feel the need to share in the workplace - constantly using this other committment as an excuse for every screw up, late day, day off, not able to be flexible???

Really that would not have affected your decision of whether to take on this person or not?

 

[deanosnana]

It is the law as an employer that you must not discriminate! (unless you have an exemption)

Who's to say what discrimination is? Don't you think we've all been discriminated against at one time or another?

Should I sue every man who hasn't asked me out because I'm overweight and past the 'sell by' date? Isn't that discrimination?

This is turning into a very thought provoking thread!

 

[WaxGirl]

Who's to say what discrimination is? Don't you think we've all been discriminated against at one time or another?

Should I sue every man who hasn't asked me out because I'm overweight and past the sell by date? Isn't that discrimination?

This is turning into a very thought provoking thread!

lol this made me smile, I'm thinking I could potentially be sued by all those little short men I turn down

 

[deanosnana]

lol this made me smile, I'm thinking I could potentially be sued by all those little short men I turn down

In this day and age...

 

[taggyboy]

This makes excellent reading and I appreciate all your views. When studying for my management qualification we had a large module to complete on selection and recruitment. It was a few years ago and I know there have been updates and changes to the law since I passed. However, I would be interested to know who do you employ?

A 20+ something who at some stage is probably going to have children?
An older person who has grown up children that can take care of themselves?
A man who is entitled to paternity leave?

Surely, at some point in most peoples lives children will be involved or am I missing the point here?

 

[samlamb]

Who's to say what discrimination is? these guys www.equalityhumanrights.com/Don't you think we've all been discriminated against at one time or another?

Should I sue every man who hasn't asked me out because I'm overweight and past the 'sell by' date? Isn't that discrimination?

This is turning into a very thought provoking thread!

lol! Listen ladies, I get that you have to think of yourselves and business's first. But discounting an excellent therapist, who may have outstanding qualifications and experience, on the grounds that she has children and or is pRegnant, is unfair and also against the law.

 

[Kate1982]

What does it matter whether she is excellent or not if she is off on maternity?

 

[melly07]

Can't help think that this thread has gone off course now! I wanted to see what was suggested to the OP not who would hire someone with children!?