IBM Avoids Hiring Women

"Apparently IBM doesn't like hiring young women because they are 'just going to get themselves pregnant again and again and again.'"

Our little company has nine employees. It's engineering, so hiring women was always a challenge. We actually got three all at once four years ago. One announced her pregnancy soon after being hired. Three days later another sheepishly said, yes, she too was pregnant. They delivered two weeks apart and both were off for three months.

When they came back both brought breast pumps and pumped throughout the day. Probably about 1.5 hours each. Every. Single. Day.

When their babies were a little over a year old, employee #1 again announced she was pregnant. And yet again, the same "other" employee did too. They again delivered two weeks apart, disappeared for three months, and to this DAY are breastfeeding in our accountant's office, displacing him 4-5 times/day.

One announced she was "done" and left the company when her second turned a year old. The other wants "at least four" and is hanging around to finish her brood or until her salary is less than 20% of her daycare bill, apparently

And my husband is still willing to hire young women. He's nicer than I would be; I would never even open a resume from a female less than 35 years old. It's fucking bullshit.

Oh dear... first of all, remember that "woman" does not equal "breeder". Secondly, if you're a CF woman and you have a job, be glad that your own boss remembers this. Thirdly- "a female"? Urgh- A Voice For Men is that way ---->

Breeders ruin everything.

Yeah. I saw a summary of the IBM story. Apparently the comments were tweeted by a moo.

To a point, I understand that IBM doesn't want to have to put time, money and training into shit-ass employees like moos. Of course, the problem there is, being female, I'm automatically painted with the same brush as shit-ass breeder womben. So, while I understand businesses not wanting to deal with moomies as employees, it's really not fair to women who have no desire to manipulate our employers as moomies do.

All the bullshit about paid maternity and paternity leave will only make things worse. I really cannot blame a business for not wanting to pay someone to breed and sit on their ass, while they also then have to hire and pay another person to do the work that moomy and duh are being paid not to do.

Why is responsibility such a dirty word in this country? It is though, and inevitably, if you say that wannabreeds should be fiscally sound before having a baybee, then suddenly you're "discwiminating against the poor!"

Frankly, I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world if baybees were only had by people who can afford them. I can't believe that's an outrageous opinion to have. But, apparently, it is.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/07/23/live-tweets-sexist-remarks-ibm_n_5613278.html

_______________________________________________
“There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a gentle man.”

Quote
cfchevygirl
Yeah. I saw a summary of the IBM story. Apparently the comments were tweeted by a moo.

To a point, I understand that IBM doesn't want to have to put time, money and training into shit-ass employees like moos. Of course, the problem there is, being female, I'm automatically painted with the same brush as shit-ass breeder womben. So, while I understand businesses not wanting to deal with moomies as employees, it's really not fair to women who have no desire to manipulate our employers as moomies do.

All the bullshit about paid maternity and paternity leave will only make things worse. I really cannot blame a business for not wanting to pay someone to breed and sit on their ass, while they also then have to hire and pay another person to do the work that moomy and duh are being paid not to do.

Why is responsibility such a dirty word in this country? It is though, and inevitably, if you say that wannabreeds should be fiscally sound before having a baybee, then suddenly you're "discwiminating against the poor!"

Frankly, I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world if baybees were only had by people who can afford them. I can't believe that's an outrageous opinion to have. But, apparently, it is.

In the US, we're so fucking hellbent crazy trying to prevent "discrimination" that from a labor policy standpoint, we're at a juncture of total lunacy in terms of ideas such as paid maternity leave, paid paternity leave, offices with daycares, etc. etc.

People start businesses to turn a profit. And that's it. That's the motivation. I've never heard anyone say, "I'd really like to start a business so I can employ single mothers and make their lives better." [Perhaps this has happened, but I've never heard it.]

So why not just allow BOTH employer and employee to cut right to the chase? Employers should be able to offer the compensation packages they prefer, and employees can find the best opportunity for them. Child-friendly workplaces might offer flex-time and a day care at the office. Childfree workplaces might pay more, and offer work hours that are more non-traditional. Everybody wins.

But we've got to get away from this mindset of "fairness" in a world that is fundamentally unfair and always will be.

This subject really touches a sensitive point with me because i know where i live such silent discrimination is being made. There have been recent articles about it and talk in the media and some employers do acknowledge that they'd rather not hire women of childbearing age due to long maternity leave and payment. Welcome to the Nordic countries where maternity leave and benefits are huge.

I joined a Finnish CF group and this subject came up. Can't believe how many women were bluntly rejected when going to interviews just because the employer assumed that they will calve anyways and leave. But here is the funny part. Some of them were asked about it more or less directly and they said kids are not in their plans. I remember one was laughed at and told that all women WILL have kids at one point and another got a very dirty look from the interviewer.

So, i just wonder...how can you tell you are CF without getting dirty looks and snarky bingoes?

Next year, I'll be of legal age to get sterilized. I guess I'll have to carry proof of sterilization to every job interview.eyes2

I'm also pissed that people assume I'll get inpig and reap the benefits on the company's dime. Yet another reason I'm against paid maternity/paternity leave, and Swedes get a LOT of it. On the other hand, I see young women getting hired left and right around here, so I might get lucky.

I don't have low self-esteem. That's a mistake. I have low esteem for everyone else.
-Daria

I'm in two minds about parental leave. On the one hand I don't like seeing breeders being rewarded while us CF people get nothing. On the other, discrimination against parents also affects the rest of us, and as a woman of childbearing age who will soon be looking for a new job, I don't want to end up unemployable. The solution here is to give men and women equal parental leave- either all or nothing- so neither gender loses out. I've had plenty of colleagues who have taken lengthy paternity leave and who leave early to pick up children from nursery, take days off when they're ill etc- it's not just women. Here in the UK parents can share leave, and CF people now have the right to ask for flexible working, so we're slowly getting there.

I can also sympathise with the "businesses aren't charities" thing to some extent but employers are a minority on whom the majority are dependent as their employees. Not all employers are nice so we do need some regulations to stop employers exploiting people. Sadly this just has to cover breeding as this is what the majority of people choose to do at some point in their lives. There are some female-dominated sectors such as nursing which would collapse if maternity leave was withdrawn and the work became any more thankless. Too many employers would like their employees to not spawn, not have any outside interests or distractions, not take holidays, not get ill, and not do anything apart from help them churn up a profit until they drop dead.

TL-DR: While I have little sympathy for moos and duhs who want to be rewarded for spawning, I have even less for exploitative and prejudiced employers. Let's stop complaining about parental leave and start demanding more leave for ourselves...

All sounds familiar to me. When my breeder sister worked at IBM, the company let each moomy have a THREE-year leave for each baby (not three years of pay, but guaranteeing the worker could return after a three-year absence). Breeder sister popped out three kids and, yep, she was away for NINE straight years. And all she could do was complain when she returned was that she was kept in a dead-end job and never got promoted. It never occurred to her that a nine-year gap, no effort to learn new job skills, and dressing in sweatshirts and jeans (IBM dropped its hyper-prescriptive dress code, but still expected reasonable business attire) might have made her bosses think she wasn't quite executive material.

IBM is finally catching on that no matter how much you give a moomy, they'll demand ten times more and never give a thing.

My solution to this problem has always been a proposal for sabbaticals for all. You pay into your sabbatical fund during your working career, and your employer thus only pays for your replacement while you are away. You can take the sabbatical as parental leave, or you can take it to study, or for whatever else you want.

The point is that such a proposal would be equitable and it would help both the CF and breeders. It would be fair because everyone would be equally entitled to leave. It would help CF women because we'd no longer get doubly screwed by having to take over breeder's responsibilities while at the same time discriminated against when it comes to hiring on the assumption that we're going to take maternity leave. It would help CF men because they'd get the same time off their breeder co-workers do. And it would help breeders because it would normalize work absences.

Yet I never hear of breeders supporting ideas like this. They always want to be exceptional and get perks, and their solution to the disadvantages of the perks--employers not being interested in hiring them--is more laws and more perks. Yet is promoting more equality which would actually give them the effect they want, which is not to seem less employable due to their lifestyle.

So yeah, as long as they are not going to fight for equality, I say fuck their maternity leave, because it's screwing us over.

What Yurble just said. Perfect idea.

I've read similar stories online over the past few years - how some companies won't hire women of a certain age group - personally if I was an employer I'd never hire any young Moos/WannaMoos. Childfree women, yes.

Great idea yurble. We have sabbaticals, research leave etc in academia (where I work) and their purpose is to allow staff to get more done, not less. Unfortunately private sector employers don't see them this way and just consider them a way to lose profit via lazy employees rather than, say, something which could benefit them if an employee goes off to learn a new language or some new programming and coding skills.

The UK government recently announced plans to give all working parents £2,000 worth of free childcare per year because they've had to admit that few couples can now afford to buy a home and raise a child on a single income. The issue isn't the cost of childcare, it's the fact that house prices and rents are rising faster than wages. A solution that would benefit everyone would be rent control and stopping irresponsible mortgage lending by banks and building more affordable housing, plus a higher minimum wage, but as many of our MPs are buy-to-let landlords with cronies in business who employ thousands, that aint gonna happen anytime soon.

The problem here is partly the fault of greedy and socially irresponsible people in business and government, don't blame the moos and duhs... alright, blame them a bit...

I bring this up any time some one tries to holler about the 'pay gap'. In my industry there is no difference in pay based on gender. However, there is a difference based on experience, training and self motivation to improve your knowledge of the business.

Myself and a female engineer hired on the same day over ten years ago. I stayed with the company earned several masters that the company paid for as well as about a quarter mil in certifications and training seminars. Worked more +16 plus shifts than I care to remember. Been around the world learning from some of the best in our business.

She had four kids and maxed our her maternity leave every time. She never attends trainings and is unwilling to travel for business. She has done nothing to enhance her career and barely does anything to bring value to the company.

I have been promoted 4 times. She moved up once. I make three times what she does. She brings this up and bitches to HR every chance she gets, citing the 'gender pay gap'.

You have to back it all the way up to the overall principle of our (US, present) Economic System. (And others sim.)

Consumer spending is 70% of the US economy.

More Consumers must be bred to keep this rolling.

Hence - the women are best positioned as Breeders. This makes the most profitable sense.

And THIS is why women aren't going to advance, they're not going to get day care, they'll be 'Mommy Tracked', and they will be flat out ignored / discriminated against.

It's all about the money.

None of this will change until new economic systems are used.

The good news is - this is happening. There are differently structured biz's out there, most are fairly new.

And / or - one can start their own biz and do it 'their way'.

I would GREATLY ENCOURAGE anyone with ambition to seriously look into self employment. There's plenty of sexism and discrimination out there and it has it's roots in our present economic model.

I work for myself and you can, too! (I do have partners.) - And you can do anything from a 'biz' / 'middle man' type job like mine - or anything you want. Get a shop, anything from Hair Styling to Auto Repair. If you're ambitious - you can start by reading and learning.

How about this? Many people *are* shut out of things! IL now has "Medical" 420. To have a shop you are required to have like 500K liquid, 2M in escrow, I stopped listening to the news story after that.

eyes2

Even to buy a shitty fast food franchise can be like 200K. eyes2

So, slog on and keep looking for something else.

Provide a service. Less startup $ required. Self and partners do this. I got the MBA *for this* - to learn these things I already had ideas on *so I could work for myself*.

I'm not madly in love with it, either. But - in many ways it is best - I have autonomy. How much $ I make is *up to me*. No one is telling me what to do or holding me back. I like money so this is the 'main thing'. I like *security* too - now that might sound strange because in the past - it was A Job that provided security. Not anymore. If they're not holding you down they'll be shutting the whole thing down by next Tuesday.

I think "handling yourself" is much more secure. *I* am in control.

I do recommend that people look into self employment, it isn't easy - but if you're ambitious or like autonomy - there's plenty of ways to do it, for whatever skill or interest one might have. Or, just to make money.

For those who do want a 'regular job' - there are more flexible and progressive companies out there. You'll have to hunt for them, but they do exist.

And yeah - a Stuffed Suit Co. like IBM - Erg, NO. I wouldn't even look at them if I were looking for a 'regular job'. If "Found On the Road Dead" is totally FUBAR then IBM must be like the 6th circle of Hell.

Giant MegaCorps are Hell. Don't go there ~

I got dirt on all sorts of places!

Another one to avoid, for our EU friends, although they do operate world wide also ~
Is - well, the name of the place might make you think of ejaculate.

Hey - what's long and hard and full of Seamen?

*This Place* should be strenuously avoided also.

But, of course, I am just talking about submarines ~

Tweeter is a moo herself who didn't bother to check that IBM's CEO and chair is a woman. So, did this live-tweeted conversation happen? HELL NO.

Dumb bitch. Dumb LYING bitch and also attention whore.

PS, her twitter feed is completely fucking painful to read and I consider myself a dyed in the wool feminist. She's a shrill harpy who needs to STFU. It's not sexism not to want to hire people who don't fucking work. Period.