How to deal with discrimination as a contractor

[ShandyDrinker]

I don't think any forum is any good for discussing -isms. It's very rarely black and white and have a long list of evidence that needs to be sorted through before the random people on the forum 'get it'. Sometimes random strangers are not the best people to turn to. If you don't know what 30 days payment mean, how long your accounting year is or some other moronic question like that we can do. Ism's we cant.

While not good at discussing isms I do think people give good responses at times even for the grey areas. In this instance I think the OP is somewhat overreacting. For example, in my first contract at one of the major IBs I saw many other people (contractors included) WFH which I wouldn't have minded doing but was initially given a flat refusal about doing so. Once I'd established that I could do the work reliably and it wouldn't be an issue me WFH they were ok with it. I left, did another contract elsewhere and returned; as part of the return I negotiated WFH. Eventually I was lucky enough to WFH the majority of the time, only going to the office 1 day per month.

The point here is that sometimes you have to establish credentials with the client above and beyond how great you think you are or performed in an interview. It isn't sexism or any other ism, just good old fashioned trust.

[SueEllen]

As someone who has suffered the effects of -isms more than once and knows the difference between that and trust issues, the situation is not always obvious to outsiders especially White males unless it's overtly in their face.

Logical people, and most people in IT are logical, presume instinctively the person complaining is at fault. Yet they forget the person complaining, while different from them in some way, is logical as well and will be looking for things to prove and disapprove their own belief of an -ism against them.

For example I once worked briefly in a firm where one of the male team leaders would refuse to speak to me. My natural instinct was to presume he just didn't like me, however my confirmation of sexist bias came from how I saw him behave to other women in the office including those who had more seniority than him. With women his level and junior he would ignore them like me, but with women senior he would look like he was cornered then not carry out their instructions. As the two guys who had hired me had left, and some other guys in the office showed they had issues working with women, I left.

In another office I again had a guy who ignored me. I didn't have a problem with this as I didn't have to work directly with him so I could ignore him also. However he had to cooperate with 2 other women and report to another one to get his work done. With the 2 women he had to cooperate with he ignored and he also did this to the woman he had to report to.

In both cases the majority of the men working around these guys didn't notice their behaviour.

When complaints were made they stated, like many on here, to the complainers "Are you sure you aren't misinterpreting it?" The fact that in both cases there were witnesses to specific incidences and conversations made no difference.

However what differed between the first and second case, is in the second case one guy who had noticing this guy's sexism worked out a way to get rid of the him. The fact he had to cooperate with 2 of the women to get his work done and hadn't became his downfall as he was dismissed on performance grounds when he couldn't complete a piece of work on time.

The second guy wasn't pushed out on sexism because of the time it would take.

[LondonManc]

I've seen someone working from home when the only computer they had access to was secured to their desk with a Kensington lock.

[fool]

As someone who has suffered the effects of -isms more than once and knows the difference between that and trust issues, the situation is not always obvious to outsiders especially White males unless it's overtly in their face.

Logical people, and most people in IT are logical, presume instinctively the person complaining is at fault. Yet they forget the person complaining, while different from them in some way, is logical as well and will be looking for things to prove and disapprove their own belief of an -ism against them.

For example I once worked briefly in a firm where one of the male team leaders would refuse to speak to me. My natural instinct was to presume he just didn't like me, however my confirmation of sexist bias came from how I saw him behave to other women in the office including those who had more seniority than him. With women his level and junior he would ignore them like me, but with women senior he would look like he was cornered then not carry out their instructions. As the two guys who had hired me had left, and some other guys in the office showed they had issues working with women, I left.

In another office I again had a guy who ignored me. I didn't have a problem with this as I didn't have to work directly with him so I could ignore him also. However he had to cooperate with 2 other women and report to another one to get his work done. With the 2 women he had to cooperate with he ignored and he also did this to the woman he had to report to.

In both cases the majority of the men working around these guys didn't notice their behaviour.

When complaints were made they stated, like many on here, to the complainers "Are you sure you aren't misinterpreting it?" The fact that in both cases there were witnesses to specific incidences and conversations made no difference.

However what differed between the first and second case, is in the second case one guy who had noticing this guy's sexism worked out a way to get rid of the him. The fact he had to cooperate with 2 of the women to get his work done and hadn't became his downfall as he was dismissed on performance grounds when he couldn't complete a piece of work on time.

The second guy wasn't pushed out on sexism because of the time it would take.

Your story sounds like it has a ton more merit than the OPs but that's assuming the two guys in question didn't act like that with any of the men but I'll take that as a given.

You have to understand for those of us that aren't borderline retarded we walk on egg shells because there is little you can do as a white male after an accusation of discrimination.

Empathy is a two way street. If we are expected to understand your plight, which we really are trying to do, you need to understand how much damage accusation do. If not for us, then for yourselves because muddying the water hurts the cause.

I'm happy to help break down any barriers, not because I'm particularly awesome, I just selfishly want to work with the best people. Still, I have been taken aside to have a chat due to a person taking issue with something I said. I'd hazard a guess almost all of us have whilst the reality is none us of give a tulip what you are.

[SueEllen]

I've seen someone working from home when the only computer they had access to was secured to their desk with a Kensington lock.

You mean they didn't have their own laptop?

Two of my recent clients allowed staff to use their own laptops connecting via a VPN.

[PurpleGorilla]

I know loads of guys who seemingly aren't 'allowed' to WFH too (despite contract not making reference to a permanent place of work, etc)

The trick I think is to get it right from the start, establish your dominance, and be the change that you seek. Take - don't ask (be prepared to walk if you choose this path of course)

This with bells on.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

One of the problems with being a contractor, which is partly why I don't do it any more, is you have to suck it up.

I took a fair amount of abuse from permies in my last contract. They just didn't like (overpaid) contractors. The managers were even worse because they knew exactly how much you were getting (ie. more than them). They weren't subtle either, with references to "gold wheelbarrows" etc. Even though they were totally dependent on my skill set, they couldn't help themselves having constant digs.

It was a case of shrug it off or leave. I've seen what happens when contractors get into dispute with permies and it doesn't usually end well for the contractor.

[jmo21]

What's it called when guys are being total arseholes to all other guys?

Because I've worked with lots of those guys!

[LondonManc]

You mean they didn't have their own laptop?

Two of my recent clients allowed staff to use their own laptops connecting via a VPN.

15 years ago on dialup, the person in question was a perm.

[LondonManc]

One of the problems with being a contractor, which is partly why I don't do it any more, is you have to suck it up.

I took a fair amount of abuse from permies in my last contract. They just didn't like (overpaid) contractors. The managers were even worse because they knew exactly how much you were getting (ie. more than them). They weren't subtle either, with references to "gold wheelbarrows" etc. Even though they were totally dependent on my skill set, they couldn't help themselves having constant digs.

It was a case of shrug it off or leave. I've seen what happens when contractors get into dispute with permies and it doesn't usually end well for the contractor.

They only know what the agency invoice is; they don't know your take. In some cases, it's quite a shock to both parties. I've seen them meet in the middle and squeeze the agent. Bill comes down from £450 to £350, contractor rate goes up from £250 to £300, agent got a take it or leave it offer. Amazing what stories you hear after a few post-work pints.