How to deal with discrimination as a contractor

[BrilloPad]

Not sure why you think that is a big and clever response.

Why is it that whenever there is an argument in the professional forums it always includes you?

[northernladuk]

You two are a bit harsh on PC on this point.

His point about no WFH meaning no WFH gets paid is valid. If you're expected to be in, you're expected to be in or you don't get paid. I've seen people deliver what they thought should be delivered rather than what was asked for. Doesn't go down well if it doesn't meet expectations.

Maybe if he could put it properly we might have a bit more respect for the few things he says that do make sense.

[LondonManc]

Maybe if he could put it properly we might have a bit more respect for the few things he says that do make sense.

Point taken.

[WTFH]

We'd also need to see the complete wording of the contract.


The OP has said:

"There is no allowed to work from home."

Not sure on the grammar of that to understand fully what it means, or whether it has been put in writing at some stage.

There is "autonomy to provide services as supplier sees fit". In writing. In a contract.

This is 8 words taken from a sentence in the (or is it "a") contract. No context.


If I was billing out at £10.00 to £99.99 per day (that's 4 digits, innit), I'd make sure I had everything in place.

[NotAllThere]

Does it need pointing out AGAIN that this is an internet forum. I can post on here that I dress up as Princess Leia at the weekend, and have sex with goats and sheep

Not in the professional forums you can't.

I might have my opinions but, again, doesnt mean I tell client what I think to their face, does it?

I think, on balance, we don't want to know here either.

[SueEllen]

Most of these posts are exactly what you get when you complain of an -ism i.e. you are not believed until you have a witness or documentary evidence.

In as far as the public sector being better it isn't. In fact the only two sexist contractors I've worked with have been in the public sector. One was managed out on performance issues as there was not enough proof that he was being sexist due to his behaviour changing as soon as someone who was senior in the department was in front of him, while the other was kept away from women. They could only be removed for sexism if they said or did something overt in front of lots of witnesses.

In the private sector the last permie who made sexist comments was apparently moved to a different site. Since no one heard from him he could have been sacked.

As for WFH, I've been allowed to do it for both public sector and private sector clients when permie staff who were managing the projects were not allowed to. The only reason I was allowed and they weren't is because they trusted contractors to get on with the work but found that their own staff did less work at home.

[WordIsBond]

When I read threads like this, I like to look back and see what other threads the OP has started, it helps fill in the blanks in the story.

Assuming you mean how I've posted about two situations that I've found myself in with recent contracts? I'm not sure what you mean by blanks? If you're inferring I tend to revert to sexism as an easy way out you need to know that in my last place it wasn't just me - it was several other females too, all of whom have left some after trying union action. Very difficult with established senior men. You should also know I shun all female events as I firmly believe in integration not segregation. None of that means I should allow myself to be bullied, not paid or treated differently.

1. There are always blanks in any story, and sometimes reading other posts gives additional information. There's no way you give all the relevant details in an Internet post about a situation.
2. Any person who is going to tell the story is going to give it from their own perspective, even if they are being entirely truthful. When you get to know a little bit more about a person, you get a better idea of what their perspective might be and how it might be affecting their story.
3. Any person telling a story on the Internet might be making the whole thing up, or lying significantly about it. Reading other posts can give you insight into that.

For instance, reading your other posts convinced me that you probably aren't making the whole thing up.

It also made me think that you might sometimes walk around with a chip on your shoulder (which the response I've quoted fits with, BTW), which might make me wonder if the problem you've experienced is 1) being exaggerated because of said chip or 2) came about because you've got a bad interpersonal dynamic going, rather than sexism, which may or may not have anything to do with said chip.

This isn't mumsnet where everyone will automatically believe your side of the story and your perspective on everything that happens. People around here are going to at least consider the diverse possibilities that 1) you are making it up 2) the problem is you 3) the problem is real but your diagnosis is all wrong or 4) the problem is real but not close to as bad as you describe it. That's the way this forum is. If you can't accept that, and that your story is likely to face some scrutiny, then maybe you've not come to the right forum....

Anyway.... If you are going to try to fight this in a legal way, you probably aren't on the right forum. You need to get real legal help as to what you should be documenting and how to build your case. I'd be willing to bet you probably don't have sufficient evidence to win a court case right now. There are discrimination laws that protect contractors, but it's going to be a lot harder to win that case than it would for an employee, I'd bet.

And you run the risk, if you are known in your industry as a guru, that you become known in the industry as a trouble-maker if you pursue some kind of legal action. Is it going to be worth it?

[LondonManc]

Most of these posts are exactly what you get when you complain of an -ism i.e. you are not believed until you have a witness or documentary evidence.

In as far as the public sector being better it isn't. In fact the only two sexist contractors I've worked with have been in the public sector. One was managed out on performance issues as there was not enough proof that he was being sexist due to his behaviour changing as soon as someone who was senior in the department was in front of him, while the other was kept away from women. They could only be removed for sexism if they said or did something overt in front of lots of witnesses.

In the private sector the last permie who made sexist comments was apparently moved to a different site. Since no one heard from him he could have been sacked.

As for WFH, I've been allowed to do it for both public sector and private sector clients when permie staff who were managing the projects were not allowed to. The only reason I was allowed and they weren't is because they trusted contractors to get on with the work but found that their own staff did less work at home.

Most of the points are valid too. It's psychologically easier to believe that you're being hard done by rather than being the one with the problem. I'm not suggesting that the latter is the case here but it's certainly not clear cut from what I've read.

There's nothing in the story to suggest that it's because the OP is a woman. It could be because of the disability; if it is, great, then there's grounds for a discrimination case. If not, could it be that she comes across as a bit of a diva and others see her as such? "I am a specialist, known in the industry as a bit of a guru".

Working practices trump the contract and if OP's working practices are trumping the contract then it's an unfortunate situation but as an able-bodied man I'd have to simply suck it up and according to NLUK log on to mumsnet. As I said earlier, any grievance needs evidence. If OP can gather it then great, good luck to her.

[SueEllen]

Most of the points are valid too. It's psychologically easier to believe that you're being hard done by rather than being the one with the problem. I'm not suggesting that the latter is the case here but it's certainly not clear cut from what I've read.

If people gave lots of information we would be deluged with posts like those of PC.

There's nothing in the story to suggest that it's because the OP is a woman. It could be because of the disability; if it is, great, then there's grounds for a discrimination case. If not, could it be that she comes across as a bit of a diva and others see her as such? "I am a specialist, known in the industry as a bit of a guru".

I know people who are consisted tech gurus in their field. It's useful them to get a jobs etc. and while they do mention it sometimes (mainly due to someone annoying them with emails) in everyday life they tend to brush it off.

Working practices trump the contract and if OP's working practices are trumping the contract then it's an unfortunate situation but as an able-bodied man I'd have to simply suck it up and according to NLUK log on to mumsnet.

So when people do -ism acts their victims should just suck it up?

Oh and don't send anyone to mumsnet they are vicious - we are much kinder.

As I said earlier, any grievance needs evidence. If OP can gather it then great, good luck to her.

Personally I would tell the OP to get another contract and avoid working for that client again.

[LondonManc]

If people gave lots of information we would be deluged with posts like those of PC.

Add the word relevant then.

I know people who are consisted tech gurus in their field. It's useful them to get a jobs etc. and while they do mention it sometimes (mainly due to someone annoying them with emails) in everyday life they tend to brush it off.

I've been called an expert a few times. 20 years in the same line of work and you just become more skilled and more experienced than others; expert, imho, is never a self-appointed title and the same goes for guru.

So when people do -ism acts their victims should just suck it up?

Absolutely not - let's prove it's an -ismist act first, as I said.

Oh and don't send anyone to mumsnet they are vicious - we are much kinder.

Perhaps NLUK simply prefers it on there with the lighter moderation?

Personally I would tell the OP to get another contract and avoid working for that client again.

Agree to an extent but it depends how wide the industry is.