• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Farageing for attention - mumsnet special"

Collapse

  • Wanderer
    replied
    Originally posted by KentPhilip View Post
    But how many men do you know who take 52 weeks off as maternity leave?
    I'd be up for that! Why do they mums get it all? They should change the law so dads can take the time off too and that will go some way towards ending discrimination.

    Mums are onto a good thing here, so I guess not all of them will be voting for this one though.

    Leave a comment:


  • suityou01
    replied
    Originally posted by KentPhilip View Post
    Yes.
    But how many men do you know who take 52 weeks off as maternity leave?
    Frankly none. Paternity leave however .....

    Leave a comment:


  • KentPhilip
    replied
    Originally posted by darmstadt View Post
    What about if a man takes that amount of time off of work, will he be also worth less to his employers?
    Yes.
    But how many men do you know who take 52 weeks off as maternity leave?

    Leave a comment:


  • suityou01
    replied
    Originally posted by darmstadt View Post
    At the 4th International Bottom Spanking and Nappy Wearing Convention (some MPs were there, incognito: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Parliament-P.../dp/B003S4Z1OK)
    Yeah whatever, you're now my new hero.

    "Ear ear" <snigger>

    Leave a comment:


  • darmstadt
    replied
    Possibly, just possibly NSFW

    Originally posted by suityou01 View Post
    Hey darmie, whereya bin?
    At the 4th International Bottom Spanking and Nappy Wearing Convention (some MPs were there, incognito: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Parliament-P.../dp/B003S4Z1OK)

    Leave a comment:


  • suityou01
    replied
    Originally posted by darmstadt View Post
    Obnoxious sexist git. What about if a man takes that amount of time off of work, will he be also worth less to his employers? Does he know anything about maternity leave in that it only lasts for 52 weeks? What about when, or if, the new laws regarding shared parental leave come in? I also think that if a woman is in a higher position in a financial institution then she'll be able to not only wangle WFH for periods but also to pay for a nanny for when she has to go into the office.
    Hey darmie, whereya bin?

    Leave a comment:


  • darmstadt
    replied
    Obnoxious sexist git. What about if a man takes that amount of time off of work, will he be also worth less to his employers? Does he know anything about maternity leave in that it only lasts for 52 weeks? What about when, or if, the new laws regarding shared parental leave come in? I also think that if a woman is in a higher position in a financial institution then she'll be able to not only wangle WFH for periods but also to pay for a nanny for when she has to go into the office.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpontaneousOrder
    replied
    Not sure why stating the obvious makes the news

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Is it?

    I'd argue that employees with children will likely to be taking a lot less risks than otherwise. Maybe it should be new common sense rule for banking - "no children - no job".
    My argument still stands, hire fathers instead of mothers

    Leave a comment:


  • Zero Liability
    replied
    The reason the banks have no regard for risk aversion is because of the whole TBTF doctrine. Don't see an issue with anything Farage is saying.

    Leave a comment:


  • KentPhilip
    replied
    Surely what he is saying is a statement of fact, not opinion.
    A woman coming back to work after years off work will have lost many of their clients and will not bring in as much business as one who has retained them.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    The head of coca-cola said it a few years ago. But being a woman she got away with it.

    Less sexism - lynch the bint!

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    Isn't that just common sense?
    Is it?

    I'd argue that employees with children will likely to be taking a lot less risks than otherwise. Maybe it should be new common sense rule for banking - "no children - no job".

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    "Women who take time off work to have children are "worth less" to City employers than men, Nigel Farage has claimed.
    Isn't that just common sense? It's not because they're a woman, a man who planned to take several months off 2-4 times in a decade would be equally less valuable than one who was committed to their work above other things?

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    started a topic Farageing for attention - mumsnet special

    Farageing for attention - mumsnet special

    Ukip leader says women working in City can do as well, if not better, than men if they don't take time off after childbirth



    "Women who take time off work to have children are "worth less" to City employers than men, Nigel Farage has claimed.

    In a speech on Europe, he argued there is no longer discrimination against women in financial institutions and suggested gender imbalances are caused by female employees making "different choices" for "biological reasons".

    The UK Independence party leader claimed women are able to do as well - if not better – than men but only if they are prepared to sacrifice family life.

    "In many, many cases, women make different choices in life to the ones that men make simply for biological reasons," he said.

    "If a woman has a client base and has a child and takes two or three years off work, she is worth far less to the employer when she comes back than when she goes away because her client base cannot be stuck rigidly to her.

    "I don't believe that in the big banks and brokerage houses and Lloyds of London and everyone else in the City, I do not believe there is any discrimination against women at all."

    Source: Nigel Farage: women must sacrifice family life to succeed in finance | Politics | theguardian.com





    And they complained that elections in USSR did not have alternative candidates
    Last edited by AtW; 20 January 2014, 20:20.

Working...
X