Infosys must face claims it told recruiter not to hire women with kids 'at home' A US judge has rejected IT outsourcer Infosys's motions to dismiss claims of a former recruiter that the company discriminated and retaliated against her. Jill Prejean, a specialist at recruiting hard-to-find executives, says she was hired by Infosys in 2018 at the age of 59 to find workers for its $1 billion-a-year consulting …
"The best excuse to get out of work is to have kids" - Scott Adams. ( I think i quoted it correctly)
I bring my kids to work, it is good for them to understand what work is. My guys/gals need time off for kids, they work from home. They get stuff done in between and still get paid without burning sick time. They come to work to have time off FROM the kids.
Best excuse ever was COVID. I still use it on occasions.
Don't want to take on the job, sorry COVID.
Customer is a pain in the butt, COVID.
Obviosity going to lose money on the job, sorry COVID supply chain issues.
Kin want you to just "stop by" because their computer is not acting right, Sorry COVID.
Due to COVID, I have gone from a 70 hr week to 40 or less, same pay.
Nothing new in the land of cold and calculating management. They would only hire eunuchs if they could. That's what they learned to do by the cold, calculating, sexist beasts at Uni that taught them it's fine to do it.
This is not only a jab at management. Most of us working in IT should take our heads out of our bottoms too and realize that for all our talk of inclusiveness there are still deep-rooted prejudices against foreigners, women and older working people. It's time to stop and adopt a more inclusive approach to our colleagues regardless of sex. This is not a white man's job. IT is for many of us the best opportunity to work due to stay-at-home parenting, disabilities or economic reasons and no one should be considered lesser for doing so.
I would add not all carers are women, but the article does not mention if they discriminated if a man was a carer.
You are right they only want robots who will no life the job, burn you up and spit you out.
Could be a blessing in disguise them not hiring women, they do not have to face the toxic work environment there, but that does not make it right.
Wrong: "Do you have any kids?"
Right: "Are you able to commit to a fixed rigid work schedule?"
The company doesn't actually care whether the prospect has kids or not. The company cares if the employee will have to take time away from work to attend to kids.
Of course, any company that asks either of those questions is probably one you don't want to work for.
I am only a small business with 3 employees. But recently I advertised for new job applicants, I specifically stated (as advised) that there be NO identifying info included in their C.V. I also stated (for good measure) I don't want to know their gender, age, ethnicity or sexuality or whatever. I stupidly thought I was safe.
I am now being sued by a female because I rejected her application. You see, she included all of the above in her C.V. So I rejected it on the grounds that she didn't send a correct C.V. as she obviously cannot read and understand written instructions.
My solicitor tells me I will lose and it will cost me serious money. And have maybe been set up? I don't know about that but from now on, I will only employ people I know. Am I wrong in doing so? Yes. I am. But can you blame me?
So, no, it isn't easy to employ people. Infact, I have killed the job vacancy. I will do it myself.
Depends what the litigant was told, which isn't mentioned above.
At face value, there is no case to answer and in some jurisdictions the solicitor should be asking for the action to be treated as vexatious.
However there's a lot of important detail omitted that could mean the OP would definitely lose.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
