|
Issue No. 160 | 08 November 2002 |
A Dry Argument
Interview: Life After Keating Industrial: That Friday Feeling Bad Boss: Begging to Work Organising: Project Pilbara Unions: Off the Rails International: Brazil Turns Left Environment: Brown Wash History Special: Learning from the Past Corporate: Will the Bullying Backfire? Technology: Danger Lurks For The Passive History: In Labour�s Image Politics: Without Power Or Glory History Special: A 'Cosy Relationship' Culture: Blood Stains the Wattle Satire: Iraq Pre-empts Pre-emptive Strike Poetry: The Executive Pay Cut Review: Time Out
African Immigration Scam Widens Unions in New Economy Breakthrough Water Workers Told to Stay Home Rural Campaign Against Rail Carve-Up Seven's Deadly Sin: Email Access Denied Vic Election: It�s Bracks �v- Jeff junior Aboriginal Health Workers Denied Minimum Wage Zookeepers Settle But Pay Stink Continues Nurses Gear Up for Aged Care Action Stoppage Over Rubbish Protection Nurses Care For Themselves Too New Roster Undermines WA Prison Security ICFTU: Japan No Workers� Paradise STOP PRESS: Libs Plan $70m Arts Heist
Month In Review The Soapbox The Locker Room Indigenous Postcard Bosswatch
More Power To The Workers Us V Them In Name Only Marital Status
Labor Council of NSW |
Letters to the Editor Marital Status
Dear Sir/Madam, I have only just begun my search for a "contact" through which I can alert "somebody" about what is going on in the employment sector. I realise that what I'm about to say is probably well established but I feel (via comments from employment consultants & subsequent job interviews) that this situation is well on the increase. The situation is quite simple...employers favour married people in preference to single people. How do I know? At almost every job interview, the interviewer asks me my age & then my marital status. Quite often, the employer will endeavour to establish my marital status by the question, "Do you live alone?", or "Do you rent?". Although these questions are not directly in violation with the current laws of anti-discrimination, they certainly allude to discrimination as indicated by the Anti Discrimination Board of NSW (ADBNSW). If the issue of marital status &/or age is not relevant to a particular job then why would employers ask these questions? It appears, from my experience, that one can only answer these questions in one way, that is, to be married. Of course, this is only applicable if the employer deems you to be of an age whereby the employer thinks you should be married. It appears that employers could equate marriage with stability & perhaps morality. Employers may therefore, be indirectly discriminating against single people. Of course, the employer is forced to pay exorbitant insurance costs as well as dividends to shareholders (the choice of being a public company is a choice of "fast money" which inevitably costs workers jobs via "cost cutting" to maintain profits which must exist to keep shareholders investing). When will the cost cutting end? How much further can costs be cut before employers fail to provide a service to their customers? I tell my story in order to alert other job seekers about the ploy employers are currently using to find the "perfect" employee. I urge ALL job seekers to call the ADB if they attend a job interview & are asked about age & marital status. I did this & they recorded my situation (not recorded the conversation) which becomes a part of their statistics.
One does NOT need to lodge a complaint & I also strongly advise against this as I feel that this will greatly limit ones' job prospects. Please be sure to tell the ADB that you will feel as though you will be greatly reducing your job prospects by lodging a formal complaint. If the truth comes out via this method, the ADB will see a sharp increase in employer discrimination against single people & therefore show this in their database of results. Name Withheld
|
Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
© 1999-2002 Workers Online |
|