|
April 29, 2003
| Politics |
|
Ginger and Ampersand have been discussing a case where a faculty member came in from maternity leave to be a part of an interview panel for a candidate for a faculty position. The woman brought her child and, during the interview, proceeded to nurse the baby. Ampersand argues that "no-babies-at-meetings ethic is leftover from an older and sexist world" and that "[s]aying that a parent-with-infant cannot attend such a meeting is an unfair burden on parents". I disagree. Miss Manners says "Babies do not belong at work or at adult social events" (page 227) and she's absolutely right.
I come at this from a high-tech manager's perspective in a Fortune 300 company, so some of what I think is probably not relevant to the actual case, which involves a woman in an academic position. As a manager I am willing to make reasonable accommodations for my employee's families, but I don't think this is a reasonable accommodation.
As a manager, I'd be really annoyed at my employee who pulled a stunt like this when she was a panel member. Depending on how it had happened, I might not say anything beyond reminding the interviewer that the company had a policy against children in the workplace. It might depend on how much pressure I'd put on her to make herself available while on leave to attend this interview.
My initial reaction to this is that, as a manager, I don't need anyone's opinion so badly that they should have to come in from leave to provide it. The employee is on leave because she cannot fulfill her job obligations due to the need of (in this case) her infant child. It's a company benefit (mandated by the government, but still) that she is taking advantage of to provide that care for her child. It's likely that even asking her to come off leave is a potential FMLA violation, especially if she isn't willing to do so or has stated that she will come back at some later date. If she cannot be separated from her dependent child for long enough to conduct the interview, then I will not require her to do so.
It's also worth looking at how this behavior affects my search to fill the vacancy in my department. Having this candidate before a panel interview means he (in this case) has already passed a resume screen, and two phone screens (one by HR and one by a department member) at a minimum. We've invested quite a bit in this candidate and are strongly considering hiring him. We think he's close enough that we're willing to take the time of a group of otherwise busy professionals to interview him. We may have flown him in from out of state. I need someone now (we never hired beyond our needs). This is a costly process. If it were cheap and easy, HR wouldn't have a directive to reduce turnover. And my employee has disrupted it. Thanks.
Disrupted. She may not have derailed it, but she's increased my costs in filling my position. Some candidates might not accept an offer on the basis of "that's not the kind of place I want to work". Some might want more money. Some might accept, but not get along well with my employee. I have to spend some time thinking about my response. I'll probably talk to a peer or mentor in management about "this happened, how do you think I should respond". I may end up talking to HR about it. It may affect team morale, which will affect productivity, especially if her coworkers think she got special privileges regarding her child. I may have to deal with other interviewees who are worried/upset about her behavior. Again, how I deal with this will depend on if I was out of line in suggesting it in the first place.
It's not out of the question that the employer could be sued. Suppose the candidate claims that this was religious or gender based discrimination designed to prevent him from performing well enough at the job interview to obtain the job he was clearly qualified for? Whatever the merits of the case, I don't want to fight that. My department has lots to do and we're already understaffed.
The expectations of workplace behavior are commonly known and also explictly spelled out in HR documents. Children in the workplace are frowned upon, but permissible in emergency situations (which this was not), assuming they are properly behaved.
Don't make me ask HR to send a memo.
|
| .:Posted by Michael on April 29, 2003 1:50 PM:.
|
The thing is, I'd say the commonly known "expectations of workplace behavior" are part of the problem to be solved, not a positive thing we should all accept without questioning.
I wish you had responded to my line of reasoning about how current "expectations of workplace behavior" were designed for a Father Knows Best world. With all due respect, I feel that your post isn't really responding to any of the points I made.
| .:Posted by Ampersand
( total) on April 30, 2003 7:14 AM:. |
Expectations of workplace behavior have to do with a lot of things, one of which is what is needed to get actual work done. Barry, you don't understand the difference between "reasonable accomodations" and "unreasonable accomodations". That is the inherent response to your point: the woman is asking for/insisting on an unreasonable accommodation.
There are ways for a woman who is breastfeeding to participate in a meeting that don't involve her disrupting everyone else's work. That's a point you keep missing. I wish you'd actually address it.
| .:Posted by Ginger
( total) on April 30, 2003 10:53 AM:. |
Well, where do the ideas of what is or isn't a "reasonable accomodation" come from? In this case, I have argued that the idea that allowing breastfeeding in a meeting is "unreasonable" comes not from anything "inherant," as you imply, but from a sexist society.
You say that "there are ways for a woman who is breastfeeding to participate in a meeting that don't involve her disrupting everyone else's work." But your statement assumes that the mere act of breastfeeding does disrupt everyone else's work; but I don't think that's true. I think that it's completely possible (and "reasonable") to accomplish work in the same room as a breastfeeding baby, and I don't understand why you think otherwise.
The plain fact is, some (admittedly liberal) workplaces do allow breastfeeding babies in the workplace, and they nonetheless get work done.
| .:Posted by Ampersand
( total) on May 1, 2003 8:09 AM:. |
