UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom introduced himself in the Strasbourg parliament on Wednesday with a warning to small businesses against employing women of child-bearing age.
“No self-respecting small businessman with a brain in the right place would ever employ a lady of child-bearing age,” he said.
Having been appointed to the European Parliament’s women’s rights committee on Tuesday, Bloom said he intended to use his position to promote men’s rights.
Based in York, Bloom has worked as a research director for TBO Corporate Benefits Consultants and built up a career as a speaker on financial economics. But now appears to have taken on board more domestic concerns after telling journalists he wanted to deal with women’s issues because, “I just don’t think they clean behind the fridge enough.”
He continued: “I am here to represent Yorkshire women who always have dinner on the table when you get home. I am going to promote men’s rights.”
He later told the BBC that his comments were intended as a bit of fun to illustrate the serious point that equal rights legislation was having the unintended consequence of putting women out of work.
Bloom’s outburst provoked a sharp response from other parties. Labour MEP Glenys Kinnock, told the BBC: “We know UKIP are Neanderthal in their attitudes, but it is absolutely terrifying that Mr Bloom can fly in the face of what we have worked and fought for, to establish equal opportunities and rights for women.”
“It looks like it is time for a ride back to the 1950s on the UKIP time machine, to the golden age of women’s rights and opportunities,” added Liberal Democrat leader Chris Davies.
Bloom did succeed, however, in catapulting the issue of discrimination into the limelight, giving HR managers an ideal opportunity to champion their role in dealing with these sensitive issues.
What are your views on maternity issues and women’s career opportunities within smaller businesses? Have you ever encountered similar opinions from other directors and managers? And if so, how did you deal with the situation?
Share your thoughts with the community using the ‘Post a Comment’ button below.
16 Responses
New policy proposals
Some good news – the Government has begun to take notice that it’s paternity leave policy is failing and is proposing to take a tiny step towards reducing inequality by increasing paternity pay from the current pittance to the respectable 90% of pay that women enjoy for the first part of their maternity leave. At last there is some recognition that fathers who want to take time off to help with their new born children need a realistic level of financial support and that many, especially the lower paid simply can’t afford to manage on the current paternity pay.
The MEP was highlighting the potential negative impact on women
Helen,
What the MEP was trying to do – besides, I suspect, gain publicity – was to highlight that inequality in maternity / paternity rights gives employers a reason to discriminate against women. I don’t agree with his method – you can’t promote the case for equality by insulting half the population. His comments turned everyones attention away from the real issue – if we promote equal maternity / paternity / parental rights to time off employers will have one less reason to discriminate – and that’s in everyones interests.
The MEP attack is on Women….not Men
Alan
The point is not about equality for men it is about what, on balance, do SME businesses loose or gain by employing Women of “Child Bearing Age”. The MEP seems to suggest this practice is detrimental to this sub-sector of the business community. I happen to disagree as you can tell from my comments. Fathers rights are some way off track and having worked with such issues would say this is an issue best dealt with on a case by case basis. Some Dads are great and others are a serious threat. That also goes for Mums and likewise needs to be dealt with individually within the conext of the family.
No one posesses anyone else. Each child is a citizen in their own right and is entitled to be considered as such. We, all of us have responsibilities toward them to keep them safe and thriving and sometimes Dad may be in the driving seat, sometimes Mum or even someone else entirely. What works best for the child is paramount.
Sweeping statments about Men being unable to afford to take paternity leave and then to use the abuse that happens to Women as some justification for Men to not take up their rights is an odd position to take. Please, the men I know have no trouble whatever ensuring they get their entitlement. What kind of rights are these that Men are suddenly cowering to bullies? Are you suggesting Men want equality but then will be too nervous to claim it? If Women were treated without discrimination presumably they would have maternity pay and the family finances would stand more of a chance of meeting demands at this time. So, backing Women’s rights would seem helpful to all families, regardless of the Father, yet still helpful to him if he is there taking his role seriously.
Men finding paternity leave would be hamful to their career? Listen again to the MEP comments…..Women wouldn’t even have a job if he was taken seriously! Thankfully, most business leaders understand what makes profits and couldn’t do without Women’s contribution.
To Ebay….or not? There is tax fraud, benefit fraud, Credit card fraud to name just a few. We wouldn’t serioulsy consider witholding a great benefit to the many simply because in theory someone (Mum or Dad) may commit fraud? It would be one daft offender who actually advertised the fact….. At what point will we be withdrawing welfare rights exactly? Now tax…… That’s an idea!
To bin or not to bin – that isn’t the question as I’ve already b
Helen,
To make the decision about “parental” leave and care arrangements a joint one is exactly what I suggested in “A Widely Held View”.
What I queried was how you can make the choice of “carer” wider without potentially empowering the “mother” to disenfranchise the babys father. This is particularly pertinent when the father is not living with the mother or if the mother is living with a third party. The principle of joint decisions is laudable but as the saying goes “possession is nine tenths of the law” and fathers are already routinely denied access to their children by thousands of mothers in this country.
Did you look into the reasons why men don’t take full advantage of their “paternity leave” rights before demeaning men by concluding that many don’t take this aspect of work life balance seriously? If you had you would know that many simply can’t afford to have their wages reduced to the statutory paternity pay at the time when their family is incurring all the costs associated with a new baby and may well have lost some of the mothers earnings.
Then there is the fact that many fathers simply don’t know their rights while others fear that taking paternity leave could be harmful to their career. You only have to look at recent high profile tribunal cases where women have suffered discrimination following maternity and you can understand why many men feel it is too risky to demand their rights at a time when they need to maximise their earnings in order to provide for their family.
As in our society many fathers aren’t living with the mother of their child and may not even know that it has been born take up of paternity leave is always likely to be less than 100%. Add to these points the cases where the mother wants someone else to help her because the father can only be there for 2 weeks and it’s no wonder that the take up is so low. Better publicity and longer paternity leave would go some way to redressing the balance.
I did not say (or mean to imply) that all women would automatically resort to sales (of “parental leave rghts”) on E Bay. In the context of a series of points about the potential for fraud that allowing mothers to nominate their carer raises (the potential for multiple claims for “paternity” leave is already a matter of fact – see the “Father Dear Father Article”) I asked how long it would be before this happened. This was not intended to demean women – my point was that where there is a financial incentive there will always be someone willing or needy enough to take advantage of it.
Carers V Fathers pt3
Alan
You may of had a partial point if Fathers used the paternity rights they already have but reality checks shows they do not. See recent report of the same. In the real world the carer is often another woman after child birth…. Mum, Aunty, Sister or Friend. Whilst I heartily agree Fathers should take equal responsiility particularly as there are huge pay backs in bonding and future relationships with their children the reality is there are many men who do not take this aspect of lifework balance seriously or simply feel there is someone else who can help better. Shouldn’t the decision about who is the carer be a joint one? To suggest women will automatically resort to sales on ebay is to demean women generally and as such these comments belong alongside those of this very silly MEP- filed in B1N.
Carers v Fathers – part 2
Helen,
Although, as a man, I’ve never given birth I have children and understand the need for a woman to have time off to recover from the birth etc. My suggestion, that both mothers and fathers should receive “parental leave” that they can transfer between them, allows each couple to decide how best to care for both mother and child.
I agree with your point that “carers” can be of either sex but we need to be careful about the practical application of any legal right to time off. Sharing the right to time off between the mother and father keeps things simple. Even extending the right to time off to a “partner of either sex that you are living with”, who isn’t the father, raises the issue of what rights the father should have – potentially adding to the cost employers have to bear.
If you let the mother nominate her “carer” what is to stop all of her relatives, friends, neighbours etc claiming paid time off as “carers”? In practice how could you limit the number of “carers” that the mother was able to nominate and stop it becoming a paid holiday for everyone she knows? How long would it be before mothers were offering to sell “carers rights to time off” on EBay to help pay towards the cost of bring up their child?
Then there is the issue of equality – if mothers can select their “carer” what rights should the father have to time off to be with his child and in deciding who should look after it? You don’t achieve equality by giving mothers rights which deny fathers the opportunity to care for their child or a say in any decision about the care arrangements. A new arrival puts enough strain on relationships without adding another potential source of conflict.
Have you ever given birth?
Just to make a point….Women need physical time to recover from the process of giving birth…she needs time for her body to recover and to adjust to one that is geared to feed a child. If the time off for any carer of either sex is granted then that would be more like equal ops. In my experience it can often be a female family member who helps out so perhaps choices should be wider than the parents to those of the Mother carer.
A widely held view?
Mr Bloom has succeeded in getting people talking about this issue and he has made a serious point which deserves discussion, even if his method was inappropriate. I have encountered his views throughout my career, but mainly voiced by childless career women – most men wouldn’t dare to say such a thing for fear of sex discrimination claims.
EEC and UK employment law on maternity / paternity discriminates against men. As a consequence selecting a male candidate means that the potential cost and disruption that will be incurred if the employee has a baby is minimised. This is because paternity brings far fewer rights under employment law than maternity. This could be a significant factor in the selection decisions made by small businesses, who are less likely to have the resources to cope with long term absence.
It’s time to move to real equality – both mothers and fathers should have equal amounts of “parental leave” which they can transfer between them according to their personal needs and preferences. This would offer both both parents the opportunity to spend time on child care – a right all but denied to most fathers unless they give up work. Both employers would pay their share of the “parental leave benefit” whether or not their employee takes the time off – sharing the cost more fairly than the current system where only the mothers employer pays and minimising any temptation for employers to discriminate.
Finally, for Glynis Kinnock to talk about equality is a joke – UK and EEC equal opportunities legislation has been driven by “womens rights” not equality and Labour champions women (where is the Minister for Men?) not equality between the sexes.
How much are we paying for this MEP?
Compare the time lost to maternity leave to the time lost to backaches, stress, malingering, colds, flu’, headaches, traffic congestion, holding meetings, reading the sports news, playing PC video games….
If Mr Bloom, or any or the commentators who have responded so far, were trying to make a serious point, there would have been more statistics and few emotional reactions. How many women really do take 52 weeks leave? If this is a poorly formed law, who created it? Housewives?
But suggesting that we sideline half the productive employment base as a means of improving the country’s standard of living is totally illogical.
Women Belong in the House
Of course Women belong in the House…. The House of Commons, the House of Lords and anywhere else decision making affecting their quality of life is taking place.
Oh, and by the way, you have no hope of delivering creative and meaningful products without women, after all they are majority shoppers and citizens in UK. But then you really ought to pay attention to your marketing boys. You know the customer is right and if you can’t deliver…. we know a woman who can.
Can’t fault the logic
Godfrey Bloom may have made his point in an inflammatory way but you can’t fault his logic. Faced with two candidates with equal ability, experience, competence, personality match and any other factors you want to consider, it makes more sense to pick the one that has no legal right to take a year off when they have a child.
The problem is caused by the fact that the maternity regulations are very non-PC. They make the sexist assumption that women do the child care and men stay at work (except maybe for a two week period when the kid is born). A partial solution is to treat parents equally and allow men the same rights a women. Allow them to choose and don’t make an outdated sexist assumption for them.
Overcrowding the Kitchens
Would the UKIP have been as successful if this comment were published prior to the Euro Elections. I doubt it
Shockingly un-PC? Great!
‘Political Correctness’ has never been a virtue. By it’s title you can see that when something is ‘politically correct’ or ‘PC’, then, like politicians, it is unlikely to be truthful, open or honest. Godfrey Bloom is intentionally using inflammatory comments (quite succesfully judging by some of the reactions here) and a little humour to make a point. And the point is simple. EU legislation on maternity rights will make a small employer stop and think before they hire a woman of child bearing age if they have another candidate of equal ability. It’s called risk management. It has nothing to do with ability, but everything to do with the risk of 26 weeks paid maternity leave followed by the potential for another 26 weeks unpaid. This would be crippling for some small businesses and those that deny it obviously wouldn’t recognise a P&L account if it smacked them in the face.
So the debate should be about how small employers can be supported within this regime. That is his real point, and it is a good one.
Life in the 1950’s
It’s nice to see that the world has moved on even though the UKIP haven’t. The comments made by Mr Bloom are obviously in keeping with the UKIP policies following those made earlier in the year by Mr. Kilroy-Silk.
A Women’s place
I agree with the sentiment Mr. Bloom expresses, although I remain a firm oponent of his party and their other policies. A woman’s place is in the kitchen, and their absence from the home is leading to poor emotional upbrining of children. Women should be encouraged to stay at home and look after the children rather than persue their business careers. What’s more they should spend more time looking after their men, who are by nature their superiors.
Employment is about skills and attributes, not gender or age.
The comments of MEP Bloom are not only shockingly un-PC, they also reflect a deep level of ignorance about how to run an effective business. EVERY business leader is accutely interested in the performance and profitability of their company.
Hiring the best person for the job (for every role / level and in every type of company) and managing them most effectively is one of the best ways to ensure that your company performs well and operates profitably. Getting the best people to perform their best so that company performs its best has nothing to do with their age, their gender or their reproductive ability.
However, it does has everything to do with the person’s skills, their personal attributes and personality, their interpersonal effectiveness, the company’s goals and operating environment and equally (or indeed more importantly) the effectiveness of leadership and management.
Perhaps politicians should also be put through the rigourous assessments for selection and development that people in business have found to be so successful (i.e., competency-based interviews, ability tests, personality questionnaires and a demonstrable track record of past success). That way we would have a much better chance of being able to predict their suitability for the job – whether they’re of child-bearing age/gender or not.