Businesses May Have To Have 'Menopause' Policies.

[Chekhov]

9 minutes ago, melthebell said:

My bold, no that's not what he's saying. 

So what is he saying ?

[melthebell]

3 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

So what is he saying ?

read what he said again and work it out

[Chekhov]

 

2 minutes ago, melthebell said:

read what he said again and work it out

2 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

Just to nail my colours to the mast, work is about more than productivity. People are humans not machines. If someone's performance dips as a result of something out of there control, so be it. Allowances should be made, and if legal protection for those allowances is required, then they should be implemented.

I am doing, and I questioned it thus :

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

This is the thin end of a very long wedge.

You appear to be saying that even if someone cannot do a job as well as would normally be expected than if it is for something beyond their control they should be allowed to do the job anyway ?

Would that be a correct interpretation of what you have said ?

And if it is, who is expected to pay for the lack of productivity that results ?

The state ? Or the employer ?

 

Just out of interest, what constitutes "out of their control" ? What about someone who is morbidly obese ?

 

Edited March 28, 2022 by Chekhov

[Mister M]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

This is the thin end of a very long wedge.

You appear to be saying that even if someone cannot do a job as well as would normally be expected than if it is for something beyond their control they should be allowed to do the job anyway ?

Would that be a correct interpretation of what you have said ?

And if it is, who is expected to pay for the lack of productivity that results ?

The state ? Or the employer ?

 

Just out of interest, what constitutes "out of their control" ? What about someone who is morbidly obese ?

 

The menopause is a minefield.

I know some women who refuse to accept that it has affected them, for example they deny it has made them more irritable or short tempered. So, for women who do not accept the menopause has affected them, would they still be covered by the allowances you say should be made for those suffering during the menopause ?

I've no idea, I've not thought about the specifics, but it needs to be handled with sensitivity. Many people experience mental health difficulties, suffer a bereavement, or fall prey to cancer each of which can impact on how someone functions at work....

I suppose I was responding to your opening gambit about people being tied in knots because of an apparent contradiction, when there really isn't one.

[Anna B]

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

Here's one that is going to tie some feminists in knots.

 

On the one hand they say that women are every bit as good as men and should have the same pay, conditions and job opportunities. Basically they should be treated exactly the same.

 

But on the other allowance should apparently be made for a woman's work performance dropping off during the menopause. In fact at this very moment the UK Parliament's  Women & Equalities Committee is considering giving menopausal women additional legal protections in the work place.

 

Just to nail my colours to the mast, I do not think men or women are "better", they are just different. There are some jobs that women tend to be able to do better than men, and vice verse. But it goes without saying I think men and women doing the same job with the same degree of competence and productivity should get the same pay.

Menopause symptoms can be easily relieved with HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy,) but it's not always offered to all women. I don't know why, if there are no medical contraindications, it should be.

[Bargepole23]

6 hours ago, Mr Bloke said:

Oh dear!

Let me guess...

... either another University or Council employee?

Electrical engineering subcontractor.

 

Not that it's relevant.

 

Your job is?

Edited March 28, 2022 by Bargepole23

[Bargepole23]

4 hours ago, Chekhov said:

This is the thin end of a very long wedge.

You appear to be saying that even if someone cannot do a job as well as would normally be expected than if it is for something beyond their control they should be allowed to do the job anyway ?

Would that be a correct interpretation of what you have said ?

And if it is, who is expected to pay for the lack of productivity that results ?

The state ? Or the employer ?

 

Just out of interest, what constitutes "out of their control" ? What about someone who is morbidly obese ?

 

The menopause is a minefield.

I know some women who refuse to accept that it has affected them, for example they deny it has made them more irritable or short tempered. So, for women who do not accept the menopause has affected them, would they still be covered by the allowances you say should be made for those suffering during the menopause ?

It's a medical condition, not a minefield.

 

As for making allowances, if someone needs a bit of leeway for a period of time for a medical condition then a reasonable employer will allow it. If that time becomes extensive then there are procedures in place in most professional organisations to manage the situation. Or are you suggesting that to avoid this thin end of the wedge we should all go to work, work flat out for our alloted time, regardless of any ailments or conditions we may have?

 

Sorry, but life isn't that black and white. Stuff happens, and most people understand that and make allowances.

[Bargepole23]

3 hours ago, Anna B said:

Menopause symptoms can be easily relieved with HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy,) but it's not always offered to all women. I don't know why, if there are no medical contraindications, it should be.

That's quite a bold and all encompassing statement to make. No exceptions to that rule?

5 hours ago, Chekhov said:

This is the thin end of a very long wedge.

You appear to be saying that even if someone cannot do a job as well as would normally be expected than if it is for something beyond their control they should be allowed to do the job anyway ?

Would that be a correct interpretation of what you have said ?

And if it is, who is expected to pay for the lack of productivity that results ?

The state ? Or the employer ?

 

Just out of interest, what constitutes "out of their control" ? What about someone who is morbidly obese ?

 

The menopause is a minefield.

I know some women who refuse to accept that it has affected them, for example they deny it has made them more irritable or short tempered. So, for women who do not accept the menopause has affected them, would they still be covered by the allowances you say should be made for those suffering during the menopause ?

The employer pays for reduced productivity,  manages the situation, and keeps a valued employee. That's what happens in good professional organisations.

[Mr Bloke]

32 minutes ago, Bargepole23 said:

It's a medical condition, not a minefield.

 

As for making allowances, if someone needs a bit of leeway for a period of time for a medical condition then a reasonable employer will allow it. If that time becomes extensive then there are procedures in place in most professional organisations to manage the situation. Or are you suggesting that to avoid this thin end of the wedge we should all go to work, work flat out for our alloted time, regardless of any ailments or conditions we may have?

 

Sorry, but life isn't that black and white. Stuff happens, and most people understand that and make allowances.

Hmmm...

Now I find this very puzzling!

Not that I'm doubting your honesty, but if you are indeed an electrical engineering subcontractor, then wouldn't that mean that you'd be classed as self-employed by HMRC?

And the relevance of this would be that if you don't turn up for work, you don't get paid.

So you should know first hand that contractors do indeed work flat out for their alloted time regardless of any ailments they have...

... unless apparently, they're employed in the public sector.

[Guest sibon]

Just to nail my colours to the trendy mast, I'd like to point out that feeding Justin the subtle troll is a fool's game.

 

See the covid threads, the Audi thread and others for detail.

 

He's best ignored.  I know he'll have a tantrum about that suggestion, but just put it down to his hormones.

Edited March 28, 2022 by sibon