Any of you legal types around ?

[Wolfpack Bitch]

I'm trying to figure out if I'm being discriminated against here. Company I work for has a position, AAM (associate area manager) which is a position I've held before and a step above where I am now. It would come with a small raise and that lil' old bit of rank and power. I never wanted to leave that position but was backed into it because I'd just lost my 'anytime' sitter who was fired for neglecting the kidlet. The job would involve me being on call 24/7 and my boss doesn't think I'm able to do that because of aforementioned kidlet. Very very rarely is there a time when I'd be called out at odd times, at this point I think he's just making excuses. But he's said that is the one thing keeping me from the job. I'm more than able to do it (he's said that as well) I'm even able, per him, to do the job above the AAM job. Again, because of his concerns about me getting a last minute sitter in the middle of the night, should the situation arise.. I don't have a chance at it.

I'm more than a little pissed off right now, even more so because I broke down and started crying on the phone. F***ing hate when that happens.. stupid female emotions !

So, should I just take the raise that they're putting through for me. It'll bring me up to over $14 an hour.. and just deal with it from there.

Should I go through with the applications I've filled out online for Sears and Lowes, see what they have to offer .. etc.


I officially stepped down from my Team Leader spot today, effective 2 Sundays from now. I'll finish up the stores that I'm committed to running. Set my Area Manager ( a good friend ) and my District Manager into a panic.. which got me a 30 minute call from the DM about it all.

It just really jacks me when I'm the first one they call for help in the office. When the last Area Manager got fired, I was the one that went in to pick up the slack.. yet they don't give me the freaking title that goes with. Add insult to injury, they hired an AAM off the street who knows NOTHING of the company, inventories, systems or equipment.

[EvilMasterBetty, Esq.]

IMO you have a dicey case at best, simply for the fact you're not necessarily being denied based on gender, but a situation. For example, a single father in your same situation can also be denied since he would also not be able to find a sitter.

In all honesty you would have a long case to play out and you probably have less than 50% chance of winning. Your employer does have a good point and does have the right to consider these factors when they decide who to promote.

[Limity (BLM)]

Agreed with EvilMasterBetty.

Now, they MIGHT be doing it because of your gender, and like you said he's just using that excuse about not having a sitter. But if you take them to court, I feel that the court will side with them, because the reason they're giving you is a valid enough one and doesn't discriminate based on your gender.

[nisi]

Actually I kind of disagree here. It is NOT legal to ask EITHER a single father OR a single mother about their child care plans. If the parent says that he or she can be on call 24/7, it absolutely IS discriminatory for the boss to rule the lovely Wolfie out because she is a mom. Children cannot legally be discussed at all. If Wolfie says she can be on call, it is none of the boss' business how she manages child care, and it IS illegal and discriminatory for them to ask her about this. They can ask her if she can leave her house in the middle of the night, etc, but they cannot reference her child directly. The boss can say that he or she is asking about a "situation" more than gender, but it is illegal for them to ask about this particular situation (i.e., what Wolfie is doing for child care). If Wolfie takes the job and then is unable to meet the demands of the job because of child care problems, she certainly can be fired for this reason, but it is illegal and discriminatory for the bosses to rule her out in advance for this.

[EvilMasterBetty, Esq.]

But if you noticed, she had to step down once already because of the sitter situation. That would give them a reason to ask it then if they reconsidered her.

I didn't say she didn't have a case, just that a court would probably side with the employer.

[nisi]

evilmasterbetty said:

But if you noticed, she had to step down once already because of the sitter situation. That would give them a reason to ask it then if they reconsidered her.

I didn't say she didn't have a case, just that a court would probably side with the employer.

True, but this is why even in workplaces where everyone loves everyone, people should never reference their personal business in terms of child care, etc. The fact that Wolfie previously left an on-call position would count against her, BUT the fact that the boss is referencing her private child care issues rather than her track record is completely and transparently illegal and discriminatory. The boss is kind of dumb, because he could easily have gotten away with saying, "We won't consider you, because you previously left a similar position." The fact that the boss is directly and openly referencing the child care issue means that a court might take it up for this discriminatory reason alone, when in fact prima facie Wolfie could be ruled out for "neutral" reasons. Referencing child care automatically cooks the boss legally, and if Wolfie pursued this I bet she would AT LEAST get a "right to sue" letter, which means the company is probably going to settle rather than pay counsel tens of thousands. It's worth pursuing.

[Wolfpack Bitch]

I probably should have filed a complaint back then as well. I also should have phrased my step down differently as well. I was the AAM, had lost my sitter but did not tell my boss about it. Was scrambling at best to find a relative willing to watch him. I was offered, and then backed into the position of salaried secretary, a pay cut.. but more steady daylight hours. One of the reasons given then by my boss was because of my babysitter situation. Ironically, 2 weeks later.. his brother had my job. He's since been fired and I'm quite sure that my boss thinks I had something to do with that. But.. that's a story for another day.

My ops manager had made mention at one time about his not being allowed to ask me about the daycare situation.

I have to give my DM an answer on Monday as to whether I think I can really handle the position. I'm wondering if I should just say yes and decline to answer any questions regarding my childcare situation. Hmmm... what's the worst they can do, demote me back to where I am now ?


You guys are great, thanks

[humanoid]

wolfpackb said:

I probably should have filed a complaint back then as well. I also should have phrased my step down differently as well. I was the AAM, had lost my sitter but did not tell my boss about it. Was scrambling at best to find a relative willing to watch him. I was offered, and then backed into the position of salaried secretary, a pay cut.. but more steady daylight hours. One of the reasons given then by my boss was because of my babysitter situation. Ironically, 2 weeks later.. his brother had my job. He's since been fired and I'm quite sure that my boss thinks I had something to do with that. But.. that's a story for another day.

My ops manager had made mention at one time about his not being allowed to ask me about the daycare situation.

I have to give my DM an answer on Monday as to whether I think I can really handle the position. I'm wondering if I should just say yes and decline to answer any questions regarding my childcare situation. Hmmm... what's the worst they can do, demote me back to where I am now ?


You guys are great, thanks

You shouldn't have to decline to answer questions about child care. I would suggest you don't take the job if there is a chance you will have a child care issue, as it would negatively effect both your job and your family. If you have someone lined up to sit for you in the off chance you get called in, then answer as such.