SAHM Reentering the Work Force - What not to do

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the consensus is to just respond to any question of absence in employment with what?

Ha! The consensus apparently is DON'T STAY HOME WITH THE KIDS because if you do, you should just roll over and die rather than attempt to apply for employment. Staying at home for any period of time = career DEATH so DON'T DO IT!

(Although I have to say, I stayed home with kids for several years, and somehow managed to get employed thereafter. And yes, I DID address the 8 year gap on my resume in the cover letter -- briefly -- where it seemed appropriate. It really didn't seem to be a big issue, but my skills were in high demand, so I'm sure that made a difference.

Really not sure why it isn't appropriate to address this in a cover letter, but I absolutely agree you shouldn't bring up kids AT ALL in the interview. The interview should be all about the job and how you are perfect for it -- not about work life balance or time off or sick leave or how you can telecommute to make it easier to pick up your kids. Anyone who interviews talking about how their kids come first -- i can see why that person wouldn't get the job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would the question in the interview be? "Explain the gap in your resume?" , "Tell me about the past ten years?" Or would the interviewer simply ask about her latest office related experience?

I can't see how she could phrase an answer without referring to her children with the first two questions.

I can give you an example. My sister was a SAHM. During that time, however, she volunteered at a nonprofit and then sat on the board of one of her kids' pre-schools. She stayed at home fully for three years. She recently want back to work, and if this question was posed to her, she could answer (assuming she didn't put all of her volunteer work on her resume, but she did, so she actually didn't have a gap.):
"I was raising my children, and during that time I volunteered at XYZ, spearheaded and managed their ABC program which included a fundraiser A and gala B. I produced all of their marketing materials for these events as well as coordinated and managed all of the other volunteer efforts. Under my marketing strategy, our fundraiser was covered in This publication and showcased on This television program. The gala was spotlighted on That television show and appeared in 10 publications. Under my direction, these efforts raised $xyz. As a board member, I spearheaded 4 fundraising efforts, including....."
You get the point.
No one cares about your children. They care about whether they want to hire you for a job.

The "I was raising my children" part is where you would lose me. We all raise our children. Are you implying that the interviewer wasn't because she was working?

Agree.

And here is the basic issue (finally). Isn't this REALLY about the WOHM interviewer not wanting to feel like she didn't raise her kids? Look, work/life issues are tough choices, and maybe both SAH or WOH choices are imperfect. The only difference is that once the SAHM reenters the workforce, the WOHM has a mommy-powerplay moment. I think some of us on this thread are reacting to the nastiness of a WOHM/interviewer enjoying the opportunity to mock the SAHM reentering the workforce.

I stayed at home with my kids and re-entered the workforce after a number of years. I kept up my skills and even did some freelance jobs to keep up my resume. Nevertheless, interviewing with women was uncomfortable many times because of these issues. I hate to say it but men were much more non-plussed about the time away from a corporate job.

nonplussed does not mean what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Man here (again). Don't kill me for stating the obvious but it really all depends on who you are interviewing with. I love to talk about my kid; and assuming that I brought you in because I already thought you had the right skills, I'd enjoy hearing about yours. Just don't tell me that my wife and I aren't raising ours because we work full-time. I agree, it's probably different when interviewing woman-to-woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:..... and this thread is just another example of how women bend over backwards to conform themselves to a typical man's lifestyle instead of trying to change the workplace to fit the realities of women's lives.... Until the latter happens things will not change for women.

What a hoot. There are women-owned businesses that do fit the realities of women's lives already and have been for years. They don't work full time and/or traditional hours. Ever heard of Section 8(a) businesses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, I don't want to work with someone who thinks I didn't raise my children properly because I chose to work. I don't think those kinds of women deserve to work. I'd rather hire someone else.

I said it.

Do you work because you love what you do or because you need to work to survive?

Both. I need the money. But if I didn't, I would still work. Your point? I'm interested.

Let me say, another reason I wouldn't want to work with such a person is because I generally find people that hold that kind of opinion to be close-minded. Not an asset in the workplace, and often a liability. And someone who made that kind of opinion known in an interview? Not very good judgment on their part.

My attitude and opinions were similar to yours when I hated my job and was working to pay the bills. Now that I am happier with my career, I changed career fields, I feel a lot differently. I think my view was changed by the lack of work ethic of my old co-workers. I was a bitter worker at the time which fit with the workplace environment that I was in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed a lovely woman who explained a four year gap in her resume by saying that she took time off as the only child to care for her terminally ill mother. Had no problem hiring her (and she's doing great!). That's way different that a SAHP situation though.

Why is it different for purposes of hiring and employment?

Because the mother is dead. The kids that caused the mom to SAH are presumably still alive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" The gala was spotlighted on That television show and appeared in 10 publications. Under my direction, these efforts raised $xyz"

Gala shit?

Yes, that's what they called it. A Gala. What's the problem?

Gala says fluffy, not bottom line business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed a lovely woman who explained a four year gap in her resume by saying that she took time off as the only child to care for her terminally ill mother. Had no problem hiring her (and she's doing great!). That's way different that a SAHP situation though.

Why is it different for purposes of hiring and employment?

Because the mother is dead. The kids that caused the mom to SAH are presumably still alive.

But if the kids are in school full time, wouldn't it make sense to seek employment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the consensus is to just respond to any question of absence in employment with what?

The consensus is to address it briefly, and move on quickly to your quals and accomplishments.

[Anonymous]

This thread is really degenerating into simple minded stereotypes. Really, all SAHM are idiots and all WOHM hate their kids? Really, that's what this thread has become. It's idiotic. Recognize that life isn't that black and white - or rigid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed a lovely woman who explained a four year gap in her resume by saying that she took time off as the only child to care for her terminally ill mother. Had no problem hiring her (and she's doing great!). That's way different that a SAHP situation though.

Why is it different for purposes of hiring and employment?

Because the mother is dead. The kids that caused the mom to SAH are presumably still alive.

This cannot and should not impact a hiring decision. Try again, how is it different from hiring and employment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Man here (again). Don't kill me for stating the obvious but it really all depends on who you are interviewing with. I love to talk about my kid; and assuming that I brought you in because I already thought you had the right skills, I'd enjoy hearing about yours. Just don't tell me that my wife and I aren't raising ours because we work full-time. I agree, it's probably different when interviewing woman-to-woman.

I think my husband would agree with you. It pisses him off that people think working families aren't raising their kids. So, just saying, it's not only a mother you're going to offend with the wrong choice of words. It's a husband and father too. Or, it could be a childless person who really hates kids!

The point is, don't be tactless and try to know as much about the person you're interviewing with as you can. Finally, I think the consensus is to focus on your skills and don't feel like you have to justify your decision to stay home with any kind of explanation. You DON'T. It's not even worth opening that can of worms because you don't know who might think what about your reasons.

[Anonymous]

OP (the real one) here. Wow, cant beleive that this is on page 11. Seems like there are some follow-up posts being attibuted to me so I want to point out that is my third post on this thread (have been busy reviewing resumes). I will ask Jeff to take this down or lock it bc its taken a turn that I did not intend.

Pack to the pile.

[Anonymous]

" Isn't this REALLY about the WOHM interviewer not wanting to feel like she didn't raise her kids?"

It's not a feeling. If you don't concede that WOHMs do, in fact, raise their children, we have nothing to talk about. It's that WOHMs manage to raise their children and work. And please don't say WOHMs have help raising their children, but SAHMs don't, because that's no universal truth in that regard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP (the real one) here. Wow, cant beleive that this is on page 11. Seems like there are some follow-up posts being attibuted to me so I want to point out that is my third post on this thread (have been busy reviewing resumes). I will ask Jeff to take this down or lock it bc its taken a turn that I did not intend.

Pack to the pile.

really? I am a WOHM and I find that comment disingenous.