most offensive questions ever asked in job interviews

Not too sure if this is 'Fake News'...  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/a1f7cf00-2417-422f-afaf-f8cbbb44fa8e?intc_type=singletheme&intc_location=bbcthree&intc_campaign=bbcthree&intc_linkname=article_interview_questions_contentcard18

Is it fake? Possibly, but I've been asked throughout my working life by quite a lot of employers (mostly men) if I planned to have children or if I have any children. I'm glad when an employer asks such questions because it gives me a measure of how willing they are to break the law - i.e in the interview. It then makes me wonder what other laws they are willing to break

On a side point Absolut, I have found at most places I have work that parent's, on the whole seem to have a better work ethos? So you would think it would be a benefit to the company to employ a parent... Just have to weigh that up against the maternity- leave required?

El-dudeareno wrote:On a side point Absolut, I have found at most places I have work that parent's, on the whole seem to have a better work ethos? So you would think it would be a benefit to the company to employ a parent... Just have to weigh that up against the maternity- leave required?

As someone without children, I think my work ethos (whatever that is) is equal to that of any parent. In one office I worked in (dim and distant past) there was this woman (desk next to mine) with adult daughters who once spent her entire afternoon yacking on the phone to her 19 year old daughter who had experienced some minor tiff with her boyfriend. She was not exactly getting any work done and, because of this yacking ruining my concentration, neither was I.  

El-dudeareno wrote:On a side point Absolut, I have found at most places I have work that parent's, on the whole seem to have a better work ethos? So you would think it would be a benefit to the company to employ a parent... Just have to weigh that up against the maternity- leave required?

I suppose it's down to individual business practices. Some see parenthood as an indication of reliability and a worker having "family values". That view is debatable, of course. Others see female staff as the ones who tend to take time off to deal with a child's ill health etc and such needs tend to cause business interruption that they need to take into account. Other employers don't want to hire a woman who then gets pregnant shortly after commencing the role and  takes maternity leave forcing the employer to cover the gap. I am aware that there are lots of reasons for the question but that doesn't negate the fact that such a question, in an interview, is illegal. They still ask it even though interviewers don't ask a man the same question because they know a man can't get pregnant nor do they tend to be the parent that takes time off work to care for an ill child (although not in all instances). All it does is highlight to me that women in the workplace is "problematic" for employers and no law is going to stop them considering how a woman's family life might impact on their bottom line. I am not saying that such an attitude is fair or unfair, only that it exists.

As a balance and to show that it's not only men who act wrongfully I was once interviewed by 3 women for a student placement where they grilled me about my political views in an aggressive and offensive manner. I was told in no uncertain terms that I was not welcome on their course. All 3 of them were leftist feminists.

[quote="Absolut"]

El-dudeareno wrote:Other employers don't want to hire a woman who then gets pregnant shortly after commencing the role and  takes maternity leave forcing the employer to cover the gap.

I know of a few women who have not mentioned their pregnancy until after they have started the job ... while some employers don't want to hire females who are going to get pregnant 'soon' after they start work (actively trying), they should still have some protection against the ones who do this imo