Debate as Recruiter Rejects Stay-At-Home Mom Due to 10-Year Job Gap in CV

A recruiter refusing to put a stay-at-home mom forward for a job role is splitting opinions online.

In a post to Mumsnet's Am I Being Unreasonable? (AIBU) forum on 28 September, user ScrawlyEmbroidery explained she'd initially rejected the woman due to a 10-year gap in her résumé.

After a friend told her she was "discriminating" against stay-at-home moms, the poster has been questioning her decision—despite the applicant demonstrating a "lack of professionalism" during the recruitment process.

Research shows that taking a career break to care for children can have a negative impact on a woman's career.

A 2014 study found that younger women were particularly vulnerable to wage and career stagnation, although the impact reduces as the woman ages. Mothers who re-enter the workforce are also more likely to face a pay gap of 5 to 10 percent. Over time, this roughly totals a 40 percent decrease in earnings.

Nevertheless, a 2011 study indicated that working moms tend to be happier and healthier than stay-at-home mothers. This was particularly true for moms who work part-time, who found it easier to balance both work and family.

In her post, ScrawlyEmbroidery said the applicant only had one job on her résumé, but that it was "great experience." However, when she tried to get exact dates from the woman, the candidate kept avoiding the question.

"It took a while to actually get dates out of her, as she initially emailed a cover note rather than a CV and then kept 'missing' the question," she wrote.

"It transpired just before our booked interview that she left the job in 2012, so a decade ago."

Since leaving her last role, the applicant has been a stay-at-home mom. The poster felt that as she hadn't pursued any qualifications or part-time employment in the meantime, that the client would "automatically reject her."

After informing the candidate that she wouldn't be invited to interview, the woman began to harass her, "bombarding" her with follow-up messages and leaving comments on the poster's company Facebook page.

"I very kindly explained that we needed more recent experience to proceed for this job (quite a high level position)," she wrote.

"But she started bombarding me with messages about how great she is and how no one will top her experience, etc (including 'you'll come back to me when you realise you can't find anyone else,' so lack of professionalism another mark against her I guess).

"But when I spoke to a Mum-friend of mine, she told me that I was discriminating against stay-at-home mums, and that I should have more empathy."

Mumsnet users were split on whether the recruiter was wrong to dismiss the woman based on a career gap.

"Highly unfair and discriminatory," said NoYouSirName. "Barring a reason why the industry would have moved on, which you say isn't a factor."

VerityFab74 agreed, commenting: "Raising children has lots of transferable skills and should not be dismissed."

"It often leads to people being trapped because they don't have recent experience so they can't get hired," wrote Mumoblue.

While Suprima said: "I imagine she's probably experienced your reaction a lot, hence the outburst. Why on earth wouldn't you just present her to the client with the disclaimer that she has been raising children?"

Others believed the recruiter had made the right choice, with Divebar2021 calling the applicant "shady."

"If she'd been upfront about the break and explained how she has tried to mitigate that absence then it would be different but she hasn't," she wrote.

"The evasiveness, the not sending a CV, the unprofessionalism with her responses you were right not to put her forward," said Reallyreallyborednow.

"She's already said the client would flatly reject anyone with that large a gap," commented AquaticSewingMachine

"In any case, she absolutely could not put forward a candidate who has displayed as much bad behaviour as this woman has."

Newsweek wasn't able to verify the details of this case.