In the course of my 30-year-long business career I once found myself working in a company, and once for an individual boss, I loathed. On both occasions, I resigned. Why won’t women do the same thing? In my view, it’s partly because they’re more risk-averse than men. You have to laugh at the current claims by many female BBC presenters that they could earn more with private sector broadcasters. I invite them to resign, then see what they’re worth in the real world.
Women want the high incomes and perks that come with some lines of work, but without associated pressures. As always, women want the upside of everything, and the downside of nothing. To their minds, they shouldn’t have to adapt to pressurised work environments, those environments should adapt to their preferences.
I’ve been reflecting on this following a Law Society Gazette article sent to me by Chloe. Extracts:
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal has criticised a firm for creating an atmosphere where a junior lawyer said she was ‘terrified’ of admitting her mistakes.
Sovani Ramona James, who worked at the time for south east firm McMillan Williams, was found to have acted dishonestly in creating and backdating letters to give the impression that a clinical negligence case was progressing.
James’s misconduct had included dating four letters for opponents and medical experts as September 2014, when metadata on the firm’s computer system found they were created in November that year. The misconduct was only detected after James, 34, left the firm in 2015.
But the tribunal opted against striking her off the roll after concluding her primary motivation was ‘fear’ of the consequences from the firm’s management of the discovery of her wrongdoing… [J4MB: This is tortuous logic, because vagina. Her primary motivation for the wrongdoing was ‘fear’ that management would discover her wrongdoing. That makes sense… in the context of not holding women properly accountable, anyway.]
The tribunal heard that James had been warned in an email in 2012 that she had recorded 75 hours short of her target of 1,440 hours for the previous year. Her target was subsequently increased for the next year to 1,515 hours.
A letter from managing partner Colum Smith in April 2013 said her record showed ‘fundamental problems’ with her time recording and it was assumed she would be working every weekend and long hours during the week to catch up.
This letter, the tribunal said, was ‘threatening and harassing in tone’, with the intention of frightening James into compliance and showing no interest in any pressures she was under. [J4MB emphasis]
The tribunal’s judgment said that awareness and openness around mental health issues had increased in recent years and law firms should be more alert to the warning signs… [J4MB: Is it a “mental health issue” when an employee cannot cope with the culture in which (s)he works?]
The tribunal heard that James lost a significant amount of weight during the period in question, her hair fell out in clumps and she would break down in tears.
Justice for Men & Boys 
I think its very basic and goes right back to those experiments with crying babies (those who are dressed as girls get comforted boys much less so). Girls are brought up being “supported” emotionally and become pleasers and whiners. Because both work. Boys quite simply receive much less “support” and are encouraged to be independent by learning there isn’t much they can do to “please” and “whining” simply get ignored or worse. In my observation far from the stereo type it is women who don’t “talk about it” in fact they talk about such problems to any and all who they think will agree with them and who might just do something for them. Never the source of the “problem” and never take control and do something decisive. Men are more “awkward” but will in fact “talk about it” to relevant people or take action. I think this site has covered the many stories of Women managers who prefer to manage men and the women who prefer to be managed by men. And the gist of both is that whatever “communication” women think they are engaged in its men who are actually clear communicators. I have often thought “HR” is used by female staff as a sort of “mum” in public services, its who you go to, to sort things out for you.
The most tragic and extreme expression of this difference is that though women attempt suicide more most is “a cry for help” and is unsuccessful as suicide but often successful in getting others to solve the problem. Men attempt suicide and “succeed” because they use more effective methods, in this they are communicating their firm conviction that there is no help to be had.
In a small way this and other stories of suspended sentences are examples of how actions by females are treated as “cries for help” however duplicitous or self serving . While in a man they would be treated as duplicitous and self service (with a little lecture to that effect from the Magistrate/Judge). Men are self reliant and generally more resilient because in fact they have learned from the repeated actions of others, they have no alternative.
LikeLike
Yes, I often wonder why so many of us argue that women are inherently unsuited to stressful work when, as you point out, they are conditioned from an early age not to deal with it as men do. They just need a bit of tough justice, in most cases. Very perceptive comment.
LikeLike
Women’s mentality requires them to be looked after and pampered. They need all workplaces to cater to their needs, instead of going out and find a place that suits them. I think it is rather obvious by now. This emotional disposition makes it that much harder for women to work at places that involve risk. Women are totally unsuitable for most military positions, the fire department, the police force, etc.. They also have no pride. If they are dismissed and will sue endlessly, instead of admitting they were not good enough. Dealing with women in the professional world is almost like dealing with children.
LikeLike
This has been an expensive and humiliating way of getting rid of a doubly protected – sex and disability, ie mental health – poor performer. What she did was dishonest and the firm’s insurers will have had to satisfy the lay client’s claim, which as it was clinical negligence could have been very substantial indeed. The insurers of any law firm foolish enough to take her on will require her to be intensively supervised (creating more work than she’s worth as everything will need to be checked and hence done twice) so she could end in the public sector where her two protected characteristics will give her preferential recruitment. As it happens, I work for a local authority as a solicitor and people are amazed I work full time in the office. It’s quite rare.
A kind friend or parent should tell her she needs an undemanding occupation which means shop or clerical work, and to look for a husband who can support her.
Mental health has a stigma in the workplace for a reason.
It usually manifests in either excessive absence or behavioural problems which can include dishonesty into which the sufferer has no insight, and of course the Equality Act prohibits pre-employment medical screening which might lead to an offer being withdrawn.
Depression can be coped with by keeping busy, look at Winston Churchill. It’s a question of will; but those with that will keep it off record because of the stigma.
Lawyers cannot afford to accommodate potential behaviour problems.
It is a long hours profession. As Nigel Farage pointed out, in the context of the City, there are some professions where to get on you need to work full time plus in the office because it depends on client relationships. A woman wanting children should avoid those occupations or set her sights low, on a support role with no client contact. He pointed out that a maternity shatters those relationships which cannot be rebuilt as the client will never trust the woman again.
Yet, knowing this, this silly profession is seeking gender parity.
LikeLike
I was with you all the way until ‘relationships which cannot be rebuilt as the client will never trust the woman again’ – what’s untrustworthy about having children?
LikeLike
The issue for the client in these industries is the absence. They don’t want to risk it happening again.
If John took a sabbatical or was absent through illness for six months then no client would be criticised for saying “I prefer my account to remain with Richard”.
However, because of the right to return to the same or an equivalent job it is not so easy for the client to insist on remaining with Richard, particularly if Susan wants to come back part time and is litigious.
LikeLike
whats interesting is that i was having a discussion late last year with people who work in the field of domestic abuse about the issue of using mental health to excuse their behavior.
they tell me that if you try to claim mental health , you would have to demonstrate it in more that two fields of your life. so that’s work, home and public(?) which this lady couldn’t do.
I’m guessing the tribunal ( usually made up of their own peers) couldn’t practice their own mantra ( due diligence) about the area of mental health and instead went for virtue signalling..
mistikin a woman can work in the city and other high pressure places and still have children, it just means they have to grasp modernity and reality and have an at home dad( my wife and I did this), but I guess that is the moment when they realize that their “you can have it all feminist claptrap” backfires as they realize that if they divorce they lose the kids and a big chunk of their assets.. There is a headmistress in the media who does that..
Seen a number of case like that when the woman suddenly quits their high pressure/ high paid job or goes part time in order to secure custody.
LikeLike
I have come across many a lawyer who had trouble performing as there is a lot of pressure to produce billable hours( which decides your pay among other factors) and the magic circle firms are the toughest, even my ex wife couldn’t perform with the largest ( the shed) so all my efforts to get her that job were almost wasted !
the issue of backdating letters is plainly fraud and yes she wasn’t struck off as she is claiming harassment. This makes her very risky to any firm as any other law firm who they will be fighting against will raise the issue of her presence on a clients file and as such question the integrity the integrity of their case
not being struck off is likely to be her undoing as there is no way to come back and redeem herself. I suspect she will move into legal counsel work.
shes done a proudman…
LikeLike
Yes, there will be some restrictions on her practising certificate and the existence of those restrictions will have to be declared to insurers.
Probably an employed role and cannot be a compliance officer at a minimum
LikeLike
Mental Health should not be underestimated. You can recover.
It’s a disability. Why should one not work in a field because of an illness. it could happen to anyone of us. Support is key.
The girl in question has since worked 3 years in a different firm with no issues – the difference being she is in a supportive environment. Maybe read the 40 odd page tribunal decision before attempting to belittle her. She (and others) worked in a culture of ‘fear’ – that’s not normal.
Keyboard warriors.
LikeLike
I did not ‘belittle’ her. But it was perfectly clear that she was unsuited to the job in question. You say she’s now found a job with which she can cope. Great.
LikeLike