Sarah Harris at the royal wedding. She watched her Ps and Qs then.
What I’m about to confess happened when I was starting out as a cub reporter. Even now, nearly eight years later, it’s hard to write about what I did, what I said. I should probably just pretend it never happened. But maybe it’ll serve as a cautionary tale to other cub journos.
I’ve sworn on television before. I dropped the F-bomb. Three times. In one sentence. On live television. Breakfast television. With children watching.
A proud career moment this definitely was not.
I didn’t even realise I was on air at the time. I was covering a flash flood that had hit the Gold Coast, and had just finished a live cross to the Today show. I’d just turned 23, was new to the show and live tv, and this had been a difficult cross. My earpiece had terrible feedback and I could hear myself on three second delay. Very off putting. I’d also been awake for 24 hours. I was tired and cranky.
After struggling through four and a half excruciating minutes of live tv, the sound director told me over a crackling earpiece that I was ‘clear’.
But my real misery was yet to come.
I wandered over to our tech, who was operating the link truck. We’d known each other for years and had a good, very blokey, rapport. He smiled grimly, as I started whining, exasperated…
‘Oh mate, we’ve gotta sort this f*@king earpiece out. I can’t f*@king hear myself f*@king think’.
He nodded sympathetically. He’d dropped a few choice swear words himself before the live cross. It’d been a stressful morning for everyone.
My phone suddenly rang. It was my Chief of Staff. ‘You’re in big trouble, young lady.’. Was I ever. Every word I said had gone to air.
I was mortified.
Viewers took to the Internet to unleash their viciousness. ‘That foul-mouth should publicly apologise for her expletive-ridden rant! What a waste of oxygen! Sack her!’
Talkback radio raged with indignant callers, calling for me to be sacked too. ‘Who does this girl think she is?? Does she know how many people would kill for her job??’
Um yeah, actually. I did. This was my dream job. A national reporting role on the Today show! I’d slogged it out at regional tv stations for years, working double shifts, public holidays and, in some cases, without pay. This was my big tv break. And I blew it. Big time. With a capital F.
I got an official warning from my boss. And a well-deserved dressing down from the show’s hosts. I’d embarrassed myself, my colleagues and a show I loved working for. I was sure my tv journalism career was over even before it really started. My credibility was suddenly a four-letter word.
Thankfully, my career did survive my very public, potty-mouthed faux pas. And I learned a few very important lessons along the way.
Firstly, if you’re going to be a Journo – especially in tv – you’ve gotta toughen up. When you make mistakes or embarrass yourself at work, there are usually a couple of hundred thousand people watching. And some of those people will have very strong, not-so-nice opinions of you. And keyboards. And high-speed Internet connection.
That said, unlike say brain surgeons, when reporters do make mistakes no-one dies. And you know what, we’re not robots. We’re human.
It is, however, important to develop your integrity by owning your mistakes. I wrote a long letter of apology to the show. It took many months of hard work to eventually win back the respect of my colleagues. I can almost laugh about it now… Almost.
Oh, and lastly, the most important thing I learned? Journalism students, write this down: Never, EVER swear with a microphone on.
Sarah Harris has been a journalist for more than a decade. She currently works as a reporter for the Nine Network and can be found on National Nine News. You can follow her on Twitter here.
What was the worst mistake you ever made at work?
Sarah Harris at the royal wedding. She watched her Ps and Qs then.
What I’m about to confess happened when I was starting out as a cub reporter. Even now, nearly eight years later, it’s hard to write about what I did, what I said. I should probably just pretend it never happened. But maybe it’ll serve as a cautionary tale to other cub journos.
I’ve sworn on television before. I dropped the F-bomb. Three times. In one sentence. On live television. Breakfast television. With children watching.
A proud career moment this definitely was not.
I didn’t even realise I was on air at the time. I was covering a flash flood that had hit the Gold Coast, and had just finished a live cross to the Today show. I’d just turned 23, was new to the show and live tv, and this had been a difficult cross. My earpiece had terrible feedback and I could hear myself on three second delay. Very off putting. I’d also been awake for 24 hours. I was tired and cranky.
After struggling through four and a half excruciating minutes of live tv, the sound director told me over a crackling earpiece that I was ‘clear’.
But my real misery was yet to come.
I wandered over to our tech, who was operating the link truck. We’d known each other for years and had a good, very blokey, rapport. He smiled grimly, as I started whining, exasperated…
‘Oh mate, we’ve gotta sort this f*@king earpiece out. I can’t f*@king hear myself f*@king think’.
He nodded sympathetically. He’d dropped a few choice swear words himself before the live cross. It’d been a stressful morning for everyone.
My phone suddenly rang. It was my Chief of Staff. ‘You’re in big trouble, young lady.’. Was I ever. Every word I said had gone to air.
I was mortified.
Viewers took to the Internet to unleash their viciousness. ‘That foul-mouth should publicly apologise for her expletive-ridden rant! What a waste of oxygen! Sack her!’
Talkback radio raged with indignant callers, calling for me to be sacked too. ‘Who does this girl think she is?? Does she know how many people would kill for her job??’
Um yeah, actually. I did. This was my dream job. A national reporting role on the Today show! I’d slogged it out at regional tv stations for years, working double shifts, public holidays and, in some cases, without pay. This was my big tv break. And I blew it. Big time. With a capital F.
I got an official warning from my boss. And a well-deserved dressing down from the show’s hosts. I’d embarrassed myself, my colleagues and a show I loved working for. I was sure my tv journalism career was over even before it really started. My credibility was suddenly a four-letter word.
Thankfully, my career did survive my very public, potty-mouthed faux pas. And I learned a few very important lessons along the way.
Firstly, if you’re going to be a Journo – especially in tv – you’ve gotta toughen up. When you make mistakes or embarrass yourself at work, there are usually a couple of hundred thousand people watching. And some of those people will have very strong, not-so-nice opinions of you. And keyboards. And high-speed Internet connection.
That said, unlike say brain surgeons, when reporters do make mistakes no-one dies. And you know what, we’re not robots. We’re human.
It is, however, important to develop your integrity by owning your mistakes. I wrote a long letter of apology to the show. It took many months of hard work to eventually win back the respect of my colleagues. I can almost laugh about it now… Almost.
Oh, and lastly, the most important thing I learned? Journalism students, write this down: Never, EVER swear with a microphone on.
Sarah Harris has been a journalist for more than a decade. She currently works as a reporter for the Nine Network and can be found on National Nine News. You can follow her on Twitter here.
What was the worst mistake you ever made at work?
.
I have been living and working in Siem Reap, Cambodia for almost a year, I fly home soon. Throughout my year here I have faced many challenges in my working role and then, on April 3, Mamamia posted an article ‘How much do you give?’ that captured my thoughts perfectly. You see, I have spent a lot of my year trying to figure out how to increase the frequency and generosity of donations from individuals and private companies. I still haven’t found the answer and, as a team, we are continuously fighting to ensure the needs of the 110 students we work with are met.
The organisation that I work for is Anjali House. We aim to provide each child with free health care, food, clean drinking water and education. We believe that no child should be forced to beg or work. We believe that they have the right to enjoy their childhood – to learn, play, make friends and grow in a safe and happy environment. These are basic rights that no child should be denied.
The students that we work with are ex-street children. By this we mean that they used to work on the streets; begging, selling roses/postcards/bracelets or sometimes collecting and selling rubbish. The children were either actively participating in these activities or were at risk of doing so without someone providing them the opportunity to just be children.
Whilst at Anjali House, we forget the circumstances of how the students end up at the organisation because when they are here they are joyful, energetic and craving knowledge. We forget that their families earn between USD1.25 and USD2.50 per day, and that some of them have to cope with the added stresses of domestic violence, alcoholism and parents with disability or chronic illness on a daily basis. The students thoroughly enjoy attending Anjali House and we are glad they get to enjoy their childhoods whilst they are here.
It costs approximately USD900 per student to run the basic program each year. My role has been to provide support to the management team. This has allowed me the opportunity to see the daily struggle of making ends meet, deciding whose needs are greater and feel the pressures of expenditure exceeding income. Work at Anjali House has been very interesting.
From time to time in my own life, I have suffered from donor fatigue, and I most definitely related to the lady in the article that was asked for money whilst walking down the street and responded with ‘sorry I only have $50 on me’. There are many organisations located in all parts of the world, most of which are doing amazing work, and all of them need money in order to continue their operations. In essence, if someone had already developed a perfect blue print for fundraising and combating donor fatigue, every organisation would be trying to get their hands on it!
All I wish for is that the students at Anjali House follow their dreams and become doctors, mechanics, nurses, hotel managers, electricians; anything they wish to be. Mostly though I want them to be outstanding members of their communities, helping others and making a difference where they can. If they can become a part of the emerging middle class and join the fight for better health care, education, sanitation, human rights and the like, hopefully they can help move their country into a brighter future.
To find out more about Anjali House, you can go here.
Elysse Goddard has just returned to Australia after living and working in Siem Reap, Cambodia for one year. She is a PR professional with a love of travel, food and AFL (amongst other things!).
.
I have been living and working in Siem Reap, Cambodia for almost a year, I fly home soon. Throughout my year here I have faced many challenges in my working role and then, on April 3, Mamamia posted an article ‘How much do you give?’ that captured my thoughts perfectly. You see, I have spent a lot of my year trying to figure out how to increase the frequency and generosity of donations from individuals and private companies. I still haven’t found the answer and, as a team, we are continuously fighting to ensure the needs of the 110 students we work with are met.
The organisation that I work for is Anjali House. We aim to provide each child with free health care, food, clean drinking water and education. We believe that no child should be forced to beg or work. We believe that they have the right to enjoy their childhood – to learn, play, make friends and grow in a safe and happy environment. These are basic rights that no child should be denied.
The students that we work with are ex-street children. By this we mean that they used to work on the streets; begging, selling roses/postcards/bracelets or sometimes collecting and selling rubbish. The children were either actively participating in these activities or were at risk of doing so without someone providing them the opportunity to just be children.
Whilst at Anjali House, we forget the circumstances of how the students end up at the organisation because when they are here they are joyful, energetic and craving knowledge. We forget that their families earn between USD1.25 and USD2.50 per day, and that some of them have to cope with the added stresses of domestic violence, alcoholism and parents with disability or chronic illness on a daily basis. The students thoroughly enjoy attending Anjali House and we are glad they get to enjoy their childhoods whilst they are here.
It costs approximately USD900 per student to run the basic program each year. My role has been to provide support to the management team. This has allowed me the opportunity to see the daily struggle of making ends meet, deciding whose needs are greater and feel the pressures of expenditure exceeding income. Work at Anjali House has been very interesting.
From time to time in my own life, I have suffered from donor fatigue, and I most definitely related to the lady in the article that was asked for money whilst walking down the street and responded with ‘sorry I only have $50 on me’. There are many organisations located in all parts of the world, most of which are doing amazing work, and all of them need money in order to continue their operations. In essence, if someone had already developed a perfect blue print for fundraising and combating donor fatigue, every organisation would be trying to get their hands on it!
All I wish for is that the students at Anjali House follow their dreams and become doctors, mechanics, nurses, hotel managers, electricians; anything they wish to be. Mostly though I want them to be outstanding members of their communities, helping others and making a difference where they can. If they can become a part of the emerging middle class and join the fight for better health care, education, sanitation, human rights and the like, hopefully they can help move their country into a brighter future.
To find out more about Anjali House, you can go here.
Elysse Goddard has just returned to Australia after living and working in Siem Reap, Cambodia for one year. She is a PR professional with a love of travel, food and AFL (amongst other things!).
.
Job hunting is about as easy as doing a 1000 piece puzzle in a windstorm. Most of us know that. It’s ranked up there with moving house as one of the least enjoyed parts of life. So we hardly need employers to make it less desirable.
And yet, here we are.
An Australian study (in conjunction with researchers in Hawaii) has found obese job seekers are consistently ranked lower than those in a more average weight range. That’s ranked on their suitability for the position, how much money they deserve and their overall ‘employability’.
Yes, yes. Maybe the study subjects just had different skills so that’s why those asked to rank them came up with different results? That would make some sense except the researchers used the same job seekers pre and post surgery to see if their sudden weight drop affected their chances.
It did. Remember: it’s the same person.
Here’s how it went down according to lead researcher Dr Kerry O’Brien:
“We used pictures of women pre-and post-bariatric surgery, and varied whether participants saw a resume that had a picture of an obese female attached, or the same female but in a normal weight range having undergone bariatric surgery,” Dr O’Brien said.
“We found that obesity discrimination was displayed across all selection criteria, such as starting salary, leadership potential and likelihood of selection for the job.
“The results suggest that a belief in the superiority of some individuals over others is related to the perception that obese individuals deserve fewer privileges and opportunities than non-fat individuals.”
Let’s unpack that a little, shall we?
Same person. Same resume. Different weight.
Here is proof – not just anecdotal evidence which has existed for years – that heavier people (and women in particular) are given a value of worth that is inversely proportional to the number on a set of scales.
Here is actual data that reveals an unsettling mindset that could be true of many: we think fat people are sub-standard. At least in the job market.
But we intuitively knew that already, right? So the question, now, is: what the actual hell do we do about it?
Have you experienced discrimination in the workplace because of your weight? What happened?
Mamamia is looking for a senior staff member to join our editorial team
Can you tweet and Facebook like a demon? Write clickable headlines and identify sharable content? Do you trawl the net constantly? Do you know what zeitgeist means? Does unearthing a great piece of writing make you tingle? Are you inextricably linked to your phone/laptop? Do you totally understand that women can be interested in light and shade? Heavy and fluffy? Do you know how to balance those two things to create a daily must-read mix of content? Are you organised? Motivated? A team-player? Able to take initiative? Are you prepared to work really hard? Are you excited by the idea of building and growing online communities across social media platforms? Are you across parenting issues? Style? Politics? News? Pop culture? Feminism? Body Image? Sex? Are you still reading?
This is not a clock-punching job. You need to live and breathe the online world and have an insatiable appetite for news, social media, great first-person writing and pop culture.
Here are some of the more specific boxes you need to tick if you’d like to apply for this role:
- Solid journalistic experience – in traditional media and/or digital.
- Experience working with CMS (wordpress and drupal preferred)
- The ability to write compelling headlines, tweets and Facebook status updates.
- Experience with community building/management on social media.
- The ability to manage rolling deadlines – the Internet never sleeps.
- The ability to manage a team and work closely with senior management
- Familiarity with the top women’s websites both here and internationally.
- The ability to work with contributors and to identify new writing talent on the net and in traditional media.
- A strong working knowledge and first-hand experience of social media, using Facebook and Twitter.to drive traffic and create communities
- Sub-editing skills – knowing how to work constructively with writers to improve their work
- Stamina, enthusiasm, passion, energy, positivity.
If you’re interested in applying, please send your CV along with a cover letter of introduction that gives a topline view of your experience and tells us anything else we need to know to: natalia@mamamia.com.au
We will compile a shortlist of applicants who will then be contacted with further information.
BY MIA FREEDMAN
The first time I was sexually harassed at work, I didn’t know what it was. Same with the second and third and fourth times.
It happened when I was working as a waitress in a restaurant after I’d left school. The owner was a loud, charismatic European guy in his 50s with a big family and there were two waitresses, me and another girl.
It began as comments about my appearance – often in his own language which he would helpfully translate. “Beautiful wet girl” he would growl at me sexually as I walked past him throughout the night between the restaurant floor and the kitchen.
It was annoying and off-putting and it made me intensely uncomfortable. Later, it would make me quite scared. But I had no name for it. “He’s a bit of a sleaze” I said to the other waitress one night when we were out of earshot. She nodded and rolled her eyes. She’d been there longer than me but she was on a working visa so she knew her position was more tenuous.
I decided the best approach was to ignore his comments which were growing more full-on with each shift I worked.
He then started brushing up against me in the kitchen – away from the eyes of customers who all thought he was a large and lively legend- after I’d cleared tables. My arms were full so I couldn’t push him away. It happened a couple of times, at which point I quit. I had begun to dread going to work and was starting to feel unsafe.
It never occurred to me to report him or lodge some kind of official complaint. To my 18 year old mind, he was just a sleazy guy being a sleaze and I just had to cop it. It’s not like the restaurant had an HR department.
How times have changed. Sexual harrassment is now widely recognised as a crime. You can’t pinch the bottom of a female (or male) employee or co-worker. You can’t make suggestive comments or sexual propositions.
I’m thrilled that no daughter or niece of mine will have to quit her job because of sexual harassment. Or will she?
The Australian Human Rights Commission describes sexual harassment as” any unwanted or unwelcome sexual behaviour, which makes a person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated.” It is not interaction flirtation or friendship – it is sexual discrimination.
Despite the fact that is has now been outlawed in Australia for over 25 years (can you imagine working conditions before then?) it is still a huge problem, with 1 in 5 women and 1 in 20 men affected. And equally appalling is the fact that there is still a huge onus on the victim to prove sexual harassment and regardless of gender (as we’ve seen with this week’s allegations by James Ashby against federal MP Peter Slipper – read more about that here), the accuser is often targeted by dirt and slurs on their character.
Too often the victim becomes the accused.
ABC Online reported on a new study that found that complainants are far more likely to leave the company than the alleged perpetrators. A study by the Centre for Work and Life at the University of South Australia examined every formal complaint lodged with anti-discrimination bodies in all states and the Commonwealth in the second half of 2009.
Paula McDonald, one of the report’s authors and an Associate Professor at the Queensland University of Technology says of the perpetrator “Sometimes they receive a formal sanction, sometimes they resign or are dismissed by the organisation, but in this study only 10 per cent of perpetrators resigned or were dismissed compared to 60 per cent of complainants who ended up resigning or who were dismissed as a consequence of victimisation after making a complaint.”
And when asked about the actual victims, Paula says “Potential complainants are very much aware of… the repercussions that might come their way, the negative fallout that often happens when they make a complaint in an organisation or elsewhere. Certainly… those potential detriments or perceived detriments serve to silence a lot of complainants who would otherwise file a formal grievance. ”
So how far have we really come?
Have you ever been the victim of sexual harassment at work? Have you reported it? How was it handled?
.
Perhaps the most enduring wars are fought by women. On Facebook and in Mother’s groups. At the gate at school drop off and over coffee in the morning. At the watercooler in the office and outside of boardrooms across the city.
It’s the war that pits mother against mother by comparing and belittling choices that we don’t agree with.
Mothers who work for a salary versus mothers who don’t get paid for the very real work of raising their children.
Battlefronts flare up regularly. Over breastfeeding vs bottle. Over vaginal vs c-section births. Over childcare. Over work choices.
According to an article in the Herald Sun today:
Nasty mummy wars erupting in cyberspace are leaving women doubting themselves, racked with guilt and feeling depressed.
Feisty mums are hijacking forums, websites and blogs intended to support mothers and turning them into battlegrounds on divisive issues, particularly the stay-at-home versus working mum debate.
Mia Freedman, editor/publisher of women’s website mamamia.com.au, said posts about motherhood often attracted the most inflammatory comments.
She believed much of the battle stemmed from insecurity about parenting decisions.
“Being responsible for another human life can be very very daunting … and they are secretly terrified of getting it wrong.”
Freedman said those who posted on her site were encouraged to use “dinner party” etiquette and engage in healthy discussion.
Read the full article here.
And last week, another Mummy Wars battle erupted in the US after a Democratic talking head and former lobbyist, Hilary Rosen, said Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s wife was unable to advise her husband on economic issues because she’d “never worked a day in her life”.
Journalist Jessica Irvine writes:
Ann Romney and husband Mitt
Ann Romney opened a Twitter account to complain: ”I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”
And so the old catfight was out of the bag again, attracting a stream of online commentary, a prompt intervention by Barack Obama saying the work choices of candidate spouses were irrelevant and an apology from Rosen.
The mummy wars are obviously a simplification. And not just because the concept ignores the bulk of mothers who contort themselves on a daily basis to juggle family and work. It also assumes that women alone are responsible for their decisions and that they do so based on their innate preference for work or child rearing.
In reality, for many mothers, the decision whether to work is purely a financial one. And it is not a decision they make alone – excluding single mothers – but a negotiated outcome between partners in a relationship.
We need to think about families not as a homogenous unit but as a collection of individuals, who can be deployed in various ways to maximise the wellbeing of the family.
…For their generation, the Romneys probably made the best economic decision they could – with Ann looking after the children while Mitt sold his labour as a management consultant, eventually co-founding a private equity investment company, Bain Capital, which remains a source of wealth for the couple.
But for couples making the decision today about who should bear primary responsibility for domestic duties, the landscape has changed dramatically.
…The perception of mummy wars only plays into the stereotype of women as emotion-driven creatures who are out to get one another. This perception perpetuates one of the most dangerous stereotypes for all mothers – that they are forever transformed by childbirth into hormonally unbalanced basket cases.Decisions about work and family life should be respected for what they are – largely financial decisions about what distribution of labour will maximise a family’s income and wellbeing. It’s time to call a halt to the war.
You can read Jessica’s full column here….
It’s an interesting idea – that we should look at the choices women make about work and family as purely economic ones. But is it realistic? In actual fact there are torrents of emotion behind the decisions we make as women regarding our work and our families.
So is it a secret, niggling fear that we’ve made the ‘wrong’ decision that drives some women to attack the choices of other women so readily?
It’s not an issue that’s going away and it’s one that can only benefit from being aired and raked over – albeit in a civilised, intelligent way.
So – we want to try and take a more positive spin on the so-called “Mummy Wars”. How women can support each other ? What can we do to bridge the gap between the mothers?
.
A ream of A4 paper because your son needed to print out his project and you’d run out and didn’t have time to stop at Officeworks.
A roll of sticky-tape.
A USB stick.
A packet of Kingstons from the staff kitchen.
A bottle of wine on Friday night (you were the one who stayed behind to clean up – you earned it).
Perks of the job?
Office pilfering?
Stealing.
Last week, news.com.au ran a story about a German office worker who stole 20 tonnes of office supplies. That’s a lot of paper-clips. And it’s not like he flogged it on eBay. He kept it – under his house. Maybe his kids had a lot of projects coming up. Maybe he was unwell. Maybe he was just a criminal. From news.com.au:
The 69-year-old retired caretaker from Stuttgart stole everything from pencil sharpeners to detergents to office ladders.
After an anonymous tip-off police went to his home and are now working hard to sort through truckloads of office equipment which the worker stole from city offices he had access to while working.
The police said the man did not try to sell any of the items and just hoarded them in his apartment, basement, attic and garden shed.
According to studies an estimated $US50 billion is lost annually from US businesses due to employee theft with a massive 75 per cent of employees stealing from their employers.
Pens and post-it notes are the most commonly pilfered items according to a study by media company Vault.
But employee theft which costs companies billions of dollars every year ranges from pens and envelopes to more “extravagant” items such as lap tops, office chairs and falsifying time sheets and expenses.
So you might not have a truckload of paper-clips under the house but ask around. Most people will admit to taking home something they didn’t pay for and aren’t entitled to. We laugh it off, saying we work so hard we’re entitled to a packet of post-it notes. Who notices anyway? The waste in that place is shocking!
But the bottom line notices and the topic turns business owners purpley red with rage. Because it’s not just physical stuff – personal phone calls can be counted as theft too, ‘I’ll call you from the office so work can pay.’ Sound familiar?
So what is it? A sense of entitlement? A sense that we are underpaid and overworked so these little self-awarded bonuses are okay?
It’s interesting stuff and it seems the bigger the company, the more okay it is. Telstra can afford to lose a yellow highlighter.
What do you think? Is taking home a pen from the office a criminal offence?
Mia
You thought the idea of being asked for your facebook password in a job interview was alarming? How about being asked about your body art. I was speaking to a friend who works in HR in Hong Kong and she says in interviews now, many employers are asking about tattoos. Not because they’re worried the Aztec design on your lower back might scare the customers (one would assume in conservative fields like banking, law and finance that area would be well covered) but for reasons of character. They want to know what kind of person you are.
Yes, there are people younger than 65 who still believe tattoos are a sign of reckless rebellion. And one day they may be the one standing between you and your next job. Remember when the hardest question you had to answer was “what’s your weakness?” and then keep a straight face when you answered “I work too hard.”
But tattoos aren’t exactly a novelty anymore. And nor are they small and discreet.
Perhaps inspired by Ruby Rose, Pink and Rhianna, women are apparently rejecting discreet little symbols, roses, love hearts and dolphins for bigger, bolder designs. “Girls want tattoos that flow with the contours of their bodies, like Angelina Jolie’s tattoos,” tattoo artist ‘Moldi’ was reported as saying. “The scrag tag has really died off.” (a ‘scrag tag’, also know as a ‘tramp stamp’, is a tattoo on your lower back). And men are following suit, or maybe even leading the way.
[nggallery id=856 template=carousel images=0]
Does a tattoo really reflect who you are? Or maybe just who you were on the day that you got it? Do you think having a tattoo is any reflection of what kind of person you are?
How many coffees?
Once upon a time I would have shined the shoes of an editor if it meant I got to hang around a newsroom and inhale the heady-smells of fresh ink as the papers rolled off the presses. I would have made the coffee. I would have danced on cue, had anyone demanded it.
When I landed my cadetship I arrived at work an hour early and always left hours late – unpaid – because it meant I was surrounded by the process and learning, learning, learning. It wasn’t work, as such. Or at least it didn’t feel like it.
Was I exploited? Probably. Did I care? Hardly.
Who are these work experience students demanding to be paid? If your employer is on their game, you are being paid. In knowledge. In experience! It’s hard to crack into the job market with even a degree these days. Employers want some depth. Some on-the-job training.
Of course, some people really are taken for a ride. Australia’s Fair Work Ombudsman will investigate claims young people are being shafted by unscrupulous employers making them work for free – sometimes up to a year - without offering them employment at the end of it. Fair enough, that’s tough. Some examples from News.com.au:
- A university student studying teaching who worked for a year at a school without being paid in the hope it would further a career.
- A bar worker who also worked unpaid for about a year at a city venue.
But I’ve seen the opposite, too. I’ve seen 17-year-olds and 18-year-olds waltz into newsrooms and offices expecting to be treated as publishing mavens with all the experience of people who’ve been doing the job for years, decades. Going to the Post Office is beneath them, you see. Getting lunch for someone is a terrible affront to their well-honed craft, you see.
I would have queued in a Post Office for a thousand years if it meant an editor spent just five minutes telling me about his job. I would have licked 100 stamps with my own tongue.
I had some sense about me. It’s not like I would have interned with a mad scientist (“I just need you to strap this needle device to your chest”) or given up my time for Cat Walkers R Us. But where it counted, I gladly would have gone.
Maybe I’m a sucker, a glutton for punishment. But … it worked.
Let’s ask my own boss and former work experience wrangler Mia Freedman some questions for her take.
I made this tea and got this sandwich myself
Q: Why do employers even have work experience students and interns anyway?
A: There are two reasons usually. One is altruistic – the desire to give experience to those looking to get into the field. And of course there is a more self-interested reason: to get help with some of the tasks your paid staff members don’t have time to do. Ideally, it’s a combination of both reasons.
Q: Isn’t it exploitation? Getting someone to do all the crappy jobs without paying them?
A: Well, if either party has that attitude, it’s not going to work. There has to be an understanding that it’s a mutually beneficial arrangement. The student gets some experience they otherwise couldn’t get. And the employer gets some help.
Q: What’s the biggest misconception about interning?
That it’s just free labour or that they’re being exploited. Also, that they will be doing skilled or senior tasks. Interns and work experience students need to understand that work places are extremely busy. There are rarely enough staff and never enough hours in a day. In the media, the environment is usually high stress and high stakes. Mistakes can be potentially embarrassing for an organisation and even have legal implications.
Having an intern around means that everyone has to notice they’re there and often adapt their behaviour accordingly. There are private or industry specific things that are discussed in the course of a working day that aren’t appropriate for interns to be part of. That’s why you can’t just “sit in on meetings and learn”.
Q: So, what should interns expect?
A: Maintaining a good intern program takes time. The employer needs to do a thorough job description and the intern needs to be aware of the kinds of tasks they’ll be doing. Everyone needs to be comfortable. You don’t want to do it? No problem. There’s probably a queue behind you that stretches around the block.
Interns can’t be given senior or skilled tasks because if things go wrong, there can be huge consequences for the organisation. At the smaller end of the scale, it just takes twice as long to redo the task or undo errors. That’s not to say an intern can’t advance and take on more responsibilities but you have to be patient. Don’t come into a website expecting to write posts and don’t come into a magazine expecting to choose the cover.
I’ve seen both happen so many times and it’s frustrating for everyone. Manage your expectations. Listen and learn. And ask straight away about their social media policy. Find out what is appropriate information for you to share with your own networks and on your own Tumblrs or blogs.
Many organisations would be horrified if they found out an intern or work experience student was sharing information (even if it seems harmless) about their placement online.
Did you do work experience? Have you been an intern? Did you feel exploited or lucky?
Remember when the working week ended on Friday? Remember when shops closed at lunchtime on Saturdays forcing everyone to hang around with their families not buying things all weekend? Then you’re probably over 35.
The push for a 24/7 economy gobbled up the weekend in many industries, but it isn’t full yet. It’s still hungry.
Now the banks want changes to allow weekend trading (some banks do, but only those who have negotiated individual contracts) and the retail industry which already has its weekend trade deregulated is pushing to open on the last of the traditionally untouchable public holidays like Good Friday and Easter Sunday.
Is it not enough that most of us are already physically plugged into the work zone through our laptops and mobile phones?
Ross Gittins wrote brilliantly on the matter this week:
“Whether or not they realise what they’re doing, Australia’s business people, economists and politicians are in the process of dismantling the weekend and phasing out public holidays. And they’re doing it in the name of making us better off.
Historically, the two arrangements that have protected the weekend and public holidays from encroachment by employers are state government restrictions on trading hours and the requirement in industrial awards that employees required to work at ”unsociable hours” be paid an additional penalty rate.
But this belief that life would be better if shops, restaurants and places of entertainment were open all hours rests on the assumption you and I won’t be among those required to work unsociable hours to make it happen. An even less obvious assumption is that the push for a 24/7 economy will stop when it has captured shopping and entertainment; it won’t continue and reach those of us who work in factories and offices.”
Take a look at your own working conditions: are you working longer hours than you should be? Weekends? Into the evenings?
Do you have to get up before you went to bed, or does it feel like it?
The argument for all of this is the Australian economy will eventually win the day and hey, isn’t that great for everyone? Of course! Having access to more money and more financial security is just perfect, because everyone likes to feel more secure while not spending time with their family and friends.
You might be working all the time, but at least you know you could enjoy it if only you weren’t … working all the time.
So, are you a fan of being able to shop, wine and dine 24/7? Or would you rather some restrictions be in place? Where’s the middle-ground?
Shankari
Last week my 6 year old son Secundo, stood up in assembly and said: “That concludes our assembly. Please wait quietly for your teacher.” It was one of the proudest moments in my life. Until recently, Secundo suffered from selective mutism and the challenge of speaking to people sparked an anxiety attack which rendered him “mute”.
No one will thank me for my part in this small victory. On the contrary, Tercero (my three year old son) told me he hated me the whole way home because he didn’t like the way I put his seatbelt on. I won’t receive any awards and recognition and I certainly won’t be paid for it.
Indeed, according to the Prime Minister of Denmark, I am actually wasting my education and career by choosing to be a stay-at-home mum. I hear you sigh: not another article by a militant stay-at-home-mum. No, please keep reading.
My education, career and intellect shape my mothering every day. I mother like a lawyer – I have checklists for the children and flowcharts and SMART objectives for me. The children know about social justice and the responsibilities of citizenship. I teach them to negotiate their own settlements and do their homework by the close of business.
I also used to lawyer like a mother, with multi-tasking and time management skills that outperform the KPI’s of any law firm. I have enormous patience (for partners that constantly behave like three year olds) and a deeper concern and empathy for the future wellbeing of my clients. Being a mother has made me a better lawyer, and being a lawyer has made me a better mother. Until recently, I managed both these careers concurrently. For the last 2 years, I have been a full time stay-at-home mum.
Am I wasting my education by investing it and myself into my children’s development – a task no one else is more qualified to do? I don’t think so. Am I overqualified for the task? You obviously haven’t met my four children. The value of my education can’t be assessed or quantified, any more than we are able to assess or quantify the value of motherhood, despite the endless debates on the matter.
I find motherhood, and in particular teaching my children and watching them become confident, independent people, very satisfying. It is exciting, interesting and challenging to help them realise their potential. I find the relentless domestic servitude of motherhood exhausting and the lack of social recognition (from any one other than stay-at-home mums and child psychologists) disappointing.
And I find the criticism of others, as well as my own intermittent self-criticism, confusing. Nobody seems to mind when PhDs become school teachers.
Apparently the Prime Minister of Denmark is very clever. She’s worked out that feminism is a social, institutional and legal change that enables women to make the same choices as men, whilst enjoying the same freedom from judgement, recrimination and retribution as men. She’s even clever enough to tell us what our choices should be.
Obviously I’m not that clever because I missed the bit in feminism where women are allowed to judge the hell out of each other when they exercise the rights and opportunities that feminism has afforded them.
When the Prime Minister recently slapped it to educated, full-time stay-at-home mothers in Britain, they rose up in arms to extol the virtues of their choices. However, in defending those choices, these mothers again judged those that had chosen differently.
If they’re all so clever, why are they still arguing over the false dichotomy between working and motherhood? All this seems to do is set women against each other – couldn’t we all just agree that:
- mothering, working and every combination in between, are valuable to society; and
- in a world where millions of women still strap their children to their backs and head off to work, having a choice is a privilege.
The recent debate has engaged some of the brightest minds in Britain and Denmark. I think that instead of criticising educated stay-at-home mums, these minds should think about how to make parenting more socially valued, not just in the playground (where everyone already knows the words to that song) but back in the workforce where real change is required. Despite the Prime Minister’s personal views, Denmark actually seems to do quite a good job of this already, with some of the more progressive policies in Europe. Share the love Denmark. And instead of criticising parents that want (or have) to go back to work, these minds should think about how to help parents make the transition and respect their personal balance, wherever it may lie.
And finally, I think both sides, and every one in between, should leave each other alone, otherwise you’re all going to get a time out.
Shankari Chandran is a recent returner after ten years in London. Formerly a social justice lawyer, Shankari chronicles the day-to-day of her family’s return on her blog.
In the US, employers are asking job seekers to hand over their Facebook login details and passwords as part of the recruitment process. One law professor described the process as the equivalent of “requiring someone’s house keys”.
This is from news.com.au
WHEN Justin Bassett interviewed for a new job, he expected the usual questions about experience and references. So he was astonished when the interviewer asked for something else: his Facebook username and password.
Bassett, a New York City statistician, had just finished answering a few character questions when the interviewer turned to her computer to search for his Facebook page. But she couldn’t see his private profile. She turned back and asked him to hand over his login information.
Bassett refused and withdrew his application, saying he didn’t want to work for a company that would seek such personal information. But as the job market in the US steadily improves, other job candidates are confronting the same question from prospective employers, and some of them cannot afford to say no.
While some companies aren’t asking for the passwords so bluntly, they’re asking job seekers to log in to company computer’s during interviews, or having them “friend” HR managers.
Questions have been raised about the legality of the process and it’s the focus of proposed legislation in some US states that would “forbid public agencies from asking for access to social networks”.
But more generally, checking people’s social media profiles as part of the recruitment process is nothing new.
A couple of years ago when I was looking to hire my first MM employee – an editorial assistant – I wrote about the process in a column called: “Wanted: Job interview magic” and many people completely lost their shit.
At the time, I wrote in part:
Job interviews have changed. I didn’t realise this until recently when I had to recruit for the first time in years and found myself doing some surprising things. When I worked in magazines, I disliked hiring even more than firing. And this was problematic because when you spend a decade managing women in their twenties and thirties who frequently hop around between jobs, countries and babies, you want to be friends with recruitment.
Resumes? I’ve seen a few. Hundred.
One of the best things about leaving management and starting my own small business has been no more recruitment. But as mamamia.com.au continues to grow, and after three years of doing everything myself, I recently waved the white flag and admitted it was time to hire an editorial assistant.
I didn’t have time to trawl through a thousand resumes and nor did I have the stomach to disappoint 999 hopefuls. So I asked around my media contacts and edited it down to five good prospects.
That’s when it became interesting. Have I mentioned I find CVs useless? Mostly because they’re the work equivalent of the profiles on dating sites. Total spin.
Without even consciously thinking about it, the first thing I did before meeting each candidate was to look them up on Facebook and Twitter. Interesting…..
And then there were two.
I didn’t even need to glance at a single CV to eliminate three girls based on their social media profiles alone. One had a constant stream of Facebook updates bitching indiscreetly about her current job. Another evidently spent much of her time getting drunk and a third had some very strident views bordering on racist.
Is this fair? Sensible? Justified? Who knows but I did it. Yes, I made judgements on the character of job applicants based on social media profiles. And why wouldn’t I? It’s absurd to believe that how you behave on social media sites can be quarantined from you ‘proper’ work life. It can’t.
What you say online and what you choose to post on Twitter or Facebook is like your shop window. It’s not your bedroom. It’s not private (unless you have your privacy settings turned up which I would have thought was standard on Facebook these days but apparently not). And it’s a better indication of character than any written reference.
And here are some of the comments:
Clearly, asking someone for their Facebook password crosses a line and is probably illegal. But checking people out via Google, Twitter and Facebook are (I would have thought) very much standard practice in 2012.
There’s a lot at stake for employers too. What employees say or do on social media can impact on your company and your brand. As Kate pointed out in that comment above from 2010, I would only assume that a prospective employee would Google me, why wouldn’t I do the same?
And if you have a problem with that, I hope you’re not looking for a job….
What do you think? Would you freak if your boss – or prospective boss – checked out your social media profiles or googled you?
A recently published study, highlighted in the Sydney Morning Herald last week, has found that one third of working mothers are employed by organisations that could not be classed as “family friendly”, leaving them subject to psychological distress. How dreadful. How dreadful that all the article’s readers could do was to blame the woman.
Instead of focussing on how we can help women balance the challenges inherent in working for a living, and living for our children, the comments on the article (all hiding behind the parapet of pseudonyms, of course), targeted women who return to work after having children with vitriol and hatred.
In this day and age, why is it that we are still trying to control women and the choices that they make, through public, degrading and simplistic commentary? As if there is not enough pressure on women already (you must breastfeed, you must lose your baby weight, you must only give your child organic food, don’t smack or yell, don’t let your child watch TV), here is another thing that we are supposed to feel guilty about.
Well guess what, I don’t feel guilty. Like any mother, I adore my daughter beyond measure – she is a smart, funny delight. I would do anything to make her life happy and safe. Now, prepare to be shocked. I also like to work. Cue devil’s horns and wicked laughter. I thrive on the social and intellectual stimulation that work provides. I am a happier and more interesting person because I work.
I also believe that being a working mother makes me a good role model. It teaches my daughter the importance of being financially independent as a woman, of making a contribution to society, of being a responsible citizen. It teaches her that she too can do anything she wants.
Do I think she suffers because she’s not at home with me, 24-7? Absolutely not. When I drop her at day care, she squeals with excitement. Every day I marvel at what she learns from her educators and her peers. I too was a day care baby, and I am a confident, independent and happy woman. I’m great at my job, and I’m a great mother, wife and friend. I don’t harbour any closet psychological problems. Really – when you think of your friends and colleagues, can you work out which of them were cared for at home and which were in day care? Of course not.
For many women, including myself, returning to work is also not a choice. The majority of us are contributing 30% of household income or more to mortgage repayments. Rent takes a similar toll. Simply to keep a roof over her child’s head, many a woman has to be in paid employment. For others, it enables them to make financial decisions that allow the family to build up its asset base, positioning children well for the future, or to allow small luxuries that widen a child’s learning experiences.
From a socio-economic perspective, having women return to work after having children is vital for the economy. At a macro level it increases discretionary spend which sustains growth, and at an organisational level, it creates a diverse and balanced workforce, which has been shown to improve profit results.
The nasty, nasty comments directed at women, and mothers in particular, have to stop. Now. No wonder postnatal depression is on the rise, and working mothers report psychological distress. When we blame the victim, when we stop caring for each other and start attacking, we create social and emotional isolation that is far more damaging than putting a child in care.
Alison Wines is a communications specialist and writer. Find her on twitter here.
Whenever I’m offered coffee in a meeting, I say yes. Even if I don’t want one.
I know it’s not cool to admit it but I quite enjoy the last few drops of the ice cold coffee that lie in wait at the bottom of a cup at the end of a business meeting. They have an “I’m-ready-to-leave-and-be-on-my-way” taste about them. An acquired flavour for sure and one I discovered quite by accident.
My weekend coffee is another matter; piping hot, brewed perfectly and preferably grown on an ecologically sustainable plantation by fairly paid workers (have I missed anything?). But in a work setting my coffee standards are rather different.
The first time I accepted a hot drink (to be honest I can’t remember if it was tea or coffee) at a business meeting it was in response to “I’m having a coffee, would you like one too?” offer from the customer I was meeting about his office phones. “Great,” I thought, “a cuppa will be lovely”. And as the meeting progressed I realised that the mood was quite relaxed as we sipped away whilst discussing the relative merits of two different telephone systems.
This was the start of the “great coffee experiment” I conducted over the next few years of my sales career. Where I found that not only did accepting a refreshment make the meeting more relaxed it also gave some natural structure to it’s pace. Small talk (relationship building!) until the coffee arrived, a segue into the business discussion as the coffee is stirred and then down to business.
The great accidental discovery that I made (a bit like Penicillin but without the Nobel prize) was that I could influence how long I got to spend with a customer based on how slowly I drank. Most people are generally polite. Particularly those who offer you a coffee in the first place. And they don’t tend to kick you out if they know that you’re still drinking. (I’ve found that it does help to hold the cup in your hand if you don’t want there to be any doubt that you are still enjoying their hospitality).
This discovery gave me the opportunity to gain a few extra precious minutes of discussion that were so important to ensuring that I had built as much rapport as possible and had the time at the end of the meeting that I like to confirm the participants understanding of where we had got to and to clarify next steps. Items that all so often get sacrificed as people are rushing off to their next back-to-back appointment.
In many years of field testing I can report that it works with all types of beverages but hot ones are best as you can work in the “wow, this coffee is taking a while to cool down” into the conversation. And it works in reverse. A meeting not going as well as expected can be hurried along (a little bit) by drinking up nice and quickly.
The cold coffee technique can also be applied in internal meetings, networking catch-ups and with most anyone. I’ve broadened my acceptance criteria from the ‘I’ll-have-one-if-you-have one’ response to a yes to any tea, coffee or water that is offered; and whether it’s offered by the person I’m actually meeting with or the assistant who is setting up the meeting.
This is not for the purpose of outstaying your welcome, being disrespectful of others time or wasting it. You need to use the extra time you buy for good (business discussion, asking questions, building rapport) and not evil (talking drivel, being repetitive, delving into detail that others don’t need to hear about).
It’s a bit like the law of gravity where when the apple leaves the tree there’s nothing stopping it headed downwards, once the coffee’s on the table it might go cold but I can control how fast it goes.
And that tastes good.
Karen is a leading expert in career skill development for women in today’s business world and author of best-selling career guide “Hot Tips for Career Chicks; Unlocking the CODE to success”. You can connect with Karen on her blog, via Facebook or on Twitter
Do you have any methods that you use to connect with people? Keep the conversation flowing
“(Cleavage) undeniably empowers a woman, gives her a great sense of self-esteem, a colossal confidence boost and often gets her ahead of the men she’s long been trying to compete with.”
That’s a real quote, people.
It comes via Fairfax’s dating blogger Samantha Brett and her piece, ‘The Great Cleavage Conundrum: should men look if it’s on display?’, published on Fairfax websites a few days ago.
Brett wrote this piece in response to Bettina Ardnt’s column about women getting their boobs out and the effect it has on men (last week we discussed that on Mamamia – comments were fascinating). In Bettina’s original column, she asked whether women who dressed sexily at work were encouraging ogling from men and called the flaunting of cleavage an “up yours gesture of the most provocative kind”.
Brett takes the debate one step further by suggesting women should use their cleavage – whether real or fake – as a tool of empowerment.
Yep. Time to check the calendar to make sure it’s 2012 and then get your tits out for the boys. Who knows what it could do for your career!
We’ve highlighted some of the most interesting bits.
She writes:
Samantha Brett
Many women have cottoned on to the innate power of the simple act of showing a bit of chest flesh. And, while the fairer sex aren’t exactly sure what chemical reactions are sparked in the minds of blokes at the mere sight of a little décolletage, nevertheless over time they’ve learnt one vital life lesson: a little cleavage goes a long way.
A bit of bosom on show does something more powerful and more intoxicating to a bloke than any conversation, expensive gift or home-cooked meal.
And when it comes to the workplace, despite the fight for equal pay and equal rights, some women (many women) know that a good push-up bra is a better investment than any PhD. Besides, it sure as hell is something no man can ever attempt to compete with, no matter how many golf games or strip-club outings they organise for prospective clients. Women simply whip on a low-cut dress, some spindly stilettos and, voila! They’re ahead of the game by a long shot.
I only wish someone would have told me before I went to uni that all I really needed to do to be successful in life was nick down to Myer and pick me up a wonderbra. Hey Presto! A job! Empowerment!
Brett goes on to cite comments to Bettina’s piece from male friends, readers and colleagues. “Breasts are like jewellery, besides their natural function, they are there to attract attention & a possible mate,” was the response from one commenter. “Women know exactly what they are doing when they dress this way,” from another.
She goes on:
Many of the women I polled for this story say they are extremely self-conscious when it comes to cleavage of their own. Flat-chested women, (especially in a sun-drenched country like ours), know all too well about the pains of having to go to the beach and compete with the ample-breasted women flouncing their double Ds as the men gawk, ogle and stare, ignoring the fact that the flat-chested femmes even exist.
“It’s the absolute worst being flat,” a friend said to me before she decided to opt for breast augmentation surgery. “You feel as though everyone is staring at your chest for all the wrong reasons. No men call you sexy, and you definitely don’t get any wolf whistles. It brings down your entire self-esteem.”
Wait, really? Damn! I’ve been going about this beach business all wrong. I didn’t realise I was supposed to be competing with my larger-breasted sister girlfriends for male gawks and stares. I’ve been there just swimming this whole time. Silly me.
And finally, there’s this:
Let’s get back to the politics of cleavage.
Whether fake or real, it undeniably empowers a woman, gives her a great sense of self-esteem, a colossal confidence boost and often gets her ahead of the men she’s long been trying to compete with.
Twitter erupted over the weekend when word of Brett’s article spread. It was “one of the most offensive pretensions to journalism I’ve ever read” according to writer Clementine Ford. She tweeted:
What do you think?