Why don't women hire other women for positions? I've noticed

that whenever I'm up for a position and a woman is the hiring person, it goes to a male. I always hear, it was such a tough decision, neck and neck...blah blah blah...but then goes to a male. Then I hear through the grapevine how the male was the wrong choice. Why are women like that? Why don't they stick together and give each other a chance if the qualifications are even?

that the qualifications ARE even. Even when things are "neck and neck" there's almost always something that makes puts one candidate ahead (even if only slightly) than another.

is knowing who to kiss up to. :(

a Male who refuses to hire Women.

Perhaps people are hired on their merits. I know if I was responsible (<- key word) for hiring someone, I would not be eager to hire someone other than the best possible candidate.

Sometimes even that choice is the wrong one.

Cheers
Drifter

In fact, I think we've got about 70 percent women and both our bosses are women.

Has no woman EVER hired another woman?

Please don't generalize based on your limited experience.

:thumbsup:

p.s. very appropriate username for the OP.

that's what I was thinking.

it has been her own reality. If so, she has legitimate reasons to be bitter about it.

:thumbsup:

"The Queen Bee Syndrome," is where women who have attained senior positions do not use their power to assist struggling young women or to change the system, tacitly validating it.

http://www.fodreams.com/deb/queenbee.php

Was this linked from the promisekeepers or something? :eyes:

I'm not familiar with the term.

(On edit)

I checked the links. The primary link if from a Woman's Small Business organization. They in turn link to an article published in the American Physical Society by D. Elizabeth Pugel, at that time a graduate student in physics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. A longer version of this article, with source citations, appeared in the July 1997 issue of Physics and Society.

:eyes:

And nobody said that all women do this. The only thing that was said is that when it happens it has a name.

name. When men do it, well, it's history/tradition/etc.

I doubt that any behavioral science texts have given us a name for the same behavior in men.

It called building a Harem. And men who do it are called Lechers or Satyrs.

Remember this is about a hiring practice where people in positions of power hire only from the OPPOSITE sex, not from the same sex.

I worked for a major bank. I don't think this is necessarily the case all the time. :hi:

:shrug:

and... Surprise! They were my best bosses... my experience anyway.

Of course they're gonna give you a diplomatic answer like it was a tough choice. If you're friendly enough with someone in the company that you're getting updates on the person who was hired instead then they might be giving you biased reports. Nobody's perfect so when the person hired instead of you makes mistakes your allies in the company probably start wishing you were hired instead.

Actually, I worked for one guy and he completely ignored me - I think he wanted to pretend he didn't have a "girl programmer" on his staff... But I digress...

I'm not sure I buy the "women should always support other women" and always stick together argument though. Seems that was the mentality by the males that got women in our predicament in the first place, wasn't it? Do you think that men should "stick together"? Do you ask what's wrong with men who hire women?

Just wanted to offer another perspective.

Whenever I'm not selected for a position, I ask the hiring manager why they didn't choose me, what qualities, experience or qualifications the candidate they did choose had that made them the preferred choice and thank them for their consideration. If nothing else, when the "bonehead" ;) they did choose, screws up and gets fired, they might remember me in a good light.

of something. But I think there are several factors concurrent with hiring practices for executive women.

1) If the woman is married, she might hesitate to hire a woman, especially a good looking one because she might be insecure in her marriage and might think a woman as her asst. would be trying to seduce her husband.

2) I also think that many women who can actually get to the top like to have a man "under" them to hold that speck of power over them.

3) It royally sucks, but company execs STILL prefer to hire a man than a woman if the potential candidates are similar in experience and training. It's sort of an unwritten law that bosses are still male, and secretaries and assistants are female. It ain't gonna change any time soon, and god damn Ronald Reagun for letting the ERA collapse into nothingness.

Especially #1.

If a women is that insecure, it is doubtful she ever would have made it to executive level.

I myself have a male assistant and do not feel I have power over him. Executives just don't think that way. An assistant or secretary is like an extention of yourself.

This is what I've observed in the companies I've worked in over the course of years. I did say that it was my thought on the matter, and didn't do a complete generalization. Many of the women I have known who have reached executive levels are either bitches or very narrow focused. Those who are bitches don't really give a shit about anyone on their way to the top, and those who are narrow focused tend to shut out anyone and everyone who isn't in their direct path to the top.

I once received an email which said that women need to support each other, because the flame you light for them does not diminish your own flame. In the past, I've noted that those who DO climb the ladder faster than others won't do that--they're more ready to kick the ladder out of the way and let every other woman fend for themselves. Once many have gotten to a high place, they forget their humble beginnings instead of keeping the door open for others.

I do know some women that don't want to have an all-female department... just like I'm sure some men don't want to have an all male department. But, I think it really depends on the person.

Years back when I first got out of college, I worked for a company that was known for being very friendly to women overall, and the department I dealt with extensively was known to be that way, too - the two senior women in the department would usually give preference to women in hiring & promotions. But, that was just circumstantial and something people whispered about, and I am sure the reverse has happened in many other departments over the years - meaning male supervisors giving preference to men.

:shrug:

and was hired by a number of males, too.

(a major educational institution)

In fact, most of them are lesbians.

:shrug:

By definition it cannot apply to a fight between men.

Generalizations like this are hard to support.

I would never expect someone to give me preferential treatment just because we're the same gender. :shrug:

And the women who worked for her when she started were systematically chased out.

Strange...

It's the way most of us are raised. The guys are the football players, the girls are the cheerleaders and pep squad. It sucks when translated into the business world.

:popcorn:

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like anybody wants to play. :-(

I have a female friend who has told me about a dozen times she HATES, HATES, HATES working for other women, that she gets along better with male coworkers...I was somewhat surprised since I think she's a pretty smart individual...

:shrug:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't think she's too territorial, though.

:eyes:

You phrased it much more pleasantly than I would have. ;)

:eyes:

stay nice for long!

I'm the same way; the more I look at something like that, the more pissed off I get.
:mad:

The qualifier "in general" doesn't hide the undertone very well, you might want to try another shade next time.
:eyes:

uh... not sure what it is... :shrug:

African-American Professionals are, in general, the most territorial creatures on the planet.

Jewish Professionals are, in general, the most territorial creatures on the planet.

Male Professionals are, in general, the most territorial creatures on the planet.

Latino Professionals are, in general, the most territorial creatures on the planet.

See how you sound to the rest of civilization?

planet...

Yep, that pretty much says it all.

:eyes:

In the subset of women that do not hire women, the motivations may be different from the subset of men that do not hire women. Sometimes, if there are very few women in an organization, a particular woman may be getting a lot of pride out of being one of the few who made it. Hiring other women takes something away from that "specialness". Sometimes, in that same situation, she may be worried that people will think she hired the woman out of favoritism. Sometimes, she may have absorbed the anti-woman attitudes she had to push through, and sees herself as an exception.

Sometimes, the motivations are about the same. Women are just as susceptible to social conditioning as men. A woman's typically softer, higher voice, tendency to raise tone at sentence ends even in declarative statments, her gentler handshake, and more compact body posture may come across as nonassertive, nonaggressive, nervous and uncertain in job interviews regardless of the gender of the interviewer. Typical feminine mannerisms also include not making as much direct eye contact, which can be interpreted as deceitful or disinterested. In tight competition, those subjective qualities can make the difference, particularly where the corporate culture favors more typically masculine social traits.

If you're worried about gender discrimination, the first thing to do is to stop thinking in gender terms. A candidate should be a candidate regardless of gender, and a hiring manager should be a hiring manager regardless of gender too. You have to break out of your own fetters before you have the strength to break out of anyone else's.

all sides. Certainly food for thought. Maybe just sensitive to the position I'm applying for and having to do more to get it then the male counterpart up for the same position. I'll let you all know how it works out. The interesting thing is, there are 6 managers, only one is a female that is the one that will ultimately make the final decision between me and the man. All the men have recommended me and she still vacillates. Go figure.

Anyway, good luck.

managers that worked for me were women, maybe that was unusual but i hired them based on their work experience and education. I'm sorry that you aren't given the chance by this person doing the hiring, maybe it's just this one women you know?

I hire people, and I've hired LOTS of women. I've also hired a lesser number of men, but that's because my field is predominantly female. The good employee to crappy employee ratio is about even, gender-wise. I want the best employee for the job, because that makes MY job easier. I don't care about that employee's gender - it's irrelevant.

Your idea that women need to "stick together" is a crock.

:yourock:

...that this is posted under the name "Catfight?" Kinda raises a red flag for me, but YMMV.

same road!

My radar beeped at that one.

:shrug:

...I can say definitively that most hiring decisions are made by at least two people. Usually it's the immediate supervisor, his or her supervisor, and Human Resources.

Hiring decisions based on age, gender, religion, national origin, ability level (when reasonable accommodations exist or can be made), veteran status and marital status are illegal. If you suspect illegal and/or unethical hiring practices are happening, you need to file a complaint.

personality.

Hiring someone who happens to be a woman (or a man, or a person of color, or a Xian, or a fill in the blank) is not illegal if the hiring decision is not specifically made based on gender, race, national origin, religion, veteran status, age, disability status (where reasonable accomodations are available), and/or family status.

In other words, hiring a man over a woman because you don't want to hire women is illegal. Hiring a man over a woman because he has experience in the field and she doesn't is not illegal.

Actually, the last three or four jobs I've had--women have hired me. My sister and one of my best friends have women bosses that hired them as well.

So they do indeed hire other women.

:shrug:

(woman here)

I was hired by a man for the job before that (in construction, by the way).

I was hired by a woman for the two jobs before that (both in construction).

And a man for the job before that.

You hear that it was a tough decision, neck and neck because no one is ever going to say, "Yeah, well, you never had a chance, the other applicants were far more qualified."

In fact I love meeting people. My best hires have been those with great attitudes and want to learn.

The real problem is that everyone has prejudices, and that people hire and fire based on their prejudices.

I was on the hiring committee at my last job, and the way our HR policies went, the hiring committee had to select the top three candidates from the applicants, and pass them over to the positions immediate manager for the final selection. The woman in that position NEVER hired men. If a man was recommended by the committee, and a woman was #2 or #3 on the list, the top ranking woman would get the job. We finally had one incident where none of the top 3 were women, so she went back into our paperwork and found the highest ranking woman who HAD applied...she was something like 9th overall.

When we confronted her about this, she claimed that women were underrepresented in the company and that she was trying to get some balance among our employees. Unfortunatly for her, one of the other committee members was an HR department employee who knew full well that over half of our employees were women. She challenged that claim and filed a formal grievance against the manager. The manager reportedly stated later on that she'd "never hire a damned man" for ANY job, so they cut her loose.

Luckily our replacement manager was far more practical...she hired based on skills alone.

I work in an office of all women!! The head of our whole agency is also a woman.

This is just your situation, but plenty of women hire other women...I don't know where you get that!

...of aerospace. (And I'm male, FWIW.) I hired them as Technical Writers.

Yes, I had to put up with a lot of shit about "building a harem." Oh, and "hiring the frigging UN." (A couple of the women weren't WASPs.) And various other crap.

A couple of really obnoxious things happened, generally invoving those pathetic aging Lotharios we're all familiar with.

But the worst insult probably came from other women, in the Human Resources dept. They called in one of my Tech Writers and tried to make her take a secretarial test--typing, shorthand, etc.
This woman didn't do that. She had over 10 years experience in the field of cryptology--code making and breaking. Which is why I hired her.

I left Human Resources a smoking crater that day. Told them they'd better never try that bullshit on one of my staff again.

Fun stuff like that is one reason I want no part of being "management."

You belong in a position of authority. I've found that most people in positions of authority believe they are better than others. We need more fair minded, go to bat employers who handle the hr dept. and other big shots just like you did.

Thank you, yes.

I've been in several secretarial/admin assit jobs where I was the glorified secretary. Usually that meant I was some wierd hybrid of jr mgmt and AA. I purposefully got out of that line of work years ago. It was too draining. Too many people to placate.

Working in technical communications, I've always worked around male engineers. I've mostly found them to be receptive because I enjoy learning about product development and they know that if I don't do what I do best, their products are going to sit on the shelf because no one can understand it. :evilgrin:

edit: As for working with other women, I've had them both. But I've found more women who wanted to cut out what they percieved as competition, rather than colleagues to mentor. One one sticks out in my brain as the mentoring type, and sadly, I wasn't in a place in my life to enjoy it. Oh well.