What not to discuss about a career gap.
Sabbatical, Family Caregiver 2004–2012 An engineering degree and a decade of work in a technical field later, this single line on my resume often attracts the most attention in interviews I’ve had since being a stay home mom. This is true even in interviews at companies that are getting great press coverage for their efforts in the “diversify tech” movement and who tout strategies to mitigate unconscious bias. The talk from those talent management executives is overwhelmingly positive, however, my experience has been that talk fails to translate to action when it comes to the actual individuals conducting interviews — interviewers who are prone to go off script and in turn open the door to unconscious biases. This often starts with the innocuous “tell me more about 2004–2012?” My straightforward response that “I resigned to care for my children and returned when the youngest went to kindergarten” has resulted in the following reactions.
1. Personal questions which yield irrelevant information.
How many kids? Ages? Boys or girls?
Who does the work you used to do at home now that you have returned to the workplace?
What arrangements have you made for family care going forward?
People voluntarily leave paid employment for a variety of reasons — PERSONAL REASONS. To request candidates elaborate on their situation encourages them to reveal irrelevant personal information. Although these questions are not illegal, often times it would be illegal to use any of this information in the hiring decision.
2. Strongly opinionated views on the role of stay at home parents (SAHP).
“I think it is wonderful for you to return to work after taking time off to get refreshed and put your work/life balance back in order”
“I love my kids but I cannot imagine ever quitting my career to be a SAHP.”
“My wife stayed home but our kids are teenagers now and she does not plan to ever return to work. She is just lazy.”
Hearing that your interviewer has a negative opinion of your personal choices is never a good sign in an interview.
3. Questions selected specifically for the former SAHP.
Give me an example of a time in which you had difficulty achieving a balance between your personal and your work responsibilities. What was the situation, and what steps did you take to address it?
What scheduling tools do you currently use to balance your work/life commitments?
Once the interviewer looked through her list of approved questions and actually said out loud “oh, this one is perfect for you.” It was the second in a series of work/life balance questions she gave me. These questions and others like them are reasonable — if they are asked to all candidates not just former SAHPs. I have not seen any research supporting the notion that former SAHPs are more likely to experience future work/life balance issues. Moreover, the time I spend describing how I balance work/life is time I don’t spend speaking to how I solve work issues, a disadvantage when other candidates may spend the majority of their interview talking about their work responsibilities, not their personal ones.
For these reasons, the seemingly harmless “tell me more about 2004–2012” no longer seems harmless to me. Talent management organizations need to continue to expose and eradicate unconscious bias within the hiring process. Instead of media pronouncements, focus on results that prove the message has trickled down to the personnel conducting the interviews and making hiring decisions. In interviews, eliminate personal questions and use the same criteria to evaluate all candidates. Review how career gaps are questioned in order to avoid inadvertently requesting personal information. Verify interviewers stick to the same set of predetermined questions for all candidates. These small steps help prohibit the interviewers’ unconscious biases from influencing the conversation, thus ensuring all candidates have an equal opportunity to demonstrate their relevant job skills.
