Why do should someone with children get preference over someone without?

Question

I do a bit of part time work in addition to my full time job and my boss has decided that those who have children should get first choice at booking days off (i.e. Christmas, Easter etc). Why should I get second choice? They chose to have kids, I chose not to - why should they get preferential treatment?

Rubbish - your life shouldn't be made easier just because you chose to have a child. Your decision, live with the consequences.

Jan R, I'm really sorry to hear that, chicken.

Answer 1

O fantastic question!!!

This is a personal bug-bear of mine.....I always make a point of parking in Parent & Child parking spaces, and I get told off by the girlfriend.
Disabled people cannot help their condition & deserve certain facilities, but why, O why, do parents deserve preferential treatment??? They chose to get knocked up!!
Tell your boss that it is discrimination to give time-off based on what you have said, you have just as much right to certain days off even though you dont have children.

Answer 2

having kids is not easy, however you are correct, such treatment seems very..... american. Our brothers across the pond have a nice sounding name for it though, affrimative action. Yet again on the other side of the leave you should have pity on your coworkers, raising a family is much harder in these darkening times and one day if you chose to have a family, you may need all the help you can get. and sean what on God's good green earth are you? A bloody college student?

Answer 3

And if no-one had children????? We'd be extinct in 100 years. Your sole purpose on this planet is to have children, you are here for nothing else than to aid the survival of your species.

But no, you don't want to, you prefer to terminate the gene line that evolved from the beginning of our species and will end with you.

So not only are you that selfish, you also question the priority of people who are maintaining the survival of our species!! You want your totally selfish life and bugger the rest. Nice attitude.

I think you should also get paid less if you're not a parent, you don't need as much money to live.

Answer 4

That is s pretty standard practice. It is also standard for people who have been with a company longer to have first shot at holidays too. Also, there are eight year old kids in China who are forced to make fireworks every day and have seen their friends blown up by accidents. I'm starting to get the feeling that life just isn't fair. Somebody owes me some happiness!

Answer 5

it sucks, but I changed my tune when I had children, then it all made sense. life isnt fair, but at times it can swing in your favour. look at the things you have that advantage you, and you will see that in almost every other area of your life you have the winning cards compared to the parents you work with.

freedom to do what you want when you want
no responsibilities
more money in the bank

dont be mad at the parents, but instead be angry at your boss for that decision. yes, they had children, and they should wear it, but your boss is the reason that they have this "first choice" so aim your angst at the correct person.

Answer 6

Well just think. If you do have kids, and its Xmas break or something, wouldn't you want to get that time off to spend time with your kids? I mean its not fair, but hey...its not fair for the kids to spend all of Xmas or easter ect or spring break home alone or at day care and parents are working! Yes its not fair, but c'mon...give the parents a break...think of the kids a little. Because you don't have kids, you have a more flexibility in your vacations. You can go anytime you please. But people with kids usually have to wait until the kids are on break.

Answer 7

Holidays off should go by seniority, not by who has children. How does he justify that? If this is in a large corporation, I'd say check with Human Resources, as that sort of thing is usually not allowed. Otherwise, talk with your boss and explain to him that your family is just as important as anyone else's, whether or not children are involved should have nothing to do with it.

Answer 8

Oh dear. Bah Humbug!!
You would deprive the kids of having their parents around for Christmas just because the parents chose to have them and you didn't??? Let's hope you never have any then with that festive attitude.

I bet the whingers on here would also be the first to complain about "latch-key kids" who suffer from lack of adult supervision because MOST parents work to avoid living off the state! These short-sighted, selfish twats will then grow into sour, bitter and twisted pensioners who will later be marching for higher pensions which will be paid for by these kids they resent being allowed to spend Christmas with their parents now. Merry Christmas you sad Scrooges!!

Answer 9

Those who take upon themselves greater responsibility must logically be equipped with the means of disposing of these responsibilities. While you have correctly asserted that your co-worker decided to have children and you have decided not to have children, you have spuriously asserted that your co-worker should not get preferential treatment when in fact he or she should. We are in agreement that to have children is a choice which people make and likewise choose not to make; Furthermore, I infer that we are also in agreement as to the fact that choices come with consequences. Let us go on then and reason out these consequences.
If we are agreed that civilization is good and we wish at the very least to maintain it and that we find ourselves in a world where death reigns over us and that the transmittion of this civilization requires the reprodution of new generations to take up the resonsibilties (and privilages) of the proceeding generations then we must by logical conclusion be in agreement that procreation by individuals (sub-structure) is both a good and necessary for the preservation of our civilization (super-structure).
If we are in agreement then it seems those who choose to procreat do a service to the civilization, if in fact their progenee are equipped to take up the responsibilities (and privilages) for that civilization's maintainence while those who choose not to procreat, at lease as far as socical security and other forms of socialism are concerned and perhaps in other ways as well, are in a way paracitical upon them that do procreat.
It seems that those who choose to raise children are faced with two responsibilities, their work and the training of their and your replacements while you have only your work and your free time.
It seems to me that the alocation of the resource in question (flexibility of schedualing) has been approriatly apropriated.
Just be thankful that you are not forced to pay a penalty or tax for being the underproducer that you choose to be.

Answer 10

It is the old argument again: you can't live your life the way you see fit. Society forces you to live under "the greater good for the greater number" principle. No room for individualism any more...