We hear the words “career break” and start thinking “family over career”
It happens unconsciously in hiring conversations.
A woman has been away from work for a few years, and before anyone asks what she wants next, people start thinking about balance, flexibility and whether she would really want the pressure of a senior role again.
The intention may be kind, but the assumption can be limiting.
Because a woman taking time away from work tells us that she took a break. It doesn’t tell us that she wants less responsibility or is less ambitious when she comes back.
Yet that distinction can get lost surprisingly early in the hiring process, shaping the roles, designations and compensation that are put in front of her.
And the data suggests we should be questioning that assumption much more seriously.
The Assumption Doesn’t Match the Data
Financial security drives 38% of women back to work. Another 38% want to apply their education, the qualification sitting unused while they were away. 22% percent want to make better use of their skills specifically. These aren’t the stated priorities of someone looking to downshift. These are the stated priorities of someone who paused, and now wants back in, fully, not at a discount or as a good to do initiative.
And Then We offer Less
Here’s where the assumption does real damage. Returning women are routinely placed into roles below their prior seniority, “fewer than half,” by one recent estimate, land anything that matches their actual experience level. Nearly 40% take a pay cut or a role downgrade on the way back in. If you assume she wants less, you’ll happily offer her less, and call it thoughtful accommodation rather than what it often actually is: underplacement, dressed up as flexibility.
Who Gets Considered for the Bigger Roles?
It gets sharper in technical fields.
Women are relatively well represented in returnship programs in functions like People & Culture, Legal, Marketing. They are far less represented in engineering, product, or information security. It is not because the capability does not exist. It is because returnship programs are seen as a second chance and hence more suitable for support roles, and not senior strategic or business roles.
It’s simply easier to slot someone back into a “softer” function than to make the case for her in a technical leadership seat. Easier for the organisation. Not necessarily right for her.
Start With the Question
Ask what she wants directly, rather than inferring it from the fact that she took a break. Some women genuinely do want reduced scope for a period, and that’s a completely legitimate choice, one that should be offered honestly, not smuggled in as the default.
Others want exactly what they had, or more, and the organisation’s job is to build the case for putting them there, not to quietly decide on their behalf that they’d probably prefer something smaller.
The most respectful thing an organisation can do here isn’t offering flexibility. It’s asking plainly instead of assuming.
Link – https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/have-we-asked-her-what-she-wants-sonica-aron-she-her-hers–uzwhc/