There is this job ad that I'm interested in:


and it says 1 WFH day/wk for parents & carers g'teed. This is sort of a deal breaker. I know that I'll be unhappy at a job where someone gets 1 day wfh every week and I don't based on something outside of my reach. I'd also want to not drive to work and have lunch at home one day/week.

Is there any chance to convince them in a job interview, with arguments, that they should extend the policy to all employees (something along this answer How to address an "improved work/life balance" policy that penalizes those who don't have children?), or I should just not apply because this sort of policy would likely not change?

  • 4
    This job is no longer accepting applications....so don't bother. :) May 29, 2019 at 9:57
  • Is it the policy that bothers you per se? i.e. would you be happy in the role if you had the working from home arrangement but the policy remained as is? May 29, 2019 at 11:13
  • @P.Hopkinson as long as I would get the benefit, sure.
    – user1
    May 29, 2019 at 13:04

1 Answer 1


Take it as a positive sign rather than a negative one.

It is highly likely that you will be able to work from home one day a week if you ask politely (sometimes you might need to work 3-6 months first to obtain trust). This is something that you could ask them about at interview.

"Maternity & Paternity Leave, 1 WFH day/wk for parents & carers g'teed"

Notice that the policy does not say that non-parents won't get the perk, just that it exists and is guaranteed for parents.

You should favour employers that offer these kinds of progressive policies for three reasons:

  1. Someday you may become a parent or carer
  2. The workforce is more likely to be diverse and content
  3. This kind of policy indicates an overall positive disposition of a company towards its employees. It suggests that they will be similarly well disposed towards complex and surprising life events (illness of yourself or relatives) which is something that you very much want as an employee. It also suggests that they are not 80+ hour working week slavedrivers.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .