Glenford Smith, career writer
Q. I just read an article titled 'The job experience conundrum' published on June 16, 2013, in The Gleaner, where you proposed sleeping with someone to get a job.
Are you serious or is this a new form of journalistic licence? Would you recommend that your daughter sleep around until she got the job?
After I read the article, I must admit to being a little bit lost. My final question is, what was the objective of the article?
- Lloyd Sewell
CAREERS: After reading your email, I must confess to being more than a little confused by both your charge and your question, Lloyd.
I want to thank you, however, for reading the article and for writing to seek clarity.
I wish to use the opportunity to provide the clarity you seek, specifically as it relates to the article, as well as to elaborate on the essential concern you raised.
Here is the relevant comment from the article: "Sleeping with someone to get a job should never be an option."
That was my advice in answer to a reader, K, who had written that she had seen where some women had to resort to sleeping with someone in order to secure a job.
Now, I'm completely lost as to how my response could be interpreted in the way you stated. It's saying in plain language that this idea should not even be contemplated, the very opposite of what you've concluded. Sex for work is morally wrong and is against every professional ethic.
Like K, I have been told of instances where women have been asked for sex as an incentive for promotion, or employment.
This is a reprehensible practice and should never be accommodated, no matter the level of a woman's financial desperation. Not only should this proposal be rejected, but the men who make it should be reported.
Now, in clearly setting out what I think is a morally correct response, I have to admit that some women are in situations where they believe they have no choice. To them, the practical need to get a job and secure an income overrides the moral considerations of the case.
Pragmatism over Principle
In other words, some women who read this may agree that exchanging sex for work is wrong, but go ahead and do it anyway because they have to 'eat a food'. They elevate pragmatism over principle. That's a bad idea.
Not only will the exploitative men be emboldened to repeat this practice with someone else, what is also likely is that once a woman capitulates to a request for sex in exchange for the job, she is almost certain to be required to keep the job in the same way.
In regard to your question about the objective of the article, my suggestion is to carefully reread it. Kindly note that the first part of the article is a question posed by a Gleaner Careers reader, K, as noted above.
The section which begins 'CAREERS:' is my response to K's question and concern. I think you'll find that it all makes sense, with this clarification in mind.
Glenford Smith is a motivational speaker and success strategist. He is the author of 'From Problems to Power' and co-author of 'Profile of Excellence'. email@example.com