Friday, 28 February 2025

The Unemployable Woman: 48, Experienced, and Too Capable for the Corporate World

There comes a point in a woman’s career where her experience, knowledge, and ability should be her greatest strengths. 

At 48, after years—if not decades—of refining my skills, navigating challenges, and solving complex problems, I should be at the peak of my professional value. 

Yet, paradoxically, many women in my position find themselves unemployable. 

Not because they lack ability, but because they have too much of it.

My most recent rejections sound like this

“We feel your knowledge and experience outweigh the level of the role”

“We would love to offer you the job but the £25k salary is non-negotiable”

“Thank you for your interest in the vacancy, but at this stage we are looking for someone who can build their career with the company”

And my personal favourite from a market leader in the estate and lettings world

“That was a great interview, you have some fantastic ideas and a vision that really aligns with what we are trying to achieve. Unfortunatly we feel that you just are correct enough”

What the f&ck does that even mean? Not corporate enough??? 

The corporate world, despite its claims of valuing talent, innovation, and problem-solving, often operates on an entirely different set of unwritten rules. 

Employers don’t necessarily want true problem solvers. They want employees who will work around the problem, not challenge its existence. 

They want compliance, not directness. 

They want fit, not friction. And a 48year old woman, comfortable in her own skin, confident in her expertise, and unwilling to tolerate inefficiency, is anything but a frictionless hire.

The Fear of the Competent Woman

Having spoken to other women in similar positions it would seem that once we reach this stage in our careers we are often seen as a “risk” rather than an asset. 

We bring decades of knowledge and the ability to make things better, but instead of being embraced, we are perceived as intimidating. 

Our self-assurance, honed through years of hard work, can unsettle interviewers who are more accustomed to hiring younger, more malleable candidates—those who will accept without question, who will adapt rather than challenge.

It’s no secret that confidence in women is often mistaken for arrogance, while in men, it’s seen as leadership potential. The double standard is alive and well in hiring decisions. 

When an experienced woman walks into an interview, she isn’t just competing against other candidates; she’s battling against societal expectations of how women should behave in professional settings—accommodating, agreeable, and deferential. 

As a woman who speaks her mind, who points out inefficiencies, who proposes real solutions rather than just working around issues, I disrupt the comfortable status quo.


The Problem with “Culture Fit”

Many hiring managers lean heavily on the concept of “culture fit.” While this can be beneficial in ensuring a cohesive work environment, it is often a thinly veiled excuse for rejecting candidates who don’t conform to the existing corporate mould. 

As a confident, experienced woman who knows her worth I don’t fit neatly into a team that has been trained to accept things as they are.

Instead of hiring someone who could elevate the company, businesses often choose the easier path: candidates who will integrate seamlessly without disrupting existing dynamics. The irony is that companies claim to value innovation and efficiency, yet shy away from hiring the very people who could bring those qualities in abundance.


The Cost of Overlooking Experience

By rejecting experienced women for being too knowledgeable, too confident, and too capable, businesses are actively undermining their own potential for growth. 

There is immense value in hiring people who can identify inefficiencies and propose real solutions. 

I have a wealth of experience that doesn't just bring skills, I bring foresight, resilience, and a level of competence that can only be gained through time.

Instead of viewing me as a threat, businesses should recognise I am an asset. I am the mentor the younger workforce needs, the problem solvers who can streamline operations, and the leaders who can bring fresh perspectives without being hindered by corporate politics.

The corporate world needs to rethink its approach to hiring. The refusal to embrace strong, experienced women is not just a loss for the individuals affected but a loss for businesses as a whole. Companies that truly value growth and success should welcome these women with open arms, not shy away from them in discomfort.

It’s time for businesses to recognise that experience isn’t a liability—it’s an asset. And that women who have spent their careers honing their skills shouldn’t have to make themselves smaller to fit into a corporate world that fears their competence.



Tuesday, 25 February 2025

Cash for Keys: The New Word on the Street

 More and more landlords are opting to reach agreements with their tenants to vacate a property in exchange for a financial incentive rather than endure the stress and cost of formal court action.

Commonly referred to as ‘Cash for Keys,’ this approach is gaining momentum, especially ahead of the Renters Rights Bill. But is it really the easy solution it appears to be? Let’s explore the pros and cons and, crucially, how to do it correctly.

What is Cash for Keys?

Cash for Keys is not a new concept. It has long been used by landlords, agents, and mediators to encourage tenants to vacate a property without the need for court proceedings. However, the newly coined phrase itself is gaining traction across social media, sparking discussions about its legitimacy and effectiveness.

The process is straightforward:

  1. The landlord and tenant agree on a move-out date.
  2. The tenant signs a Deed of Surrender, formally ending the tenancy.
  3. The landlord pays the agreed incentive once possession is returned.

This arrangement avoids the lengthy, costly and stressful legal process associated with possession claims, allowing both parties to move on with minimal stress.

But is it really that simple? Let’s look at where things can go wrong.

Potential Pitfalls of Cash for Keys

1. Paying the Incentive Too Soon

One of the biggest mistakes a landlord can make is paying the tenant before they have vacated. The payment should always be made only when the tenant hands over the keys. With modern banking apps, an instant transfer can be completed on the doorstep once possession is confirmed.

2. Tenant Doesn’t Move Out

While rare, there are instances where tenants accept the payment but doesn’t leave. This is why having a signed Deed of Surrender is crucial.

Under Section 18 of the Distress for Rent Act 1737, once a tenancy has legally ended, a tenant who remains in occupation is liable to pay double rent.

However, landlords must communicate this early and ideally include it in the Deed of Surrender to deter non-compliance.

 

3. Claims of Harassment or Illegal Eviction

Some landlords have reported that solicitors have warned them Cash for Keys could constitute harassment or illegal eviction. However, this is misinformation. As long as the agreement is mutual and free from coercion or threats, it is entirely legal. Harassment and illegal eviction claims arise when a landlord forces a tenant out unlawfully, such as by changing the locks or cutting off utilities. A properly executed Cash for Keys agreement is a voluntary surrender, not an eviction.

4. Councils Advising Tenants Against It

Another common issue is local councils advising tenants not to accept a Cash for Keys offer, claiming they will be deemed intentionally homeless and ineligible for housing assistance.

This demonstrates a misunderstanding of homelessness law. A tenant who agrees to end a tenancy because it is no longer affordable or suitable is not intentionally homeless. Spending rent on non-essentials, knowing eviction will follow, is intentional homelessness—but accepting a fair financial settlement to leave is not.

Why Cash for Keys is More Relevant Than Ever

With the abolition of Section 21 on the horizon, courts are expected to become overwhelmed with possession claims.

At the same time, councils will struggle to cope with an increase in homelessness applications.

For landlords and tenants alike, Cash for Keys presents a practical alternative:

  • For landlords, it avoids legal fees, court delays, and the uncertainty of enforcement.
  • For tenants, it provides financial support for relocation without the stress of an eviction process.

While Cash for Keys is not without its risks, it remains a viable, legal, and often mutually beneficial solution when handled correctly.

Ensuring a signed Deed of Surrender, withholding payment until possession is returned, and clear communication are key to making it work.

As the rental landscape shifts, expect to hear more about Cash for Keys—because for many, it may soon be the most practical way forward.