Paternal leave for undeserving man

FFS. You can't declare something to be "fraud" based purely on assumptions.

Have you actually read what you've posted???

Perhaps you think that Nat West would happily send him off on 6 months leave at full pay just as a reward for having conceived a child? I have already said that I think this is vanishingly unlikely. So it follows that they have not been told the truth. There is no need to know anything more about the detail of their policy or what he said to them.

You think it's "unlikely" but have zero clue what's in the policy. And you've deduced that "they have not been told the truth" out of thin air. And there's "no need to know the detail of the policy or what he said to them".

What the actual fuck. 😂

@Blossomtoes you can see their pay gap reporting here - https://www.natwestgroup.com/who-we-are/working-at-natwest-group/diversity-equity-and-inclusion/gender.html

it also depends on what you mean by highly paid, there are plenty of finance, data, tech etc roles at manager level that pay c. £50k (regional, so add 30% for London roles) before benefits and bonus that are achievable 5-7 years out of university. I agree with you that heads of department type level are unlikely to take this leave but there will be plenty of males in the £50k - £120k bracket (which personally I’d class as well/ highly paid) across the country having children and taking this leave. Ok not everyone eligible will take it but it’s a global policy so they’ve got to be willing to foot the bill if there’s high uptake.

He's shown that he's a dickhead, taking advantage of a policy designed to help parents to go on jollies.

Now you know what he is, make sure your interactions with him take this into account. He's obviously unreliable and unwilling to be a father. The only thing you should expect from him is money. Go via cms so it's as legally binding as possible.

Try to not give him any other head space. Don't let his dickishness distract from your time with your young baby. You don't get these days back

I’d want to see some evidence before I agreed with you. I’d want to know how many highly paid senior male employees took six months paternity leave for a start. My guess is not very many by virtue of being older and past the baby years and not wanting the impact it would have on their careers. Given that the NatWest scheme is relatively new it’s unlikely that the data is available to support your theory.

Thing is with these policies it's to attract and retain staff, being able to do this outweighs the few who 'fraudulently' claim it I expect. Its a slippery slope to demand to know what people are up to on maternity and paternity leave.

I'm sure organisations are aware that some might take the piss, it's tricky with data protection and the like to demand things like the matb1 form which is for the woman rather than the baby if that makes sense; I guess asking for the child's birth certificate is reasonable though.

Generally I think it's a good thing, agree that the min mat leave for women isn't good though and although it can be galling seeing men get better we should be aiming to raise the levels rather than reduce them to meet sub standard ones.

@Blossomtoes whats not to agree with, it’s basic maths?

@SofiaSoFar I get that MN doesn't like men, and people screaming about men not being entitled to paternity leave then can't complain that women are the default parents.
But there is a clear biological difference here .
Replace 'man' with the non-birthing partner of a lesbian couple, and the result is the same.

Women can't fake being pregnant (well OK, maybe they can, but if would be very hard). And it takes 9 months to grow a child. She would very clearly be lying if she asked for maternity leave every 6 months.

There is theoretically nothing from stopping a man from making a baby every week if he wants too, then claiming paternity for all the different women!

The policy is great, and I hope more employers follow suit but they HAVE to show proof. Which isn't obvious to the naked eye, unlike for a woman.

Had the OP said that her husband or named birth cert father had gone off on a jolly fair enough there's nothing she can do to stop him. But this guy says he says a baby with no proof, and begs a free holiday???

It ruins it for the actual good fathers.

But what if the man actually WAS fathering several babies a year? Perfectly possible. Since some think it entirely plausible that employers are happy to grant leave for a child in whose life you do not plan to be involved, it follows that the employers can’t complain when he does this several times in a row, right? I mean, it’s not like women stop getting maternity leave after a maximum number of kids…

Also to those saying men could just take unlimited paternity leave, I think the business would realise something was up if a man was supposedly fathering multiple babies a year. That’s quite the pretence to keep up at work, and will lead to a hell of a lot of judgement.

Plus technically women could do the exact same, claim they are in a same sex relationship and their partner is pregnant.

For those saying a matB1 should be requested, what difference does it make? It doesn’t prove paternity does it?

I think this policy is a good thing, but as with most things in life it will be abused by a few. Even taking that into account, it will still most likely have a positive net impact.

Will you just lay off with this desperate need to have the last word @Blossomtoes?

Nope.

Will you just lay off with this desperate need to have the last word @Blossomtoes? It’s tedious in the extreme.

For the third time, my take on the situation is based on the premise that the employer would not be happy if they knew the truth. I think that is a safe assumption, you clearly do not. I heard you the first time.

There is every need. If the policy allows for this leave following the birth of a baby and that’s all the detail it goes into he’s entitled to it.

Christ. It’s like banging your head against a brick wall.

We know the truth of the extent of the man’s (non) involvement with his child because OP has told us.

Perhaps you think that Nat West would happily send him off on 6 months leave at full pay just as a reward for having conceived a child? I have already said that I think this is vanishingly unlikely. So it follows that they have not been told the truth. There is no need to know anything more about the detail of their policy or what he said to them.

You. Don't. Know. What. The. Employer's. Policy. States.

You don't know what has or hasn't been said, concealed, written, declared, ignored or agreed. No idea whatsoever.

Deliberate concealment if the truth in order to get the benefit. Isn’t that obvious?

It kind of does. Except possibly that senior employees are more likely to be older and past the baby years. I can see what you’re getting at but I don’t agree with it.

My choice of word was crass and unthinking @Singlemum19802023. I should have said responsibility.

What on earth has that got to do with declaring it to be "fraud"?

And remember, we don't know what their policy is so how on earth people are deciding it's "fraud", god only knows.

In what batshit universe would any employer be absolutely happy to give 6 months of paternity leave on full pay to a man if they knew that he was not in contact with the mother of his child and had no intention of spending any time with the baby?

Also just realised my tag of @Blossomtoes in my last post didn’t work, did my explanation of why this pat leave policy is likely to be more expensive for the business than providing equivalent mat leave make sense?

@Sissynova I don’t think anyone has insinuated that this is a reward in the same way a bonus would be but you’re being naive if you can’t see that such generous policies have attraction and retention of male staff as an objective

OP you must report him because he is a man and he is definitely breaking a policy that I have not read.