To think statutory maternity pay should be the same amount as the state pension?

Er yes, I do realise, what’s your point?

Then they should get a bloody job! Many jobs out there for folks that want to work…

Totally different things.
the people getting state pension have paid in many many years, far exceeding what they have put in.

if you decide to have a child, you need to factor in funds.

pensioners fully deserve the pittance they get after paying in for 40-50 years.

have a child? Pay for it yourself, don’t get me started on the benefit scroungers that have there life paid by us tax payers…

You do get paid more for the first couple of months but yes it would be nice to get a higher amount. I guess it's because likened to not being employed so the responsibility has been taken away from employers amd put into the government paid sphere.

As this has become the norm all we can do is try to save to compensate for the shortfall or go back early. Unless of course very fortunate financially. Xxx

I can’t believe the people saying smp is fine - it’s awful. I’m a teacher and our MAT pay is rubbish. My partner works has an okay salary but we’re hardly high earners and I was shocked by how little we had, then I had to use savings and the credit card just to survive and believe me we didn’t do anything flashy.

I did take the entire year. But a lot of workplaces, civil service and some nhs get 6 months full pay while we get two weeks.

Some paternity packages in the private sector are better than th maternity smp nowadays. This is good but does show that maternity pay is poor imo.

I think it needs a shake up and needs to be higher. and kit days cost because you have to pay childcare so I basically did about three.

How about Carer’s Allowance, should that be increased too?

YABU , the country is already financially strained and presumably you can get CB as well

YABU OP - only in that maternity provision should be MORE generous than the state pension. After all, there's a mother AND baby involved. But YANBU to make the point more generally.

Not paying into proper pension provision for yourself is a choice. Everyone knows state pension only isn't enough - they had their whole lives to plan. They also have the choice to continue working- there is no longer a compulsory retirement age.

Presumably that is to ensure they can survive, whilst focusing their minds on getting a job, rather than making it possible for them to stay on job seekers forever

Presumably people also have a 'choice' to build up a decent pension in their working lives rather than rely on state pension only?

I don’t really understand why you’re making a comparison with pensioners. Benefits clearly aren’t equal as evident by jobseekers aged 25+ who only get £92.05 per week to live on.

Not unreasonable. I know so many women who had to go back before they were ready because of SMP.

I don't think women should go back before a year tbh (unless they're really bored!). I was still breastfeeding on demand with mine at that point, and my childminder wouldn't take under one. Your body is still also making a recovery!! Those saying you get nursery from 9 months, so what? Wouldn't it be better to give women the choice?

For mumsnet as well - What's with all this "they have a partner earning a wage"?? I thought we all agreed depending on a man financially was a pretty dumb plan.

I think you’re absolutely right, although I’ve never thought about it before. New parents often still have mortgages to pay etc. The maternity leave has definitely improved but it is still really difficult to manage. We didn’t have a 3rd because we simply couldn’t afford it.

As for pensioners living the life of luxury, I don’t think that’s true for everyone. But I do think they’ll be far better off than the generations in their 30’s/40’s now. My parents (2 sets as divorced) have made an absolute killing on their properties. Retired at 55 on fantastic pensions and earn more now than they did working. My NHS retiring age has increased to 68 years.

And yet very many women these days do take a full year off work so presumably they can a) afford it and b) prioritise more time off than returning after 9 months and getting their salary back

Having a child is a choice. Reaching state pension age happens to everyone who didn't die before 67.

You do realise that mandatory auto enrolment only started in 20212, don't you? Up to then, employers were under no obligation to pay into pensions.

Just on point of correction we have amongst the least generous maternity provision amongst developed countries in terms of pay (discounting the travesty of USA!). We have fairly good provision in terms of leave but not pay. The pay is poor.

I would rather see pensions cut or frozen to fund incentives for childbearing, if people don't have children you will not recieve a state pension. For some reason pensioners are the only group in society who are not expected to shoulder their fair share of the consequences of difficult economic times. Contrary to what they claim, they have not "paid in" their entire lives, they were taxed to fund the welfare bill that existed at the time, and now the welfare bill is rising, it's completely unfair to expect working adults and children to be suffering disproportionately so pensioners can maintain their standard of living. They should in fact be amongst the first to feel cuts, along with those chronically reliant on unemployment benefits without cause, as over half of pensioners have wealth exceeding half a million, and a quater have assets over one million.

I have no horse in this race however, as I am fortunate enough to not need to consider working or recieving maternity pay while raising children. This shouldn't be an unusual position, as we know it's best for children for them to be raised by their own mothers, for at minimum the first three years of life, and what is the point of society and economic growth if we're deciding as a society that it's acceptable for a six or nine month old baby, who should still ideally be breastfeeding, to be separated from its mother for nine hours a day.

Here we go again. Today's 30-somethings have the worst deal ever, ever and today's pensioners are living the life of luxury after a working life of joy and ease.
The working generation is paying tax to fund today's pensioners, just as they did when they were working. It has always been the same but for some reason it has suddenly become a huge issue and today's workers seen to be under the impression that they have been particularly shafted by doing the same as others have always done.
OP, if it makes you feel any better, you will be paying for my luxurious retirement in 10 years time but I had much worse maternity entitlements, no subsidised childcare and no flexible working and limited workplace pension, so much as younger workers don't want to hear it, they don't have a monopoly on hardship.
And no, we couldn't afford one parent at home as we could not easily afford the 15% mortgage rate on one salary.

I think one of the issues is who pays. The state pays the pension and the company pays the SMP. Smaller companies would find it really hard. In the past there was a scheme where you could claim back SMP paid if you were a small business but they discontinued that. So now the full cost is born by the employer - which if you only employ a small number of staff and have a low turnover kind of business could put you out of business.
Personally I think under a certain size/profit margin maternity pay should be paid by the state and at a much better rate.