to think this is really not on (maternity leave)

[manicinsomniac]

Having a baby, having your full time off, coming back for a month then announcing you're 4 months pregnant and will be off again. If you knew you were pregnant (or even trying) should you really go back to work, knowing that your employer was going to have to pay two salaries for one job?

I really don't know if this is standard practice and completely ok or whether it's unfair and cheating the system. It seems unfair and a bit immoral to me.

littlechickpea it is illegal for the company to ask you any questions relating to your intention to have kids or otherwise and therefore not incumbent on women to tell their employer voluntarily. Presumably you would want women to do this do they give their employer an opportunity to discriminate against them - also illegal.

Can you all please RTFT. Stat mat costs are completely recoverable. Enhancements would be payable whenwver the wonan chooses to take her leave. It is my understanding that some additional recruitment costs are recoverable too but I may be corrected on this. Small businesses rarely pay enhancements so this claim that they are disproportionately affected is complete nonsense.

The difference between coming back pregnant or taking mat leave a year or two later is negligible in terms of impact on a company. In fact as one PP pointed out it can be easier in some circumstances where the gap is smaller because the person who last covered the leave is more likely to still be available and up to date with the role.

Women arguing in favour of sex discrimination. It really beggars belief.

You dont think its wrong that someone can work for just 6 months and then get 18 paid months off and a further 6 months unpaid which the company has to subsidise, at the end of which they may not even return to work?

I am afraid that the "I'm alright Jack" attitude is incredibly short sighted when you think of the ramifications on the company. Like LittleChickpea said, it could end up with the company losing business and people being made redundant. It is never as simple as "They can afford it".

IMO there should be no such thing as mat pay and mat leave. Would certainly lead to a more flexible work market. Work and get paid or don't work and don't get paid, fairly simple equation really.

ODFOD

OK, so how long should you have to return for between leaves Bogey?

Presumably you would want women to do this do they give their employer an opportunity to discriminate against them where did you get that from? She said that if the women were honest then the situation could be planned for long term and make it a better outcome for all concerned, instead of having to reactive all the time.

And I suggest YOU RTFT. As has been pointed out above, holiday pay, private health insurance, company cars etc are not recoverable and all (if they had been in place before the ML) are legally required to continue during the leave. That would cost a company thousands and thousands of pounds on top of what they are having to pay the replacement.

The difference between coming back pregnant or taking mat leave a year or two later is negligible in terms of impact on a company. And your evidence for this is what? In the last company I worked for ML had a huge impact because it was a small and specialised company and if one of the tech team went on ML they were nigh on impossible to replace on a temp basis.

I think that the same requirement that is in place for the first ML should be in place for all of them. So roughly 6 months before qualifying for paid leave.

If companies choose to offer extras such as company car, health insurance etc then that's a big bonus. Also one that they surely know they'll have to cover duribg ML.

Bogeyface can you please just explain how the timing of women taking ML upsets you? All objections seem to be about ML in general.

And the govt. pays for any other female who happened to have 11 kids, an old nag, and be housed by the council, but look at that "sense of entitlement _not", best to be working to be screwing the state eh? least ways ,then its legit?

The requirement for the first ML is just that you must be employed the week before becoming pregnant. So basically what you are saying is you don't agree with coming back 3 months pregnant and working up to the due date, but coming back and getting pregnant a week later then taking ML from 6 months would be fine?

ChairmanWow I never said anything about the business asking questions. I said the woman needs to be open and honest with the business about their intentions and work with the business so the business can manage the situation and protect their clients (in our case). This has nothing to do with ML pay for me. This is about balancing the rights of the woman and what's in the best interests of the business. Bogyface is right if we lose clients we have no choice but to make people redundant. People need to consider that! BTW, I work for a global organisation. I feel sorry for smaller business because they have even less in terms of resource.

To be completely honest in our organisation it is much more damaging to the business for someone in a client facing role to have two close ML leaves than two with a 12 / 18 month gap. People may not like that but it's the reality of the situation.

LittleChickpea I wouldn't want to do business with a global organisation that can leave clients exposed because it cannot deal with a member of staff going on maternity leave. That organisation is taking massive risks to be working in that way.

Then petition to get the law changed -- don't criticise women who are just exercising their legal/contractual rights.

The law is the way it is so that people will have children and women will be in the workforce -- this is a public policy position that the government has taken. You are thinking of the benefit to individual women, which is only part of the issue.

Growlithe this is not about us not dealing with maternity. This is about the impact on the relationship between the business and our clients. We need consistancy and our clients expect consistancy. Again reality is clients don't care if someone is on maternity or not. They want continued consistancy. They pay Alt of money in fees for the service and advice and swapping and changing the lead on their account is unacceptable. It's not as simple as bringing someone in that can take over. It's getting to understand the business, their global structure, the global operations, legality and regulation in each of their global territories. The contacts, understanding the programme in place and markets. That's just the start of it! Ontop of it each client is totally different and most client managers/directors will have anything between 20/50 clients. For us to replace a client manager/director is not that easy. If there is no suitable internal applications recruiting externally is not easy. Most of the good people will be on 6 month notice periods. And do you think they will take a job where someone will be returning from ML.

A small example, one of the things we use to attack other businesses in our sector is client managers / directors moving jobs, going on ML etc. because we know it causes disruption. So a client manager / director having two close MLs is a dream. And it's a small world in our sector so everyone knows what's happening in our market. So you may appreciate why this is so high on the agenda in our business.

LittleChickpea there are more problems with working that way than mat leave. Surely working with that little flexibility leaves the client and the business greatly exposed by being reliant on one employee. The employee does at least usually give good notice of mat leave. What about sickness or accidents?

Also, structuring workload in that way can be detrimental on hopes of career advancement. If you are so indispensable within a role, how can you have opportunity to move on?

Succession planning is surely crucial to any business.

Growlithe Our structure works well and we have the largest client base in our sector globally. Companies work with us because they know we structure our company/processes/employees to suit the clients needs. The client manager / director is the lead on the account. This is a vital role! There are others on the team but the managers / directors are key to all relationships. There are plenty of opportunity for progression but you need specific skills, qualities and experience to get a job in client management. These are difficult roles to fill. Not everyone wants to move into these positions because they are high pressure roles. And unfortunately the majority of client managers / directors in our sector are men which I believe is very much to do with the fact businesses don't want to take a risk on woman of a child bearing age. Incan assure you no one will ever admit to that because of the employment laws. The only way we will be ale to change this is by taking into consideration the needs of the business when we make choices as women. The impact our choices have on the business and speak to the business to manag these. I want more women in my world but it won't happen if we simply think industry will be ok with us going off without considering the business needs. I know people may not like what I am saying but i am been totally open and honest about the reality if the situation.

I'm siding with 'Andubelievedthat' on this one.
ML is a State Welfare Benefit, the same way that HB is and being other Social Welfare payments.
It is quite amusing that women who are on ML several times over have a sense of entitlement, the same sense of entitlement as the woman with 11 children who is having a house built for her (by the state).
ML isn't means tested either, so families earning £200k plus receive it.

I find this thread astonishing. Nobody is irreplaceable and you're naive if you think you are. In my job I like to think I have good relationships with the people I deal with however the truth is, the company's not going to grind to a halt if I discover I'm pregnant again just before I go back to work. I appreciate that for small companies it is more difficult than for large ones but if maternity and paternity rights were more equally shared it would share the burden around much more fairly.

Business is important for the economy but children are important for the whole country otherwise the country wouldn't exist.

There is no relationship between maternity pay and people having children. People have children out of a personal desire, not for the benefit f society. You could stop all maternity benefits tomorrow and people would continue to have children. There is not such thing as mayernity pay for the majority of the worlds population, doesn't stop them reproducing !

LittleChickpea I can't see there being a queue of women eager to enter such a sexist world which is obviously bordering on illegal in its lack of opportunities for them. Good luck with your career.

Biologically, someone has to have babies. That happens to be women. And I'd argue in the majority of cases, there is a man involved who is more than likely also working and therefore not "screwing the govt" by taking a mat leave to raise a child and recover from giving birth.

To suggest we evil pregnant women are out to screw companies and governments over by having babies and actually looking after them for a few months out of a probable 50 year working life is astounding.

Perhaps all working women should be sterilised? Oh and we can't have them scrounging off the state by claiming benefits either, so maybe women on benefits should be sterilised too. Only women with wealthy husbands are allowed to have kids because they can afford to stay at home and not accept any financial help from anyone, whether they are legally entitled to it or not.

It's sexism and discrimination whichever way you look at it.

What's your view on paternity leave then?

My maternity leave ends in 3 weeks, guess its a good job I miscarried this week otherwise I would be going back pregnant

Growlithe there are women in my world (just not the pecentage i wish werenhere) and it's not sexist. It's not bordering on illegal, we just put client needs first. I have been fortunate to have a great career and love what I do. I am a mum to be and the business is aware. But this is my choice, and I fully intend to go back after 6 weeks. People may disapprove and judge me for that but I knew when I took on down my career path what the consequences were. I made that choice and I have a responsibility for my choice. If I decide that I want another child then I will need to consider alternative options because it would be unfair on the business that has given me so much over the years. Again reality....

luanmahi I am astounded at the feelings of entitlement too.

i worked for a company with 400 staff- the majority of whom where of childbearing age (men and women 25-40 ish). we had a real churn of maternity and paternity leave. i often had female employees embarrassed about coming back from ml pregnant. my view was that if they wanted 2 children close together, that was their business and it made a lot of sense in many ways. it made no difference in that their entitlement was the same (we offered no enhancement). almost all of them came back after ml no 2 and stayed long term.