Maternity Leave article - AIBU to think this is simply misleading & wrong?

[BeCool]

Link to page elsewhere on MN

It a summary/comparison of maternity benefits around the world.

But for the UK it says this:
"British Mums get 52 weeks off, with up to 90% of their pay. UK Mums can apply for other means tested benefits too."

I don't know anyone at all who got 90% of their pay for 52% weeks. You get 90% of your pay for SIX WEEKS only, then SMP for up to 34 weeks, then a further 3 months without any ££ at all. Your employer may give you further benefits but these would be a bonus, not the norm.

I thought it was going to be an interesting article - but the way the situation in the UK is misrepresented, gives me no faith at all that other countries are being accurately represented either - rendering the entire article rather pointless. I know they have used " up to 90%" but surely that's no excuse as the situation is at best, inaccurately or misleadingly summarised.

AIBU to wonder why the Debt Advisory Centre misrepresented the UK situation so badly? Or am I being overly pinicky? (bit cranky this morning)

I get a year full pay - very lucky indeed.

Just seen this article today and it makes my blood boil. For every other country it states what the legal allowance is, and for the UK it blatently misrepresents the reality. I am fuming!
A better/clearer chart would have been to show how a woman, normally earning £28000 full time, would fare if she took 6 months or a year off work in each country.
Absolutely fuming about this. (You can tell, can't you, that I did not get 52weeks at 90%! I got 12 weeks at 90%, went onto SMP for 6 weeks, then took 3 weeks holiday, and then went back to work full time so that I could pay my mortgage and keep a roof above our heads!) rant rant fume fume!

The more I think about this the more angry I am. What if a woman were to refer to this to see if she could afford to get pg/have a child? This would completely misinform her.
Should we assume that the people at the Debt Advisory Service are ensuring more customers in the future, ...maybe they need to ensure that they keep themselves in jobs.

Mumsnet - you really need to do something about this blatent misrepresentation!!!

I get the bare minimum it surprises people as I work for a medium sized professional firm. Have discovered a lot of my female colleagues also thought they would get more. Luckily I read the maternity policy ages ago so was prepared (crunching the numbers is still terrifying though - not sure we'll ever be able to afford a second).

I got 6 weeks at 90% then 21 weeks at 50%. I saved 5k while pregnant so that between DH and I we'll have a full year on the breadline

Like you Meg I'm not sure we'd be able to afford a second.

Definitely misleading but so is the info for other countries - I'm in NZ and certainly aren't getting 100% of my normal pay!

Not unusual though as I've come across several comparisons out here in NZ which get UK employment law wrong. I wish journalists would just ask someone appropriate rather than just googling...

OiMisses I hear you & I agree completely.

WTF is this Debt Advisory Service and how/why are they doing such a poor job with this? I certainly wouldn't have any faith in them, and I do wonder if people aren't getting completely the wrong picture thanks to them.

that was what I was wondering about too ConfusedKiwi - so we now know that for some countries, inc UK, they pretty much made these "comparable facts" up!!!

and it's still on MN!

Australia is misrepresented as well. You can get 18 weeks Paid Parental Leave, but it's $606.50 per week (minimum wage) and is taxed, and only one parent can claim it.

Very poorly researched and written. Bruce and Sheila? Seriously?

I work for a big supermarket Tesco and just got SMP. 90% for six weeks then 33 weeks at about £130. This was a couple of years ago.
It was the same when I worked for Whitbread.
IME private companies generally seem to pay the bare minimum, while my friends who work for the NHS, teachers or in the council seemed to get a much better deal.
Because of the crappy deal, I had to go back when both mine were only 6 months old

The bit about Denmark is misleading too. Much of it depends on which trade union you are a member of.

(I've just realised I'm looking back with rose-tinted glasses, i only got 6 wks at 90%, then went onto SMP.) But it's irrelevant.
Mumsnet HQ please take down this page and inform the Debt Advisory Service that they are incorrect and need to get their facts straight before publishing!

Hey everyone, just to let you know that we've had a read of the thread and see your point: quoting best-case scenarios only could mislead expectant parents. So we've taken the page down. Thanks for your help

Thanks Sarah - good call.

I think it would be valuable to quote the legally-mandated minimum, and then say "but many employers offer more than this".

Agree with Trills.

Thank you Mumsnet.

I did get 90% pay for 9 months with DS, but only because was working part time and studying before I went on maternity leave, so my part time pay was only the same as SMP. This time round it is going to be a much bigger shock! I think I get 90% for 6 weeks then 50% for 3 months and then SMP after that

I got the usual 90% and then smp. I went back after 6 months - this was 2006/07. (Before ML changed)
The job I went back to wasnt the same. I had not got my rep anymore. I was a general dogs body. Ringing customers telling them they weren't gettin their order etc etc but the girl who left a month after me to have her baby returned a month after me getting the days SHE wanted because her boyfriend was the supervisors nephew. I wanted certain days per week off and I had to WAIT until this girl had sent in her return back to work requests so they could amend mine and then tell me what days I could have. She got her days and I worked the days she didnt. It was a piss take.

The whole company had changed and it was awful no left a month after. Ds1 needed an operation and I went on sick to look after him (annual leave) I went back for 2 weeks and handed in my notice. I used to love the job then after maternity leave I used to go home crying and cry on way into work :-(

The company has dissolved now!!!
I wonder why?!

My previous employer gave 9 months (39 weeks) full pay then nothing for the remaining 3 months. Don't know anywhere else that beats that. But.... You are contractually obliged to return to work for 6 months or pay it back. Not unreasonable.

Just read Fairlygrounded's post- a year's full pay. Wow!

Full year on full pay here. For both children. Didn't have to pay anything back when I didn't go back after DC2...