To worry about taking 12 months maternity leave??

[user1476114613]

Hi All,

First post, no idea how to personalize my user name.

I am 3 months pregnant and looking to tell my employer shortly about this. I work for a US company but am based in the UK. I report into a USA-based manager and have no team mates in the UK office, if that makes sense. I am Head of Marketing for Europe and of course work to GMT hours.

I am maybe unreasonably panicking about my maternity leave. HR are based in the US and I know that they will think it's nuts that we are entitled to up to 12 months. In an ideal world, I would take the full year. I am pregnant with my first baby after a long slog with fertility treatment so we are over the moon. I've waited so long for this and want to make the most of it. My role is reasonably specialist due to the area of business we operate in and I am quite popular with managers (sounds like a dickish thing so say but hopefully relevant).

My company has recently carried out thousands of redundancies across the world (we employ 50,000+ globally but it was still huge). We're told we're over the worst but I do worry about being replaced/ditched if I take more than 6 months. I obviously want to find someone who will cover my work well but I am also (very unreasonably!) worried that they'll not take me seriously if I take more than 6 months. The average amongst US colleagues seems to be between 6-12 weeks for maternity leave which seems nuts to me but they don't bat a n eyelid.

I understand that I am legally entitled to return to my original job after 6 months (i'll also tag on about 30 days accrued leave onto this). Would it be sensible to take just the 6 months? Or AIBU to not take 12 months based on an outcome which might not happen? Due to the nature of our fertility problems (early menopause) this will likely be my only baby.

My job is incredibly convenient - I work from home but can pop into the office whenever I choose and my salary is very good. Work is hard but the balance is fantastic if im honest.

WWYD?

I'm a remote worker (wfh) and it's a different proposition to in-office roles when it comes to kids.

My experience was that it's MUCH easier to feel comfortable getting back to work after a baby when you wfh. Having your partner (or nanny) on baby-station while you're just in the next room and only 6 paces from a breastfeed or snuggle, it's a godsend.

Normally I'd encourage any woman to take all the materntiy leave she's entitled to, but in this case you might find that earlier is fine, if your company is open to flexible hours as you all figure things out with childcare or your partner dropping back to part time or whatnot.

Agree with Dutch1e, working from home does put a different perspective on your dilemma. I had DD in the US, and went back after 4.5 months - 14 weeks maternity plus accrued leave. I had enough leave accrued to go back four days a week for five months, and negotiated working one day from home - in practice I worked two half days from home (and had two half days leave) per week. So I had the best (and worst) of all worlds. What enabled me to cope with it (had to go back to work for visa reasons) was getting a nanny. It meant when I worked from home DD was nearby, I saw her throughout the day and could continue with breastfeeding, and could also be fairly flexible with my hours. So if you have a nanny or your partner is taking leave, then it really means you are still spending the majority of time with your baby. I was exhausted though - I couldn't have worked full time. I also couldn't give much of a toss about the work, and I resented having to go back, but it did mean my career didn't stall. After about six months of that arrangement they wanted me to go back to full time. So I quit and we moved back to the UK and now I work from home as a freelance consultant, and again it means I see DD much more than if I was commuting to an office every day.

I was previously an advocate for long maternity leave, but I now feel that being lucky enough to have jobs which have allowed me to work flexibly and from home means I've managed to keep my career going (and it's gone in much more interesting directions since going freelance - something to think about if you do find you have to move jobs) as well as maximising time with DD - I'm also hoping I can continue with this style of working when DD goes to school, without negatively impacting my career. Hope sharing my experience helps in some way! Congratulations on your pregnancy!

I wouldn't take the full 12 months if you would risk losing the job. Id take the long term view that jobs working from home are brilliant when you have kids and hard to find. It will mean that you will / should have the flexibility to juggle things round to do school drop offs and pick ups when he/she is older and you'll never miss things like school plays and parents evenings because you were stuck in an office too far away to pop back for an hour! What you'll sacrifice in the extra six months of mat leave you'll get back in being able to have a job that works alongside being a mum. Also, like someone else said, if you can give your partner/husband the other half of the mat leave then your child won't miss out on having a parent one:one for the first year.

I don't think the benefits of a flexible job where you can easily work from home should be understated. Especially when you have a child in childcare where they can pick up every bug under the sun and you can find yourself needing days off all over the place. Juggling work and parenthood can be hard and flexible roles and employers aren't that easy to come by.

I work for an American owned firm and I know that women in my team found themselves coming back to a different but equivalent role after taking more than 6 months. At the moment I like my team, role and boss and have a decent amount of flexibility which I would not wish to risk losing so if we have another baby I'll be taking 6 months tops. Dc will then be with DH but I would do the same if it was childcare

To the minority who've said it's 'madness' to return to work after 3 months.... just imagine that in several years time, ML is upped to 24 months. Some people will look back at how things were in 2016 and say 'goodness, only had one year off. Madness!'
But of course it isn't. Just as those of us who were only entitled to 3 months ML werent mad- it was completely normal 25 years ago.

Having been a 3 month returner, I'd say it's physically tougher (especially if still bf as I was) and you're doing More night wakings. But emotionally probably easier than starting to leave a child at around 12 months old.

OP- you don't have to take a year off, it's up to you. Your baby will be fine either way, and if you have a good career set up there's nothing wrong with wanting to retain that. Also have you thought about transferring some parental leave to the baby's father which is another option?

Ages ago I returned part time at 4 and 7 months with my babies. Both times my career could't easily be neglected longer than that. I can't imagine developing regrets in time for my deathbed In fact, I love that I have an interesting career AND an excellent relationship with my kids (I do have an un-lovey house, a neglected garden, an extra stone to carry around, and only a handful of close friends. It has to give somewhere.)

I have a new baby and plan to go back part time at 7 months, as here is a work project I need to attend to (if I don't - it just won't happen and I've been working towards it for years). I asked my older boys if they resented that I worked when they were babies. They looked at me like I was mad for asking such a stupid question. They barely remember daycare, expect for some vague, fond memories of mischief. No regrets from any of us.

that's true malvinas, my dds also dont remember...but it's when they older say from 7 or 8 and also pre-teen and teenagers and you can be flexible with work that they really notice. a baby one two year old - even three four wont remember so much so long as they had good childcare and consistency and you spent lots of time with them weekends etc...

older kids need more emotional support and that's when flexible working and earning good money really pays off.

and that is often easier to achieve if you dont have huge career breaks/very long ML.

From my personal experience I went back when DD1 was 8 months and DD2 was 10 months

8/9 months is ideal for me as 10 months we were in separation anxyety territory and after 6 months they start weaning so real food make them feel slightly less dependent - not that mine ever drank any milk at nursery and just breastfed during the night in the first few months...

Go home, have the baby, and by law they have to assume you are taking 12 months and you only need to give them 2 months notice of when you are coming back, as far as I am aware...

unless you have a US contract and not a UK one...

but i think 8 months would be a good time to go back, 7 months + your accrued holiday

(and I am also coming from a much wanted children after recurrent miscarriages perspective)

From my personal experience I went back when DD1 was 8 months and DD2 was 10 months

8/9 months is ideal for me as 10 months we were in separation anxyety territory and after 6 months they start weaning so real food make them feel slightly less dependent - not that mine ever drank any milk at nursery and just breastfed during the night in the first few months...

Go home, have the baby, and by law they have to assume you are taking 12 months and you only need to give them 2 months notice of when you are coming back, as far as I am aware...

unless you have a US contract and not a UK one...

but i think 8 months would be a good time to go back, 7 months + your accrued holiday

(and I am also coming from a much wanted children after recurrent miscarriages perspective)

apologies for duplicate post!