To think that if stat mat pay is good enough for women it's good enough for men?

[NewAccount270219]

I just read this press release from the TUC:

www.tuc.org.uk/news/tuc-calls-overhaul-shared-parental-leave

It's a subject close to my heart because DH and I are in the 1% who have done SPL, it's been brilliant for us and I would like to see higher uptake. But this bit really annoyed me:

The TUC believes take-up is low because the scheme is so low-paid (£145.18 per week) making it unaffordable for most fathers.

Statutory paternity pay and shared parental pay should be increased to at least minimum wage levels.

SPL is paid at the same rate as statutory maternity pay! If I was on leave right now I'd be being paid exactly what DH is - but it's too low for him but good enough for me? And suggesting that both paternity pay and SPL are raised to minimum wage but NOT maternity pay?

Look, I get that in many families (not ours, but many) the man is the higher earner and that's a barrier to him taking leave. But basically this seems to suggest that women's wages are optional - 'pin money' - and so it's fine to throw them some token mat pay, but men need real money. And I find that sexist and offensive.

Same. My experience is also that it tends to be women who are most hostile to the idea of 'sharing' 'their' leave, rather than men saying they don't want it

In my experience that is 100% correct. DH and I did SPL, and he got nothing but congratulations from women ("oh you're such a good husband and father!"), and envy from men who claimed that their partners had refused to share their leave. The same women said to me that they'd never share their time off with their OH.

I do wonder whether there ought to be a "use it or lose it" period of leave for men, rather than it having to be at the expense of the mother's time off. I remember feeling quite resentful that DH was getting the last 3 months of leave off, when DS was so much easier and slept better (although was still bf twice a night by muggins here) - I think that was also due to the summer being so amazingly warm and sunny last year and I was stuck in an office. It was absolutely the right decision to go back earlier though as it turns out, I got a promotion and a massive pay rise out of it.

I remember feeling quite resentful that DH was getting the last 3 months of leave off, when DS was so much easier and slept better (although was still bf twice a night by muggins here)

Ha, DS started taking long, 1hr+ naps in his cot the week I went back to work, having previously only slept while I pushed him in a pram for sodding hours a day. DH said 'it can be a bit boring when he's asleep, can't it?' and I nearly killed him!

The use it or lose it policy has worked well in the Scandinavian countries where its been used.

SosigDog
Sorry, don't know why I got it into my head that paternity leave is on full pay, I suppose some employers offer it but it's not a statutory right. I do think they should get full pay.

"If you’re already a SAHM you don’t get 6 weeks pay because you don’t have a job. So you should be able to transfer those 6 weeks between parents as you see fit. The DH of a SAHM should be able to take the full 6 weeks since she obviously won’t be claiming them. Why should families with a SAHM lose out on paid time off?"
I completely disagree with this. Maternity/paternity/parental leave is for parents in paid work. SAHMs don't get maternity leave and SAHDs don't get paternity leave. A working father should get some paid paternity leave but I don't see why they should get more paid leave if the mother is a SAHM as opposed to a paid employee (which would be the effect of your suggestion).

Prynhawn
I think they are two separate issues. The mother should get 6 weeks on 90% as a minimum. If she gets more that's a bonus. And fathers should also get some paid paternity/parental leave - but that should be in addition to the mother's 6 weeks and not instead of it.

There should be no pressure on mothers to relinquish their 6 weeks paid leave to the father. None at all. And making in an option means that in some cases there will be pressure.

A working father should get some paid paternity leave but I don't see why they should get more paid leave if the mother is a SAHM as opposed to a paid employee
Basically every family should be entitled to six weeks of paid leave. In families where the mother works she may choose to take it or split it with the father. In families with a SAHM the father should be able to take it. How is it fair that some families get six weeks of free cash for someone to stay at home, while others don’t? Families with a SAHM are often the poorest yet they’re the ones missing out on the free money!

settlers I wish. I would love a third but would be lucky to have a month off if that as I'm the higher earner. Previously I had a year (lower earner) and then four months (equal to DH pay wise)

Do away with all of it. Have "Primary Carer's Leave" (6 weeks at 90% and then SMP, then unpaid leave) which is shareable between both parents in whatever way they see fit, then have "Secondary Carer's Leave" (2 weeks at 90%) which can be taken by whoever is not on PCL. I still guarantee 95% of PCL would be taken by the women, but at least it would be fair.

I really didn't want to take a huge amount of maternity leave this time around, and I earn (slightly) more than my husband, but with the generous full pay for 18 weeks my work offers, plus a very generous holiday allowance, I'd have been stupid not to take advantage of it in favour of my husband's company's offer of statutory pay only. As it is, I'll only have to take 1 or 2 months at SMP which we can handle - but I'm pissed about having to take another hit to my career while he doesn't.

But women are the ones who give birth, sometimes have birth injuries, might need to establish breastfeeding...making things equal doesn't always make them fair.

"How is it fair that some families get six weeks of free cash for someone to stay at home, while others don’t? Families with a SAHM are often the poorest yet they’re the ones missing out on the free money!"

What a load of nonsense.
Being a SAHP is a CHOICE. It's a perfectly valid choice. But you can't choose to be a SAHP and then moan about the financial consequences!
Working parents pay tax and national insurance and that's why they have the right to paid maternity/paternity/parental leave.
If you haven't worked and made NI contributions or got NI credits, you can't get SMP or Maternity Allowance.

Families on low incomes get other benefits if they qualify for them.

"But women are the ones who give birth, sometimes have birth injuries, might need to establish breastfeeding...making things equal doesn't always make them fair."

Exactly. And that's why we need to protect mothers' entitlement to 6 weeks paid materniry leave immediately after the birth.

Mothers can also take SPL so I can't see problem with their proposals. They could take 6 weeks maternity leave, taking the 90% and then switch to SPL.

I think the current arrangements for SPL are fine. Women give birth, they get first dibs on the leave.

SPL worked amazing in our home.
I took 6 months (8 weeks and 90% pay and the rest smp), then my DH took off 4 months SPL at the basic rate and his parternity when DS was born.
I'm the higher earner in our household so financially it was worth it for us and my DH really wanted to have some time at home.

My work have just introduced enhanced maternity pay for 5 months and 2 weeks full pay for paternity plus an extra week at 90% pay if they choose to take it.

My partner is on SPL at the moment as he gets full pay and then goes on to statutory. There as being self-employed I only got statutory. So as I'm the higher earner when working it makes sense for him to take it.

In our social circle he's not rare by taking SPL. Mainly as lots of the women are self-employed and lots of the men work for organisations who pay enhanced SPL and/or allow them very flexible working.

Interestingly some employers seem pissed off that men are actually taking it up, and one of my male friend's was bullied out of his job for taking leave. The male manager ended up being given the boot when senior management found out why my mate had left as they were using my mate as their shining example of their equality policies.

It’s clearly not good enough for either.

Being a SAHP isn’t always a choice. Not every job is Mon-Friday, 9-5, fixed hours.

I’m not surprised scream . My friend’s DH was refused 4 days a week despite many of the women in the team working part time and made redundant shortly afterwards. I don’t think that was a coincidence.

To all those saying well men are often the higher earners, what about single mums who are the only breadwinners?

We used SPL, or I think it was APPL then. First person in DHs work to do so if HR are to be believed.

Worked well for us, I earn slightly more, DH got to have Christmas and New Year off and miss most of the January sales (he's in retail), while having quality time with DS. Win win

SMP was never the min wage, it's the same amount as ssp.
Who would pay the min wage for parents to have a year off. Welfare has been cut, and it's not like women are hard done to in terms of conditions.

You're framing their argument somewhat.

The next sentence after yours is:

Large numbers of dads in insecure work like agency workers and those on zero-hours contracts are not eligible for it. And currently men and women who are self-employed don't get any shared leave whatsoever.

Parents can only get SPL when the mum gives up part of her maternity leave. The TUC believes that dads and second parents should have their own special leave which should be available from day one in their jobs – including those who are self-employed, agency workers or on zero-hours contracts.

Statutory paternity pay and shared parental pay should be increased to at least minimum wage levels. And increasing the current statutory paternity leave period (two weeks) – and extending the leave to all fathers, including those who are self-employed, agency workers or on zero-hours contracts – could benefit almost 500,000 dads, says the TUC.

It's a bit more nuanced than how you are trying to frame it

"SMP was never the min wage, it's the same amount as ssp."

No, SMP is about £146 and SSP is about £92 (per week).

I have been having very similar discussions at work. Unfortunately in most families it is still the men that earn more money so it doesn't make sense for the higher earner to drop their wage.

This then contributes to the gender pay gap. When men are the higher earner it make sense for women to go part time. Unfortunately the lowest paid jobs tend to be the ones that are more likely to support part time workers therefore the lowest paid jobs tend to mostly employ women. This is certainly the case for my employer. This contributes to the gap between male and female hourly rates.

It's a catch 22.

Not that I would ever want to give up time off with a baby but maybe a work around would be women swapping SMP for help towards childcare which might enable them to go back to work full time?

I'm in 2 minds to be honest.

Women now outperform men in the first few years of work, its after they have kids that their wages drop. I think the proportion of couples where mens pay is significantly more than the woman's (before they have kids) is dropping.

Lots and lots of couples could afford to share paternity leave but dont. And it's a shame as personally I think it would make a big difference to individual families and society.

So something needs to be done to try and increase the uptake. Which is hopefully where they are coming from, and might actually make people think twice before the woman automatically takes it all

But I think paying men more is never going to happen as it is surely illegal. There is much more that could be done instead to encourage men to take up this benefit though

I have had to plan financially for having a child, which included changing my job for a company that offered an enhanced maternity package (as old employer was statutory only).

With myself as the higher earner by 16k, I will be exhausting my enhanced pay (6m) and then most likely transferring the rest of my leave to my DH to take, as financially it makes more sense for him to be at home.

While I think maternity pay should be increased (to whichever parent takes it) I don't think it should be equivalent to NMW. It is a choice to have a child, and I believe the parents should take on (most of) that financial burden.

I will own up to being one of those women who didn't want to share 'my' leave. We were in the position of DH earning more so it was never a really serious suggestion by DH but he did joke about having 6 months of the leave. I did feel put out as felt that year off was my reward for the hard work of giving birth.

I was lucky that I worked for the NHS so got enhanced leave and generous holiday and we saved to allow me to be off for as long as I could.

I knowingly paused my career by going part time and didn't progress for a number of years while I was part time. It's all worked out though and my career is back on track again.