Most people think maternity leave should be abolished?

[PlomBear]

I am very pro parental leave but reading comments here www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7891605/amp/Sacked-having-baby-Scores-firms-pushing-female-staff-falling-pregnant.html I’m wondering if most people are anti pregnant women?

“It's a huge burden on small businesses, which is why I don't employ women who are young enough, but don't have children. My business couldn't stand paying someone to be off and employ someone else to take their place temporarily and then as we all know, the majority once you've paid them up, choose not to come back.”

“In my day when you were pregnant you gave up your job to bring up your child.”

“Its completly unfair to be made to hold a job open for a woman to have her baby. Its the womans chose so why should an employer be punished. The law is an ass.”

“Mothers should be with their children looking after them and teaching them to be future good adults, It's a choice children or career not both.”

“I think that companies should be able to put a clause in their contracts to say if they fall pregnant in the first 5 years then they forfeit the right to maternity pay and leave and are breaking their contract. Why should companies have to keep jobs open for them to may or may not return. I have never had children so never entitled to time off or maternity pay at the end of the day you choose to have children and this can be timed to not affect a job. Also they are taking a job and money from someone else.”

Reading the comments I feel like I’m back in the 1950s when teachers and nurses had to be unmarried!

It's the daily fail though. They don't really like any women tbh (unless they are in a bikini on a beach and then you get old letchy Larry commenting "cor check out that stunner, I would haahaa").

The comments are probably all written by people who don't work ... ;)

Even “in real life” I’ve heard people moan about so and so having a year off work.

Maybe people would rather have the USA system with no paid parental leave?

Parental leave IS important but I think there are nuggets of truth in some of the comments. I’ve known women of childbearing ages not to be employed simply because a small business would go under if they had to support a long term maternity leave/hire someone to cover.

That’s the Daily Fail for you.

Shocking that so many people think that businesses bear the cost of maternity leave though, and don’t realise that they claim it back from HMRC.

I think we should make paternity leave compulsory, at least 3 months worth, maybe after maternity leave. Just to make these businesses who won’t employ young women stop and think a bit.

But SMP comes from the government not the employer themselves. The employer is not losing any money.

I’m always intrigued by companies who say they won’t hire women between 18-40 due to that reason. Then I also read that young people can’t find jobs and people over 40 can’t find work. Yet millions of people have jobs despite those claims.

And employers can claim back SMP from the government.

Capitalism has created a world where generally both partners need to work. The other option is women could stop having babies and the population reduces and eventually dies out. And of course nobody to pay taxes or care for the elderly!

Yes. Which is why there had to legislation

Typical DailyMail fuckers

Never read the Daily Mail.

Pay.

Would expect no less stupidity and nonsense from Daily Heil readers

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/qz.com/1275938/22-american-mothers-on-what-its-like-to-go-back-to-work-after-maternity-leave/amp/

The US is the only rich nation in the world that doesn’t require companies to offer their employees paid maternity leave. Only 14% of US civilian workers in 2016 had access to paid family leave in 2016, according to the Pew Research Center. One in four US mothers return to work 10 days after giving birth.

10 days!!!!!

They don’t hire women over the age of 40 just in case they have elderly parents/ not attractive enough/menopausal. We are discriminated against pretty much from the age of 25yrs.

Well what were you expecting from the Daily Hate? I will not click on their website nor buy their paper the facist fucks.

But SMP comes from the government not the employer themselves. The employer is not losing any money

This. I’m very rusty but when I last did some book keeping small businesses would actually end up being paid slightly more than what they had to pay out to cover SMP.

Any ‘small’ business bleating out their arse about monetary costs has questionable comprehension skills tbh. Cover recruitment is also bullshit and a normal expense/time burden they should have already considered since no employee is obligated to work for them for life.

But SMP comes from the government not the employer themselves. The employer is not losing any money.

The employer may have to pay a temporary worker to cover. And usually temporary workers cost more than a full-time worker, to compensate them for taking a temporary job. (Not sure about minimum wage jobs, but certainly for skilled workers, temporary workers cost more.)

And then there's the admin overhead of recruiting, cost of doing hand-overs, etc.

So what those comments are saying is that basically poor people shouldn’t have children and women should choose between a career and a family.

PettyContractor - so should women quit work when they get pregnant and live on benefits so that an employer doesn’t have to recruit maternity cover?

What about if a man has an accident playing sports and needs months off work sick?

Cover recruitment is also bullshit and a normal expense/time burden they should have already considered since no employee is obligated to work for them for life.

Replacing a "permanent" employee with another does incur temporary extra expense, but it's not in the same league as paying (say) double the usual salary in order to get someone to work for you for six months, which you might have to do to persuade them to work for you rather than taking a "permanent" job elsewhere at the normal salary.

I think plenty of small business owners and managers find matenity leave incredibly difficult to work around and i understand why. But that doesnt mean i dont support the concept of maternity leave as beneficial for all of society not just the particular mum and baby.

so should women quit work when they get pregnant and live on benefits so that an employer doesn’t have to recruit maternity cover?

I haven't said anything about what should happen. I've merely described ways in which I think maternity leave costs employers even if they don't offer maternity pay.

All this shows is that a lot of people and employers don't believe women are worth hiring ie we bring no particular value to the business in terms of expertise, experience, skills, etc etc

Companies with more of a mix tend to be more successful I think I have heard.

The idea that it's a woman's choice to have babies is a bit odd as well. If so the women in the world said (and were able to enforce) no more babies then I think men would have something to say. Men want children as well! What this means is that society knows people want children but want all of the downside to be borne by the women.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/06/andrea-leadsom-challenged-to-explain-views-on-workers-rights

“I envisage there being absolutely no regulation whatsoever – no minimum wage, no maternity or paternity rights, no unfair dismissal rights, no pension rights – for the smallest companies that are trying to get off the ground, in order to give them a chance,” she suggested.

Then who would work for a small business?

The idea women should leave doesn't take into account the cost of hiring training someone new, and loss of knowledge.

The Daily Mail and their readers are old fascists. You can't expect them to think of the next generation apart from a gammony obsession with inheritance tax.

Simple as.