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!

Then who would work for a small business?

70% of the workforce are employed by SMEs

My dad ran a small business, it is now run by my sister. He always said he would never employ a woman in a core business position. He was absolutely right that it was very difficult for him to cope with long term absence. But as I pointed out, he has one male employee who was constantly on the sick so it wasn’t any less of a risk to employ men. He never saw it that way. I have some sympathy for his position and it is true that small businesses find it harder, but the answer is to support them better, not to reduce maternity leave.

Should have 3 years service first. Or even 5.

Should this apply to sick leave? Say you have a chronic condition or a MH issue, should you need 5 years service before you are entitled to sick pay?

Or if you have a disability which means you will need time off? Do you need 5 years service before you are given any help with that.

If anyone thinks these people don't exist in real life, they should visit the small business where I work...
I'm the only woman of childbearing age employed, and as I've been predictable and had babies, they'll be 'more careful' in future.
My 'year long holiday' is regularly referred to in front of visitors.
You'd think that I was getting paid millions, not the bare minimum SMP the way it was begrudgingly offered.
I gave them a whole decade of great work, but that counts for nothing now that I've proven to be such a burden.
It makes me so sad.

So I’m currently on maternity leave and my employer needs to train my replacement, and for a little while pay me and my cover. However if I do not return I have to pay back the non-statutory part of my maternity pay. Let’s say I don’t go back - the employer hasn’t lost any money as the SMP is government funded.

How is this any different to if I just found a new job and left? I’d still need to be replaced, I’d still be taking my skills and experience with me.

Typical British misogyny. Sexism is back with a vengeance, and we are not even supposed to protest. Suddenly women are being forced to accept transgender activists, but no one will stop men coming out with shit like this, or force them to take responsibility for their own children.

Women are going to have to stop having children with any man who thinks like this, for a start. Stop having sex with them too. We're all going to have to be a lot more aware of the rubbish men are feeding us with all their 'sex positivity' shite.

"“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.”

Men are supposed to accept that children are a natural result of sexual activity and help raise, look after and teach them. It's both - sex and children. Any man who basically wants to wipe women and children out of public life can show some of the integrity and public spirit they routinely expect of women and live the celibate life.

Mintymabel some qualification period for sick pay would be good imo from a small business perspective- for context, we've had the situation where someone started, worked for 2-3 weeks then was off sick for 5 months. They were part time so ssp wasn't that much less than their pay.

Added context is this person was actually pregnant - no issue with paying SMP although they weren't eligible but they are taking full year plus holidays, which of course they accrue. I suspect they went come back but we have to keep the role open...

@MintyMabel

Should this apply to sick leave? Say you have a chronic condition or a MH issue, should you need 5 years service before you are entitled to sick pay?

Or if you have a disability which means you will need time off? Do you need 5 years service before you are given any help with that.

Not really the same is it? If someone has a disability/becomes disabled and has to have some time off, that's not their fault, they don't plan it, and they can't help it. Pregnancy is planned and don't say it's NOT, because it nearly always is. And as I said, starting a new job when you know you're pregnant is quite disgusting and very devious.

ALSO, regarding sick leave, (and how long you should work there before you're allowed sick leave with full pay...) Yes I DO think you should have a decent period of working there before being allowed to go off sick with full pay (or go on maternity leave...) And it should be 3 years IMO.

Our local authority has a 'you must be here 6 months before you get paid for sick time off' rule. (which isn't long enough IMO.)

My cousin and my friend who work there say they have lost COUNT of the amount of people who don't have a single day off for the first 6 months they are there, and then as soon as they have done their 6 months, they have a day off every bloody week. 3 or 4 people have done their 6 months, and then gone on the sick for 3 or 4 months within DAYS of completing that 6 months. On full pay!!!

So whilst some people are genuine hard workers and grafters who hardly have any time off; some people take the piss.

So yeah, I do think you should be at a company for at least 3 years before claiming full sick pay. (or full maternity pay.)

@OrangeSlices998

So I’m currently on maternity leave and my employer needs to train my replacement, and for a little while pay me and my cover. However if I do not return I have to pay back the non-statutory part of my maternity pay. Let’s say I don’t go back - the employer hasn’t lost any money as the SMP is government funded.

How is this any different to if I just found a new job and left? I’d still need to be replaced, I’d still be taking my skills and experience with me.

Yes you COULD start a job and get trained and so on and then leave after a year, but AGAIN, it's not the same as starting a job when you know you are pregnant. It's devious and sly, and very unfair on the employer, and women who do this are setting other women back a century!

What's more, if you DID start a job and had extensive training for it and then fucked off straight after your training/course finished, MOST companies will - quite rightly - make you pay for your training. Why should they invest all that money and time in you, for you to just piss off to another employer? (With the skills and qualifications THEY paid for.) ???

There's some spectacularly outstanding entitlement on this thread.

SSP is a basic amount of money. So if employers don't pay it, the Government would have to. Otherwise people would starve.

Not really the same is it? If someone has a disability/becomes disabled and has to have some time off, that's not their fault, they don't plan it, and they can't help it. Pregnancy is planned and don't say it's NOT, because it nearly always is. And as I said, starting a new job when you know you're pregnant is quite disgusting and very devious.

It is the same. And no it isn’t nearly always planned. Is starting a new job when you know you have a chronic or mental illness disgusting and very devious too?

@MintyMabel

It is the same.

No it isn't.

And no pregnancy isn’t nearly always planned.

Yes it is.

Is starting a new job when you know you have a chronic or mental illness disgusting and very devious too?

No. Just when you KNOW you are pregnant.

HTH.

Off to bed now. I'll leave you with your spectacular entitlement and your straw man arguments.

Night night.

@TigerOnATrain

Whether it is a disability you are “hiding”, or a pregnancy, the effect on the employer is the same.

Statistics show around 45% are unplanned.

Funny how when someone has no way to back up their argument, the opposing argument is called straw man.

Your ridiculous stance has been called out, that much is obvious.

@TigerOnATrain Why did you reply to me with such an attitude? I never said I was pregnant when I got my job, if I had been I wouldn’t have been entitled to anything other than SMP according to my contract. I was there over a year before falling pregnant. I am now on maternity leave and intend to go back - but my post postulated that I don’t, and asked how the company is worse off for covering my maternity leave than it would be if I simply handed in my notice?

Yes if I did a funded masters and then left the next day they’d ask me to pay, and rightly so as I’d have to sign a contract stipulating I stay in post X months post course completion.

You keep saying everyone is entitled but you’re just being rude!

In most cases concealing pregnancy is financially pointless as there's no mat pay entitlement if you are already pregnant when employed.

Most people or most back street car repairers grumbling about their receptionist having a life?

I am very pro-parental leave. There are massive flaws in the system though. A lot of those are around the unequal division behind maternity/paternity division. And some of them are around either employees or employers acting badly.

In my mid- late twenties I was part of a four person team, all female mid twenties to mid-thirties. The employer had generous maternity leave and annual leave policies.

For over two years I was the only person in the team not on maternity leave. All three other team members fell pregnant had a child, took a long leave, came back for a short period having conceived again. They then timed their outstanding annual leave across two leave years to run into the next maternity leave so that they basically worked a couple of weeks before being off again.

One never came back after her second maternity leave. One came back for six months. Neither were asked to repay maternity pay.

The final one went on to have four children without ever really coming back to work, between maternity leave, annual leave and sick leave. She came back for a day between her third and fourth. She announced her pregnancy to her PA (who was covering a lot of her duties) by saying “well, you’ll just have to keep working a little bit harder because I’m expecting another”. When the PA was visibly upset by this, the mother-to-be walked straight into HR, lodged a grievance against the PA for harassing her and promptly got herself signed off for stress. Thankfully there were witnesses who said the PA hadn’t said/done anything except looked surprised and had said “Congratulations” so nothing came of that. In the end she never came back. She threatened to sue and was paid to go quietly.

Then in my early thirties, in a probationary period for a new employer, told every month that my probationary period was going excellently. Fired on final day of probationary period, one week after I got engaged.

So the system does need to be improved a lot.

Hopefully it will be more balanced with shared parental leave and more men will take time off to look after their kids. I guess the 1 harder thing is breastfeeding - not impossible, but just quite a lot more faff to pump and bottle feed.

I find the quote 'in my day women gave up their job when they had children', to not have been the case for my GM pre early 1950. She was a manageress of a high end furniture store, and left when she had DM (as was expected). What she didn't expect was the owner landing on her doorstep 6mths later with a massive bouquet, and the offer of financial contribution towards childcare (very unusual) if she'd be willing to return? Apparently the man who'd taken over didn't 'run a tight ship, profits were down, and the accounts were sub par', (or words to that affect). She took up the offer and returned to work. Obviously its an outliner situation, but still an example of its time. Apparently having a penis vs being a mother, doesn't necessarily make a better employee, go figure 🙄

But I agree with a pp that there should be no maternity leave straight away. Should have 3 years service first. Or even 5.

I’m assuming you mean maternity PAY, not maternity LEAVE. Obviously we couldn’t have women waddling back to work bleeding an hour after giving birth, waiting to deliver the placenta. Or is that what you’re suggesting?

And as for maternity pay, it’s perfectly legal for businesses to put a minimum service requirement on their enhanced mat pay. So for example where I work, it’s 18 weeks on full pay if you’ve been there two years, and 6 months on full pay if you’ve been there 5 years. (You also have to repay a hefty chunk of it if you don’t return to work for 6 months after your leave.)

The only thing businesses are required to pay to women from the day they hire them is SMP, and they reclaim that from the government.

Physically/medically you need at least 6 weeks to recover which is why the 90% salary part of statutory pay is 6 weeks. I know male colleagues who have injured themselves playing badminton or football and been signed of for a similar period so i think SOME guaranteed paid leave is justifiable and warranted from a medical point of view

HOWEVER there could be something done about the prolific back to back maternity leavers who take a year off each time and expect their jobs to be held open for what could be several years

I run a small business (5 employees) including one woman in her late 20s with a young son. Yes there was a risk that we would train her up and then she would leave to have a baby but she was the best person for the job.

And then she got cancer 2 months after starting work and had to have lots of time off. And we just did whatever we could to help and she’s been back at work cancer free for a year now and is the hardest working person we have.

We aren’t employing machines, people have stuff happening to them and your business should be run to allow for this.

Incidentally the temp we had in to cover our employee while she was off having chemo, we also took on part time as she was so good.

And we have an older man in his 50s who has had multiple weeks off with a recurring injury, again, you do what you can to make his job fit in around his injury because well looked after employees will tend to work hard and mainly because it’s the right thing to do.

I do agree to an extent. Some women do take the piss and you see it on here a lot.

For example, I do not agree with women taking continuous maternity leave back to back. We have someone in my office who was pregnant again when returning from her first maternity leave. It leaves work in a tricky situation.

Bit late to this thread but I don’t think that any sane person thinks like this, I’d just laugh it off as a click bait trash article.

Most people will go on to have children, so maternity/ parental leave generally benefits society as a whole. It’s quite rare to be a SAHM now- mostly for financial reasons.

My company is great with maternity leave and it’s great that I can continue working while hopefully progressing even if I am part time. Your working life is 40 odd years now. A couple of years off is nothing.

For example, I do not agree with women taking continuous maternity leave back to back.

A few women from work did this, it actually works out well because they have their families, and then return to work for many years after that with no interruptions. Are you saying that women shouldn’t be allowed to have children close together, that they should just be sacked and not have the opportunity for a future career?

@StatisticallyChallenged you don't exactly have to keep the role open. For 26weeks she has the right to return to the same job, but after that she has the right to return to a similar job with no decrease in pay or conditions. Or you can restructure the team and make her role redundant - this happens ALL the time.

The only inconvenience for employers is the time for finding and training a temp. Which let's face it, given most women work in the low to middle grade jobs, this is much less difficult than they like to make out.

Of course we should have maternity pay and leave. My dh wanted kids just as much as me but why should I loose my working privileges just because it's my body that has to do the hard work for a short period of time in my 40 year working life?

Most companies thankfully are moving towards better conditions for women in general (not just mothers) and the daily mail is a publishing for racist, mysoginist, self -entitled white folk who would rather see us return to pre war 'good ole days'.

What a load of cock, literally.