Scrapping Shared Parental Leave

[EasterIssland]

It's in the news that it's been requested for it to be scrapped because it's not being used as needed and to get a new system in place.

I'm in between two minds about this, we took Shared Parental Leave with my son, our salaries were similar (I actually earned few ££ more than him), so we took 50/50 time . And I think it was good for my son to have 121 time with myself as well as 121 time with my DH and at the same time spending time together as a family. I'm spanish and right now in spain mum and dad can have 4 months off (which can be at the same time) when a baby is born, however, many dad's decide to delay a few months the shared bit so the baby doesnt go to nursery that early and many of them end up not using their bit as too busy at work (I've seen it a few times now)

I also take the new leave wouldn't be full salary, specially for the partner, as it'd be unfair for a mum to be circa £150/week salary whilst dad/other mum's are on full salary

So im unsure what needs changing so that the system works better.
Would 52 weeks for the mum at the current ML allowance + x amount of weeks at same salary really work? Unless the allowance is really increased to nearly match the salary I can't really see how this would work and how partners would decide to take more leave as it'd impact their home income

Would your partner have really taken chase of it if the allowance was higher ?

www.theguardian.com/money/2021/apr/26/shared-parental-leave-scrap-deeply-flawed-policy-say-campaigners

AIBU : A new system is needed and xyz should be done so it gets better
AINBU : I think the current system is good and a new one would not make partners taking more time off anyway

I’m about to take it in three weeks, my husband has a really generous paternity policy/shared parental leave policy. He will take 22 weeks full pay from his employer, it eats into the 39 weeks full pay I’m entitled to but I’m planning on returning to work in September for a school direct scheme so it works brilliantly for us. As long as I have given notice to curtail my leave, so set a date I’ll be returning to work, he can be off at the same time which I think is pretty good for him to bond with the baby :)

Part of the problem is that SPL is not well known about at all and its not clear how it works. I'm not even sure most employers are particularly up on it. I'd never heard of it till this morning when I saw it in the news. Looking into it I think its something my partner and I might consider taking advantage of before they scrap it.

Two weeks paternity is shameful really, isn't it?

Why does it have to be shared at all? I’d rather just see much improved maternity and paternity leave provision. Absolutely no reason for it to need to be a zero sum equation.

I personally don’t agree with it and would be happy to see it scrapped. I think that maternity leave should be made better for mothers and that fathers should get more flexibility overall and more paternity leave but that the mother should be the primary carer for at least the first year.

@Comefromaway

I'm not overly in favour of it as I feel it can be used to pressurise breastfeeding mothers to return to work and stop breastfeeding earlier than they might have planned.

I dont see it as a stopper and as mention I say this as someone who went back to work when my son was 6.5m and he's still bf at over 3 years A friend of mine as back at work since her son was 8 months I think and still bf, moreover with the introduction of solids they've found several allergies so she's had to reduce her diet to avoid them.

Many bf mums are back at work earlier than what we think (I've seeing it now with the vaccination stories, many NHS workers worried about the jab back in January and whether to have it because they still were bfding)

Another problem with SPL is when a company offers enhanced maternity packages. Wherever I have worked, there has never been an enhanced spl package for the man, but there is for maternity leave: therefore there is a financial disadvantage to the mother coming back earlier than 12months

@BungleandGeorge

A lot of people introduce a small amount of solids just before 6 months so I’m not sure what the statistic that only 1% are exclusively bf actually means. Mine was having a small amount of food to suck on and about 5 bf throughout the day, no other milk and that would not have been compatible with working. There was a clear advantage due to allergies, I think it is absolutely a step backwards to force mothers to go back after 6 months. Not everyone is in a position to take 6 months out of their job (eg self employed, senior management etc). Fairest thing is 12 months shared leave, split however the parents want. Our maternity leave in this country is pretty generous when you look at USA. Australia etc

Yes the stats are a bit of a red herring really. My boy actually refused bottles totally even with a lot of persevering but nope, wouldn't take it only I would do. I'm not sure how I was meant to feed my child if I listened to bunglebee :/

@MiddleParking

Why does it have to be shared at all? I’d rather just see much improved maternity and paternity leave provision. Absolutely no reason for it to need to be a zero sum equation.

Exactly. It shouldn't be shared and the fact some people on here think it's a great scheme rather than imagining a better policy for ALL and not to the detriment to the other, is really, really sad imo.

We did shared parental leave and Dh took 3 months off. While women taking mat leave get 6 months full pay in his workplace, he was told he wasn't eligible for anything (other than the portion of my stat pay) So to make it work, I think the pay side needs to be addressed.

Also there is the social side, he found it quite awkward attending baby groups, as it's mostly women still baby age. Some groups he wasn't made to feel welcome , or he felt like he was invading on breastfeeding women spaces. I also felt like I was missing out on building those relationships with other mums that are so important in the first year. the few friends I'd started to bond with from groups drifted off when I returned to work as there was a big gap until I was in my usual working pattern and returned to the groups myself again.

Even in his flexible, quite diverse employer he found some quite negative attitudes towards his having "3 months skive at home" (Haha ). When he applied for an internal vacancy a year later he was questioned on how he would balance home responsibilities with the new role which involved some travelling . So I do think it had an impact on how he is viewed at work, and whilst these are issue women have faced for years, in some workplaces I can see how tricky that would be to navigate

I went back to work when my baby was 9 months and my DH did shared parental leave. I'm still breastfeeding him at almost 2 years old and he has never had any formula or cows milk. He had some expressed milk early on but refused bottles from 3 months or so.

I don't know any women who stopped breastfeeding to go back to work, they all stopped for other reasons. Breastfeeding post 9 months or so is very different. Even when I am around he isn't interested except first thing and bedtime.

What annoys me is that it’s being talked about that the reason that men don’t take it is because the pay is shit. The same pay (the first 6 weeks aside) that women have had to put up with for years but now it’s the men getting it it’s a problem. 🙄

I'd be more in favour of SPL being scrapped and maternity leave reducing from 39 weeks at £153 to 6 months at 90% pay since exclusive breastfeeding is only up to 6 months - that way more women who have to work can choose if they want to breastfeed for the full recommended duration.

I have twins and have to go back when they are 20 weeks. I have to wean them off breast before then. I can't pump because I don't work in a traditional office and would have no facility to do it

The current system is archaic in that it assumes that women are still in lower paid jobs and can afford to reduce to £153 pw.

@MiddleParking

Why does it have to be shared at all? I’d rather just see much improved maternity and paternity leave provision. Absolutely no reason for it to need to be a zero sum equation.

This is what the campaigners are asking for. The ‘shared’ thing is what makes it so problematic to administer and even get your own head around.

A much better system would a) enshrine/protect women’s rights after giving birth separately to b) statutory paid parental leave for parents of any sex to be taken within X months of the child’s birth, a lot like the emergency provision you can take in chunks (but paid!)

We have to normalise career breaks, and flexible working, for men. I think this would do it and would be so valuable.

I'm pregnant, DH isn't eligible for SPL as he won't meet the criteria for having been with his employer long enough. He was on a temporary contract when I fell pregnant and he had to then move to a new, permanent job. He won't have worked for his new employer for long enough so not eligible. We are gutted because we always intended to make use of it. We couldn't do it first time around either as he was a student.

We are planning on using SPL when our baby arrives - current thinking is that I will take 8 months leave and then my husband will take 4 month SPL (I will have leave to use up before I go back so hoping to overlap on Month 9). I earn 3x what my husband does and for me to take the full year would be brutal financially - my employer tops up 3 months full pay, 3 months half, but after that we'd be relying on savings to cover the mortgage. The 'sensible' thing to do would be for me to go back after 6 months when the top-up runs out, but I hate the idea of going back so soon, particularly as my job is pretty demanding.

All of this is to say that I completely understand why uptake for the current system has been so poor - in the majority of households where the man earns the same as or more than the woman, the idea of losing that full wage for a chunk of time is unachievable. The other alternative is to overlap the time off, but then you're looking at nursery at 6 months old, plus the costs that would come with that. As far as I can see, the only way to improve uptake will be (1) to improve the pay system such that, whoever is taking the time off in whatever split, there isn't a massive financial penalty, and (2) to introduce a non-transferable allowance for each parent, similar to the Swedish system.

I don't think it was a good idea because I breastfed. It would have been better to see fathers as an equal parent and give them independent time off instead.

Little confused about all the breastfeeding comments. Most children start being weaned at 6 months, then by 9 months they’re down to 3 feeds and usually 2 feeds at 12 months.

If you returned to work at 9 months you can still do those feeds as usual - first thing, after work, before bed. So it’s only women that return before 9 months that would have to find milk for one of those feeds as they could still do a morning and nighttime feed.

I’m back to work and still breastfeeding, it works just fine!

I’ve used SPL twice as well as the system before (which I think was called additional parental leave, this was in 2012 and was brought in during the dying days of the labour government), each time giving me 6/7 months of work and my DH 4/6 months off, between 2012 and 2019. Observations..

1. A shockingly high number of mums still seem to see this as “taking away” their right to maternity leave (I’ve always framed it positively as allowing a greater share in parenting duties).

1. Even big corporate companies have struggled to warm up to this, but it’s better than it was.

1. Paperwork and acronym mountain.

1. Enhanced maternity pay is much more common than enhanced SPL pay, and employers who pay enhanced maternity pay for a long time (say, over six months) end up inadvertently disincentivising SPL. If I worked at my husbands employer, I would receive the equivalent of about two months full pay on maternity leave between months 7-12; he got nothing but statutory for a few weeks for taking off months 7-12.

1. We’ve just got to normalise this. Even over the years I’ve been “active” in this area, I’ve seen loads more dads doing this, but it’s going to take at least ten and more like thirty years at the current rates of pay to make a real difference.

BTW, bfing is a boring excuse. Long term breastfeeding and returning to work at six months is not at all incompatible.

@ShirleyPhallus

Little confused about all the breastfeeding comments. Most children start being weaned at 6 months, then by 9 months they’re down to 3 feeds and usually 2 feeds at 12 months.

If you returned to work at 9 months you can still do those feeds as usual - first thing, after work, before bed. So it’s only women that return before 9 months that would have to find milk for one of those feeds as they could still do a morning and nighttime feed.

I’m back to work and still breastfeeding, it works just fine!

Not all children feed on a predictable schedule. I fed my youngest until 2.5 and he still fed 3-4 times a day when I weaned him. My eldest refused to drink water until he was 12 months old, when he finally relented and drank it, he weaned himself off of milk within 2 months.

@ShirleyPhallus

Little confused about all the breastfeeding comments. Most children start being weaned at 6 months, then by 9 months they’re down to 3 feeds and usually 2 feeds at 12 months.

If you returned to work at 9 months you can still do those feeds as usual - first thing, after work, before bed. So it’s only women that return before 9 months that would have to find milk for one of those feeds as they could still do a morning and nighttime feed.

I’m back to work and still breastfeeding, it works just fine!

Well as long as it works for you

I'm not sure how I was meant to feed my child if I listened to bunglebee :/

Well, you could have gone back at eight months, or nine, or ten, or eleven. Or tried cupfeeding. Or given solids during the day while working and allowed your baby to reverse cycle. I haven't said anything about "forcing" mothers back at six months, nor will I. Nor am I irreversibly wedded to a model where there is a fixed 12 that has to be shared. I'm merely committed to a model of parents sharing care and being facilitated to take leave to that end, and a better sharing of the 12 months we currently have would be a practical step forward.

I went back at eight months, shared leave, and did numerous KIT days before that. My second baby didn't really take the bottle at all. He did fine.

And, again, most countries have shorter leaves than we do and in many of them breastfeeding rates are much higher. The massive drop-off in breastfeeding in the UK happens between birth and 6 weeks.

I'm not overly in favour of it as I feel it can be used to pressurise breastfeeding mothers to return to work and stop breastfeeding earlier than they might have planned.

Like others, I’m not that sure that it does. We did SPL with both my kids, one under the old and one under the new scheme. I went back to work at 7 months with my first (taking accrued leave after ending mat leave at 6 months and going back to work for a token day before taking leave as the system then required...) and at 8 months with my second.

I breastfed both until they were 19/21 months respectively and it was fine. I expressed at work once or twice during the day. Eldest had one formula feed during the day from around 9 months, younger remained resolutely anti-formula (and had been a bottle refuser until I went back to work). And even when I stopped expressing they still had morning and night feeds and when they were ill, in hospital was able to BF them throughout.

There seems to be this idea that if you’re not always there, you have to stop BFing which I think is just as problematic as the idea that women might feel pressured into stopping before they’re ready.

@SmednotaSmoo

I’ve used SPL twice as well as the system before (which I think was called additional parental leave, this was in 2012 and was brought in during the dying days of the labour government), each time giving me 6/7 months of work and my DH 4/6 months off, between 2012 and 2019. Observations..

1. A shockingly high number of mums still seem to see this as “taking away” their right to maternity leave (I’ve always framed it positively as allowing a greater share in parenting duties).

1. Even big corporate companies have struggled to warm up to this, but it’s better than it was.

1. Paperwork and acronym mountain.

1. Enhanced maternity pay is much more common than enhanced SPL pay, and employers who pay enhanced maternity pay for a long time (say, over six months) end up inadvertently disincentivising SPL. If I worked at my husbands employer, I would receive the equivalent of about two months full pay on maternity leave between months 7-12; he got nothing but statutory for a few weeks for taking off months 7-12.

1. We’ve just got to normalise this. Even over the years I’ve been “active” in this area, I’ve seen loads more dads doing this, but it’s going to take at least ten and more like thirty years at the current rates of pay to make a real difference.

BTW, bfing is a boring excuse. Long term breastfeeding and returning to work at six months is not at all incompatible.

No one has said it is incompatible but if a mother wants to BF her baby more than what you deem to be acceptable, she should be able to. You say mother's see it as their leave being taken away from them...it is. You think it's fine for the father to use up some of the time the mother would usually have. Why? Why should both parents just be given the same amount of time off that's not less than what the mothers currently get? Of course if mother's know people who had 9-12 months off and are being told they can get 6 months off they will feel like it's being taken from them...it has!

I say again, I do not understand why people are happy to accept a measly 6 months per parent? It's breadcrumbs.