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

It definitely needs a shake up. I would have loved my husband to take SPL but he knew that his employer would reject the request because it's not mandatory so he didn't bother applying.

This shows that people don't understand the scheme - employers can't reject the request if you meet the eligibility criteria any more than they can refuse a pregnant woman's 'request' to take maternity leave.

I think we have an appalling maternity/parental leave policy in comparison to European nations. I am the higher earner and will therefore “donate” a few weeks of my own leave to my partner so that we can be off together for some of the time, but it means that I don’t get to have the full maternity leave entitlement. A mere statutory 2 weeks off for fathers is completely unreasonable - it’s cruel to everyone in the family. I think a “use it or lose it” minimum of 90 days off for fathers should be the bare minimum.

@SecondGentleman My partner would love to take more time off, whether it is paid or not. The unpaid parental leave you refer to is probably going to have to be used for the days when our children are sick and unable to attend school, particularly as our society will probably be more sensitive to the risk of contagions after COVID. We are not entitled to use more than 2 weeks in any one year. The issue is that in order for him to take SPL under the current policy, I would have to go back to work much sooner. Why shouldn’t both parents be legally entitled to time off together when they have a newborn? Two weeks is no time at all for a body to heal (women with C sections aren’t even allowed to drive for 6 weeks), so it makes sense for parents to be enabled to support one another at the beginning especially. The longer than a mother can breastfeed, the better.

I think the whole system needs rethinking right up until children start secondary school.

There is a bit of maternity leave that is about physical recovery for the mother and this needs very robust protection.

I like flexibility in a system so families can do what suits them and do like that about the current scenario. But freedom of choice is hampered by finances.

I feel this missing piece is that free hours dont start as soon as matenity /paternity leave ends and normal mat pay/paternity pay rates after the initial bit are unpaid.

I also have an inkling that a choice of some sort of right to work part time with a top up paternity pay would increase dads involvement a lot more . My DH didnt want or need a 3 month 'go' at being primary carer. But a longish period of part time work would have supported nursery settling in and my return to work after i had physically recovered a lot more and been more settling for a baby.

The trouble is, as seen by the gender pay gap, men on average earn more than women, so when it comes to statutory or self funded pay when 39 weeks has expired, it makes more sense to give up the lower salary (i.e. the woman stays off).

Actually this isn't true. The gender pay gap only kicks in past the age of 30, and largely as a consequence of women stepping back in their careers for children. For a couple in their 20s having their first child, it's more likely that the woman is the higher earner (www.theguardian.com/money/2015/aug/29/women-in-20s-earn-more-men-same-age-study-finds).

[quote SunflowerIris]@SecondGentleman My partner would love to take more time off, whether it is paid or not. The unpaid parental leave you refer to is probably going to have to be used for the days when our children are sick and unable to attend school, particularly as our society will probably be more sensitive to the risk of contagions after COVID. We are not entitled to use more than 2 weeks in any one year. The issue is that in order for him to take SPL under the current policy, I would have to go back to work much sooner. Why shouldn’t both parents be legally entitled to time off together when they have a newborn? Two weeks is no time at all for a body to heal (women with C sections aren’t even allowed to drive for 6 weeks), so it makes sense for parents to be enabled to support one another at the beginning especially. The longer than a mother can breastfeed, the better.[/quote]
You can use four weeks of unpaid parental leave in any one year. Given the number of posts of Mumsnet about fathers who refuse to take time off work when their child is sick, I struggle to believe that saving a father's unpaid parental leave for future child sick leave is a particularly common thing.

You are already legally entitled to time off together. Under the current system, I took 10 months with my first child, and my partner took 5 months, and we overlapped for two of those months. For my second, I took a year, and my partner took 10 weeks when the baby was born (again, overlapping). Once you take accrued annual leave into account (for both parents), plus the two weeks of paternity leave, you can stretch the current allowance so the father has quite a chunk of time off without really affecting the mother's time off.

Four weeks of unpaid parental leave, plus two weeks of paternity leave, plus two weeks of regular annual leave for the father gets you within spitting distance of the Swedish entitlement (they get 16 months total, this arrangement gets you to 14).

[quote SunflowerIris]@SecondGentleman My partner would love to take more time off, whether it is paid or not. The unpaid parental leave you refer to is probably going to have to be used for the days when our children are sick and unable to attend school, particularly as our society will probably be more sensitive to the risk of contagions after COVID. We are not entitled to use more than 2 weeks in any one year. The issue is that in order for him to take SPL under the current policy, I would have to go back to work much sooner. Why shouldn’t both parents be legally entitled to time off together when they have a newborn? Two weeks is no time at all for a body to heal (women with C sections aren’t even allowed to drive for 6 weeks), so it makes sense for parents to be enabled to support one another at the beginning especially. The longer than a mother can breastfeed, the better.[/quote]
Under SPL you could both be off together. If you wanted, you could both take 6 months off together from the start

The unpaid parental leave isnt any good for random days off sick. You have to give notice and take it in week blocks. Unless your child is disabled then you can take random days.

@MildredPuppy

The unpaid parental leave isnt any good for random days off sick. You have to give notice and take it in week blocks. Unless your child is disabled then you can take random days.

True, but you can jiggle this a bit - if you use, say, two weeks of the unpaid parental leave for your annual summer holiday, then you'll effectively have two spare weeks of annual leave, which can then be taken for the random days off sick.

There have been quite a few newspaper opinion/feature pieces on SPL recently, all saying how great it is, if only we could sort out the pay issue.

And I agree on a corporate level - I'd really love to see mandated disclosure of parental leave packages for all companies because often it's so opaque until you've joined, and it can be really difficult to ask at the interview stage as it risks them getting the frighteners.

But at the government/public policy level it's jawdropping how many say that statutory pay (which is what many women get and isn't presented as an insuperable barrier to them taking mat leave) is presented as 'just too little money' for men to consider it.

Thats very employer dependent though. I work in a school so annual leave doesnt exist in the same way. My DHs company dictate over half his annual leave around factory shut downs.

@JassyRadlett

There have been quite a few newspaper opinion/feature pieces on SPL recently, all saying how great it is, if only we could sort out the pay issue.

And I agree on a corporate level - I'd really love to see mandated disclosure of parental leave packages for all companies because often it's so opaque until you've joined, and it can be really difficult to ask at the interview stage as it risks them getting the frighteners.

But at the government/public policy level it's jawdropping how many say that statutory pay (which is what many women get and isn't presented as an insuperable barrier to them taking mat leave) is presented as 'just too little money' for men to consider it.

Totally agree. It demonstrates how differently we value men's time.

I find these articles infuriating - they are waxing lyrical about the benefits of SPL, while simultaneously spreading misinformation about the affordability of it and so discouraging readers from taking it. Most readers will come away thinking that SPL isn't an affordable option for most people, which just isn't true.

I had my first while still living in the US. I got six weeks of maternity leave that wasn't actually maternity leave at all - it meant using my entire holiday allowance for the year (9 days, having used one already for a funeral), sick leave, and unpaid time off. My husband was living in the states with me, but worked for a UK company under UK working rules. He got the full two weeks PL and then when I went back to work, he was able to use his entire year's holiday allowance (28 days at the time) to take another six weeks to be at home with our daughter.

I still remember everyone cooing at the baby in her little carrier when he popped in twice a day every day so I could feed her. It made me furious when the company owner touched her little feet and said how sweet she was - the same woman who begrudged every minute of 'leave' I'd managed to piece together and rolled her eyes when I used my (legally mandated, unpaid) breaks to feed my daughter in our car in the car park.

I had to wean her soon after he went back to work because my supply dried up when I tried pumping. I'm still sad about that. I'm still sad that nothing has changed in the states and women still go through the same thing to take a very few weeks to be with their babies.

Anyway, employers in the UK still begrudge every second of parental leave they are required to give. Men don't 'share' it because if they do, they will punished, either directly through lack of promotion/constructive dismissal, or through losing face. I think lots of them also feel (perhaps rightly) that they are 'taking' from their partners by using part of 'her' maternity leave. The only way it will become something that is actually used is if it becomes a legally-mandated, use-it-or-lose-it allowance that exists in ADDITION to the full allowance for the mother, rather than as something that has to be shared. The parents should be able to decide if they take it consecutively or concurrently. And, as a bonus, it will also eliminate the very real discrimination women face because they 'might' get pregnant and 'might' take maternity leave. If the risk is the same when you hire a male, then the discrimination (at least that specific discrimination) will disappear.

@SecondGentleman Well now I feel silly, for some reason I thought we were only allowed 2 weeks per year for each of us. I’m thrilled to hear it might be more and will research more thoroughly...!

I still think that fathers should have much more than 2 weeks statutory paternity leave 😇

I actually think it's time stat pay became a central Government issue, and not one pushed onto Employers.

Maternity, Paternity, Sick Pay - they're all far too low to be liveable on, but it's not at all practical (particularly in the current climate) for a large portion of businesses to even contemplate the kinds of bills some of the policies suggested on here would create.

Taking the financial burden form the employer and equalising the absence burden would hugely improve workplace equality, too.

Centralise it, get it up to sensible numbers and then look at equalising it. SPL works, where both partners earn similar amounts, but that's so very rarely the case. 6 months for both parents (3 full, 3 50%) set up - running together, sequentially, alternating, part time - as suited the families, would be a lot better set up for the child and for equality in parenting, than we currently have.

Centralising it would also open it up to those who are self-employed, too, and would get rid of the ridiculous time-with-employer barriers that are currently in place. They're needed, currently but they're very cruel in practice, particularly to fathers.

@Wroxie I completely agree with everything that you have said. I used to live in the states too and I am so sorry to hear about your mat leave experience. The USA is the only OECD country in the world without a national statutory maternity leave policy and it is so grim for women that I don’t even want to mention it here, as I see the UK becoming more and more American each year without any of the benefits of living in America... Big hugs to you. What a terrible time that must have been.

“Men don't 'share' it because if they do, they will punished, either directly through lack of promotion/constructive dismissal, or through losing face. I think lots of them also feel (perhaps rightly) that they are 'taking' from their partners by using part of 'her' maternity leave. The only way it will become something that is actually used is if it becomes a legally-mandated, use-it-or-lose-it allowance that exists in ADDITION to the full allowance for the mother, rather than as something that has to be shared. The parents should be able to decide if they take it consecutively or concurrently. And, as a bonus, it will also eliminate the very real discrimination women face because they 'might' get pregnant and 'might' take maternity leave. If the risk is the same when you hire a male, then the discrimination (at least that specific discrimination) will disappear”

You articulate this so well. I completely agree and for the reasons that you describe. I hope that the shared parental leave policy is scrapped in favour of something that protects maternity leave and gives fathers much longer paternity leave.

We looked into it but didn't understand it. DH salary is higher so we figured it was better for him to be in work.

We thought about using it during early pregnancy and before getting pregnant, our earnings are similar mine a little more and I liked the idea of things being more equal. When we looked into it my maternity pay was better than his parental leave pay (nit full pay but over statutory until 6 months when it became statutory pay only). Also my work had been stressful so I decided not to share the leave after all and have a longer break. I tbink we need a better system. More full pay leave for mothers and fathers, and time off together would be more useful than swapping and sharing leave. I think the first 3 months for both parents would be much better!

Paternity leave shouldnt have to come at the cost of women giving up some of their leave entitlement.

DH and I didnt use SPL. DH earns more than me, and his company don't offer enhanced parental leave pay (maternity or paternity), so it made no sense financially, but more importantly, he knew I wanted the time with the babies (I was breastfeeding) and he didn't want to effectively take it from me.

I would prefer a system like they have in one of the Scandinavian countries, where there is a specific paid leave allowance for fathers that cannot be used by the mother (in addition to decent leave for the mother). Imho that is the only way you will get men to take leave.

But equal isn't equal.

A mother could easily spend half of her 6 months off recovering physically from c-section, post partum haemorrhage, establishing breastfeeding. Then what? Good old dad takes over once baby is sleeping a bit more, but without leaking from everywhere so can get out and about with the baby? Meanwhile mum still gets up to breastfeed or attempts to juggle pumping with working...

Yeah, very fucking fair.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

Paternity leave shouldnt have to come at the cost of women giving up some of their leave entitlement.

DH and I didnt use SPL. DH earns more than me, and his company don't offer enhanced parental leave pay (maternity or paternity), so it made no sense financially, but more importantly, he knew I wanted the time with the babies (I was breastfeeding) and he didn't want to effectively take it from me.

I would prefer a system like they have in one of the Scandinavian countries, where there is a specific paid leave allowance for fathers that cannot be used by the mother (in addition to decent leave for the mother). Imho that is the only way you will get men to take leave.

But what about if women want to “give up” some of that time? I see that my baby would benefit very much from spending time with her father, why would I not want them to spend time together like I have with her?

Added to that, I would have been moved on to stat pay by 9 months, whereas DH got paid full pay for his SPL. So between us, with that SPL and all our accrued holiday we had about 14 months between us and we were paid full salary for about 85% of it

We used it for DD2 as it didn’t exist for DD1. It worked well - not sure the “at the same time” thing was around then

He took the normal 2 weeks at the start, I had 8 months which was more than I took for DD1 then DH was at home for 2 months (I think all paid by his company, or at least 6 weeks of it)

Particularly good for ramping back up into work

I work in HR and have had many discussions with staff (both mothers and fathers) about SPL and whilst most have been positive, few have taken it up. The rules are complicated and it can be difficult to co-ordinate employers for split periods of SPL.

We took Additional Paternity Leave which was a short lived policy just before SPL and it worked for us. I was the higher earner so it was a no brain drain financially and both me and OH agreed that it was great that he could have a few months to spend time with them as well.

I think it will take a generation for SPL to be embedded. I don't think it will be scrapped, but I think SPL is far too complicated in its current guise.

I can see why people are saying they think more time off together would be better, especially at the beginning, and that might be best for some families. But we had both - 8 weeks both off at the beginning, four months with DH on leave and me back to work - and having that time off together at the start was really nice, but it didn't do nearly as much to establish us as equal parents as both having a stint as the one at home did. I found that for that early period breastfeeding really was an issue, and made equal parenting impossible, whereas it was very different for that later period.

I process family leave for my company. We offer enhanced pay for mat, pat, and SPL.

Uptake of SPL is very low in comparison to the other two and I've never yet seen a woman give up the paid part of her maternity leave so her partner can take SPL.

I agree that part of the issue is that people either doesn't know it exists or don't understand how it works.

I also think not as many people are as open minded about gender roles as they think they are.

My sister is pregnant and was horrified when I suggested SPL to her. She has no intention of giving up any of her time with the baby even if it is so her partner can spend time with his child.

I've also had various men look at me like I've grown a second head when I've explained that they could actually take time off to care for their own child.