Paternal leave for undeserving man

[Singlemum19802023]

So, I often read these and think. “that can’t be true, it’s too unreasonable” but that REALLY IS the case here, or so I believe. Let me know if im
wrong.

I’ll not messaging to bitch or moan (however if you guys say I am being unreasonable then I’ll shut up about it!), more to get advice on what I need to do to draw attention to it.

Also, I never understand all the acronyms on here so if I do anything wrong I apologise!

Here goes…. I gave birth to a baby girl in Feb. It was after a brief 3 month fling with a guy. Didn’t go anywhere. No dramas. Informed him we were pregnant at 12 weeks and agreed to try to parent together (however he lives in Brighton, I’m in Manchester). I knew it would be me doing the work. No issues with that, just wanted my daughter to know who her dad is.

So…he works for NatWest, who, in Jan 2023, have given all men 6 months full pay paternity. Don’t get me wrong. This is a good thing for families and I totally support it. However, the father of my child is not here, he is not helping us on a day to day basis, he’s out on the beach with his mates having a whale of a summer at the expense of NatWest. Believe it or not, he has never asked me for my MAT B1, or the birth certificate, so I’ve no idea how NatWest even know he has a child!

It just seems like a crazy thing for a company to afford rights to their male colleagues that, I’m pretty sure their female colleagues don’t get (I’m sure they have to waddle in to HR with their MAT B1 to get Mat pay!)

I don’t know who to speak to to try to get them to look at this. I’m happy for parents to have the right to parental leave and I think it’s important for men to have this to support their families. But to allow anyone who “knocks up a girl” and refuses to take responsibility to also take 6 months full pay, plus accrued holiday, and a phased return to work, is an absolute abuse and a slap in the face to all of us that cope as single parents on Statutory Maternity!!!

I just don’t know what to do about what I feel is a complete injustice and a p** take of an important change in policy that should benefit families.

@SofiaSoFar I get that MN doesn't like men, and people screaming about men not being entitled to paternity leave then can't complain that women are the default parents.
But there is a clear biological difference here .
Replace 'man' with the non-birthing partner of a lesbian couple, and the result is the same.

Women can't fake being pregnant (well OK, maybe they can, but if would be very hard). And it takes 9 months to grow a child. She would very clearly be lying if she asked for maternity leave every 6 months.

There is theoretically nothing from stopping a man from making a baby every week if he wants too, then claiming paternity for all the different women!

The policy is great, and I hope more employers follow suit but they HAVE to show proof. Which isn't obvious to the naked eye, unlike for a woman.

Had the OP said that her husband or named birth cert father had gone off on a jolly fair enough there's nothing she can do to stop him. But this guy says he says a baby with no proof, and begs a free holiday???

It ruins it for the actual good fathers.

@Blossomtoes whats not to agree with, it’s basic maths?

I'm sure organisations are aware that some might take the piss, it's tricky with data protection and the like to demand things like the matb1 form which is for the woman rather than the baby if that makes sense; I guess asking for the child's birth certificate is reasonable though.

Generally I think it's a good thing, agree that the min mat leave for women isn't good though and although it can be galling seeing men get better we should be aiming to raise the levels rather than reduce them to meet sub standard ones.

Thing is with these policies it's to attract and retain staff, being able to do this outweighs the few who 'fraudulently' claim it I expect. Its a slippery slope to demand to know what people are up to on maternity and paternity leave.

I’d want to see some evidence before I agreed with you. I’d want to know how many highly paid senior male employees took six months paternity leave for a start. My guess is not very many by virtue of being older and past the baby years and not wanting the impact it would have on their careers. Given that the NatWest scheme is relatively new it’s unlikely that the data is available to support your theory.

He's shown that he's a dickhead, taking advantage of a policy designed to help parents to go on jollies.

Now you know what he is, make sure your interactions with him take this into account. He's obviously unreliable and unwilling to be a father. The only thing you should expect from him is money. Go via cms so it's as legally binding as possible.

Try to not give him any other head space. Don't let his dickishness distract from your time with your young baby. You don't get these days back

@Blossomtoes you can see their pay gap reporting here - https://www.natwestgroup.com/who-we-are/working-at-natwest-group/diversity-equity-and-inclusion/gender.html

it also depends on what you mean by highly paid, there are plenty of finance, data, tech etc roles at manager level that pay c. £50k (regional, so add 30% for London roles) before benefits and bonus that are achievable 5-7 years out of university. I agree with you that heads of department type level are unlikely to take this leave but there will be plenty of males in the £50k - £120k bracket (which personally I’d class as well/ highly paid) across the country having children and taking this leave. Ok not everyone eligible will take it but it’s a global policy so they’ve got to be willing to foot the bill if there’s high uptake.

FFS. You can't declare something to be "fraud" based purely on assumptions.

Have you actually read what you've posted???

Perhaps you think that Nat West would happily send him off on 6 months leave at full pay just as a reward for having conceived a child? I have already said that I think this is vanishingly unlikely. So it follows that they have not been told the truth. There is no need to know anything more about the detail of their policy or what he said to them.

You think it's "unlikely" but have zero clue what's in the policy. And you've deduced that "they have not been told the truth" out of thin air. And there's "no need to know the detail of the policy or what he said to them".

What the actual fuck. 😂