Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Stat maternity pay should be relative to earnings

131 replies

nappyvalley2024 · 06/03/2024 06:21

Why is statutory maternity leave a flat rate after the initial 6 weeks?

It would be fairer to have it linked to earnings for 3-6 months. Families in higher incomes will find the drop in pay more significant than those on lower incomes and would have been paying more NI.

This leads to higher earning women having to take shorter mat leaves than those on lower incomes.

OP posts:
PickledPurplePickle · 06/03/2024 06:23

I disagree as a family people need to save for this drop in income

It Shouldn’t be covered by the state

PheobeBebe · 06/03/2024 06:23

Is this a joke? Those on higher wages could maybe have some prior planning and save more prior to mat leave? Your entitlement is shocking

BlueThursday · 06/03/2024 06:24

My own view is a higher earner is more likely to have an enhanced package from their employer or more of an opportunity to save prior to the leave

Mt563 · 06/03/2024 06:24

It should at least be minimum wage.

RedHelenB · 06/03/2024 06:25

Higher earners also have a better opportunity to save for maternity leave.

DurhamDurham · 06/03/2024 06:25

My own view is a higher earner is more likely to have an enhanced package from their employer or more of an opportunity to save prior to the leave

Absolutely this.

MississippiAF · 06/03/2024 06:25

Nope, find better employers to fund mat leave, not taxpayers

DayAndAge · 06/03/2024 06:26

Plenty of high earners do the type of job that comes with enhanced mat pay in their salary package. Some places offer a year of full pay. Equally, high earners are better placed to save for mat leave and I'm sure I read somewhere often take longer off than lower income women. But I do take your point, it's hard and probably the middle earners who find it hardest

Bagwyllydiart · 06/03/2024 06:28

The state should not have to pay for your children

WandaWonder · 06/03/2024 06:28

nappyvalley2024 · 06/03/2024 06:21

Why is statutory maternity leave a flat rate after the initial 6 weeks?

It would be fairer to have it linked to earnings for 3-6 months. Families in higher incomes will find the drop in pay more significant than those on lower incomes and would have been paying more NI.

This leads to higher earning women having to take shorter mat leaves than those on lower incomes.

OK playing along, Why would they?

Scooby2024 · 06/03/2024 06:28

Most will have enhanced packages. I only got Stat but as soon as we found out I was pregnant, we started living as if we had had the drop in wage and saved the rest. It definitely helped to realise how much money we wasted/didn't need to spend. Helped in the long run for high childcare fees.

TwylaSands · 06/03/2024 06:31

Mt563 · 06/03/2024 06:24

It should at least be minimum wage.

Madness. Save for children.

what would be a better argument is a universal basic income.

plantlover34 · 06/03/2024 06:33

I'm not sure about linking it to earnings, but I do agree that it's shockingly low. Who can possibly live on £700 a month?

I think SMP should be raised in line with other benefits or possibly closer to minimum wage.

It would cost a lot less than a 2p cut in NI, and would actually make a lot of sense from a government that says it wants to raise the birth rate - pay mothers better for the work they do!

LightSwerve · 06/03/2024 06:39

Oh dear.

You want those who are better off to be even better off than currently, whilst leaving those with less to continue to struggle?

You've completely misunderstood what NI is about.

There are millions of kids living in deep poverty, if anyone should get a bit more it is them.

Some families are watering down formula.

duende · 06/03/2024 06:40

I had both my kids in the UK and each time I had to save up for a year to top up my stat mat pay. I was the higher earner.

It is not the norm in most European countries where mat leave is proportionate to your average earnings in the months/ year pre mat leave. In Poland for example you get 80% of your average pay, for 12! months.

Germany is about 70%
Spain is 100%.

Women should not be financially screwed for years for taking time off to give birth.

Amba1998 · 06/03/2024 06:40

I want a second child at the end of this year. I’m saving for Mat leave. I want the same standard of living and to be able to go on holiday etc (and of course afford my bills). I get en enhanced package and then it drops. I’m saving to pay myself into my current account what I would normally earn.

that’s all on me. I don’t expect anyone else to pay for me.

Parker231 · 06/03/2024 06:44

plantlover34 · 06/03/2024 06:33

I'm not sure about linking it to earnings, but I do agree that it's shockingly low. Who can possibly live on £700 a month?

I think SMP should be raised in line with other benefits or possibly closer to minimum wage.

It would cost a lot less than a 2p cut in NI, and would actually make a lot of sense from a government that says it wants to raise the birth rate - pay mothers better for the work they do!

You don’t live on £700 a month - you save up whilst pregnant, check whether your employer has a maternity package and pool income with the baby’s father.

Rosestulips · 06/03/2024 06:46

I don’t agree, that’s what occupational maternity pay is for. I was happy with mine and managed a year off work both times

Garlicking · 06/03/2024 06:47

duende · 06/03/2024 06:40

I had both my kids in the UK and each time I had to save up for a year to top up my stat mat pay. I was the higher earner.

It is not the norm in most European countries where mat leave is proportionate to your average earnings in the months/ year pre mat leave. In Poland for example you get 80% of your average pay, for 12! months.

Germany is about 70%
Spain is 100%.

Women should not be financially screwed for years for taking time off to give birth.

I quickly looked up the German info:

The maternity allowance amount is always determined by the salary of the last cleared calendar months before the beginning of the maternity period. It is a maximum of EUR 13 per day. The employer pays the difference between the maternity allowance amount and your previous salary.

You don't need the state to pay you to be pregnant, you need employers to.

Plumtop11 · 06/03/2024 06:50

I took a big pay cut for maternity leave but we saved like mad throughout my pregnancy to help cover that drop and honestly we didn't spend as much month to month in the first few months.

I think we should be grateful for the maternity pay and leave we get in this country.

motherofbantams · 06/03/2024 06:56

I agree OP.

We lived in Sweden for a bit, there, is 90% of earnings up to 90k, for mum and dad, 480 days. Paid by the state. So you do get a more relative amount. Means dads take time off. Better equality for women as companies used to men taking time off.

They do have a higher higher rate income tax than us....but you get so much more for it!

MarieG10 · 06/03/2024 07:01

Just add expenditure to the state spending that there is no income to pay for it. We need to be cutting not growing, especially when some people are now on marginal tax and deduction rates if 80-85%

mummyh2016 · 06/03/2024 07:05

Unpopular opinion on here OP, you're very brave!
But yes I agree. I remember my first baby, me and a colleague went on ML at the same time. She worked 2 days a week, relatively stress free job. She just about qualified for SMP so she only had a very small drop in wages. I picked up around 1/4 of my wages on maternity as I worked FT in sales. To add insult to injury I then paid tax on my SMP whereas she didn't.
I was the main earner in our household, she wasn't. It's okay saying higher earners need to save (which I did) but our household income was around the same so why shouldn't her DH have had to save as well?

MillshakePickle · 06/03/2024 07:06

We are not high earners but fall into with a combined 80k wage. We do not have university educations . We live in the South East commuter belt, have a mortgage, a car but no car payments. 1 dc at school with wrap around care plus clubs and 1 baby. Currently on mat leave. H has a commute.

I am currently on stat mat leave and in the unpaid portion. I don't have an enhanced package. I will take the full year. This baby was unplanned.

We have had a massive drop in income but financially while things are tight we have not had to touch our savings (yet) we saved as much as we could through pregnancy. And did already have savings. We manage by not having had a stupidly large mortgage (we bought under our budget - in case we couldn't afford to pay the mortgage in an unforseen event) not having a massive car payment, by not having loads of subscriptions, memberships, abroad holidays- we've still had on 2 with another 2 weeks at Easter booked, we eat well and still do activities and days out as a family but do more local and free activities pack a picnic etc. We have a warm house and the children are fed and clothed well as we are. We budget and mostly stick to it and have had some big purchases which were unplanned.

We have made financial decisions to the best of our knowledge and ability throughout. We have no family help or receive any benefits. My maternity leave has no rea impact to our standard of living.

The tax payer should not being paying more for me to be on mat leave. Having children is a choice (and yes, a privilege).

We will be much, much worse off and struggle when I return to work. We are both cutting our hours equally to help pay for child care, commutes and pay our bills. This shouldn't be the case that working costs more than not. I would prefer to see more funding for childcare provision, better maternity care and better pediatric care. This would have a greater impact than higher maternity stat pay. We are already very lucky with how much time and pay we receive compared to other countries.

Plan better in general and make better decisions/choices op. Don't rely on the state to fund your family especially if you're a higher earner. It's entitled and embarrassing. There are families struggling through no fault of their own who are returning to work early, have no help or financial assistance, who both work full time, or who are on benefits that are not fit for a decent standard of living or are single parent families.

Megifer · 06/03/2024 07:09

No 🤣🤣🤣 higher earners can just save up.