To think the amount of SMP is entirely unreasonable?

[SMPWTF]

I knew the amount prior to TTC but only now at 6 months pregnant is it actually registering.

£184 a week, and it’s taxed. If it weren’t taxed the amount would be £736 for a 4 week month.

How is this even close to enough?

DH and I earn similarly, respected careers but we’ll never be millionaires. Our household bills for our small semi-detached home are just over one of our whole salaries.

I understand that in the ideal you’d save up for maternity leave, but in practice that’s difficult for most people. The start up costs for preparing for baby are very expensive. We have been lucky to have been gifted a lot of big ticket items but even so the costs still add up fast. I can’t imagine even trying to save anything for a second maternity leave if you’re paying childcare fees for your toddler - probably one of the reasons we’ll be one and done.

I don’t think working people should have to save for years per child they have. Nor do I think people should only have children if they can afford to live on one income, because then we create a society where only either end of the wealth spectrum find themselves in a position to start and grow families.

No wonder couples are having fewer or no children.

Why can’t women be paid at least 50% of their wage? So many companies offer 6-12 months full sick pay, so why are so many still reluctant to meet this offer for parental leave?

@SouthLondonMum22 I think ideally, women should be able to survive on their husband's income while being SAHM if that's what they want.

Defo not state paying women to be a SAHM lol.

@Oldermum84 if anyone is being short sighted it's you. If you make hiring women an unattractive prospect for employers, you'll have more women claiming benefits. Or being forced to rely on their partners to support them if they have a baby. Maternity pay and leave has to be fair, not only to the woman but to the employer and tax payers too!

I'm 50 years old - I've had 4 children and I've experienced this from all sides. You can't make hiring women a risk to employers - this will just set women back and cost the state a lot of money. And you can't argue that we need people to be having lots of babies - there's 60 million people in this country. That's plenty of potential workers and tax payers.
I'm in favour of 6 months full pay and fathers taking the second 6 months of parental leave, I'm just not in favour of limitless billing the employer or state for numerous mat leaves.

In what way have I made employing women unattractive? All I have said is that SMP should be higher.

I mean 'you' generically, sorry if that sounded accusatory

I do think we as a society could do a lot to help women by state subsidy if good quality childcare for families, so that woh or sah are genuine choices, not forced by cost and circumstance.
Maybe we could do something at the tax end for sahp or workers who aren't taking up a limited childcare place, idk. I feel like there's lots which could be done to assist women and even up the sexes a bit, but doesn't make it an expense that employers directly gave to cover .

Basic maternity pay in this country (90% pay for 6 weeks up to 39 weeks of SMP) for employees is the most generous benefit I think we have though? Especially when you add in child benefit which you get soon after birth. Together that’s more than the state pension. It’s way more than carers allowance. Substantially higher than unemployment benefits. PIP is different because that’s calculated on actual costs of living with a disability.

On top of this, many women have enhanced pay up to 6 months full pay as many on here have said they’re getting. I’m struggling to understand why this is not enough when it’s already so generous?

I honestly don’t think you realise how good you all have it (including myself who had second child fairly recently). The women before us fought so hard to get enhanced maternity pay from employers. Why are you not more grateful to them- they didn’t get it but paved the way for us. I personally know women in their 50s who got my company to change their policy.

I think this just shows how entitled the younger generation are today- it’s all take take take. And I’m part of this generation. There’s no willingness to endure hardship and sacrifice coffees/ holidays/ discretionary spending. It’s quite sad really. We are soooo lucky compared to our predecessors… have some gratitude.

Yes, I’ve seen posters on here arguing for a 5 year mat leave (on the basis that one of the Scandj countries offers that). Women with 3 or 4 kids would be out of the workplace for 15-20 years!

It took us about 5 years to get rid of debt built up over the first two of our second kid's life. But hard on small businesses if you make them pay more and how much more can you put on the tax bill. All very tricky.

You’re right they shouldn’t be paid, they should be forced into poverty or abortions

Oh and to add if women are forced (under your scheme) to go back to work full time after 6 months, to have had maternity pay, most would just not do it. Meaning either they won't have children at all this a declining population and the economic disaster this would bring, or they would all quit their jobs and claim benefits.

@Oldermum84 I’m not sure whether that would happen if paid maternity leave was capped at 6 months. Maternity provisions in the US, for example, are appalling-if you get 3 months’ paid leave you’re considered lucky. Yet birth rates in the UK and US are roughly equivalent. I think people would adapt to 6 months especially if it were better paid.

@BruFord I was referring to the PP saying women should be forced back to work full time after 6 months, not capping maternity pay at 6 months. Yes a better paid 6 months would probably be equivalent to a poorly paid 9 months (as is current) so I agree.

Agreed! 👍

Oh another "back in my day" poster. Times have changed. We don't have it easy! (FYI I don't have regular coffees and last time I went abroad was 2 nights in Amsterdam 5 years ago).

Well the question here is why aren't you doing shared parental leave, so you go back at 6 months to your higher paid role and your lower paid partner takes 6 months off on SMP.

State pensioners aren’t carrying around 25-40 year mortgage terms with crippling interest rates. Carers allowance is shit and could be better, same as jobseekers for those who are genuinely looking for work. Lots of people fall into that bracket who aren’t, though.

Women who are working and have trained hard for their careers shouldn’t face financial penalties or disadvantages over those who don’t have children.

It’s not about the women before us, it’s about the women who come after us. We either accept this as good enough now or we strive for better. It’s not a race to the bottom and your comment is quite regressive. I’m sure many of the ‘predecessors’ you speak about would agree that SMP hasn’t gone up fairly with inflation, what use is it being grateful for what they did 20 years ago. The world is different.

I’m a younger mum myself with young kids so not sure what you mean?

Agree. If you’re working you should hope to be able to afford to meet a friend in a garden centre for a coffee, or go on holiday every couple of years at least. I don’t care what anyone says, that is normal life for the majority of people and isn’t really a luxury if you work hard and could ordinarily afford it when not on leave. So many posters with holier-than-thou attitudes to spending, as if they practice it themselves.

Find it very hard to believe this, sorry.

12 years ago is when my company policy changed - I benefited from it

I’m not regressive at all. I’m stating that maternity pay for employees is already generous as a recent recipient myself. It doesn’t need to increase because the couple have sufficient time to save and make up some of the difference/ reduce their expenses. If they need to borrow in the interim so be it.

That’s what I did and I don’t see the issue with borrowing short term - it’s my responsibility to put my hand in my pocket as I’ve already been given plenty by my employers and the taxpayer. I need to do my bit too (and my DH by taking on extra work).

Well it’s true. I have two young primary age children. Just stopped paying childcare for youngest. I meant mum of young children rather than I’m young, but I am a millennial

But if you want to sustain that lifestyle you need to save up and pay for it. You have a responsibility to chip in too, you can’t expect more than your already generous mat pay.

I don’t think the taxpayer should plug the gap after my 6 months of enhanced maternity pay. I would have gone back to work at 6 months pp if it hadn’t been for family. And then I no doubt would have been judged for putting my 6 month old in full time childcare. I think more employers should offer enhanced maternity pay if they can. Lots of big companies could afford to offer it but don’t. I feel for the women like me who, if I didn’t have enhanced maternity pay , would have been back at work when baby was 2-3 months old, he’d have gone in childcare full time at that age. We couldn’t have managed financially without doing that. I’m saying I am very very grateful for my enhanced maternity pay and recognise how much of disaster it would have been without it - and many others are in that situation. DH already worked full days and isn’t home until late evening after leaving early morning. He’s often on call over weekends and over night as well (as in has to be available to answer the phone/deal with enquiries etc). He’s salaried and this overtime is expected and part of his role, not paid extra for. Not sure where he’d fit a second job in doing that. And no, wracking up debt isn’t something I’d do lightly or quite frankly even consider. Each to their own but I’d take going back to work thank having that hanging over me.

This is emotional manipulation based on zero evidence. There is UC available and child benefit. People are acting like it’s only SMP which is disingenuous, at best.

I agree with you but lobby employers instead of expecting the government to make up the shortfall. In a perfect world, women would get 1 year on full pay and high quality, highly subsidised childcare but we don’t live in a perfect world.

@YOYOK But how could a small business possibly offer a new parent one year on full pay and also pay someone else to cover their job?

I honestly don’t think most small business could, do you? They’d go under.