to get a job, just so i can get maternity leave and pay

[doyouthinkthisisok]

or do you think its fair enough, you've paid in for years and your only claiming what you are entitled to, or do you think its a bit off?

my dd is 17 months old and we have decided to try for another i am a sahm at the moment.
perhaps i should of gone back to my old job, 5 months ago?
the extra money we would get from mat leave would make it some much easier for us.
of course if i got a job next week, i have no idea how long it would take to get pg

Because when you get people who take the piss out of the rights people fought long and hard to get for others, just out of a sense of entitlement, you take the piss out of everyone who needs that right not just for 'extra money' but out of the sheer necessity those rights were designed to help them with in the first place.

What if it is a large employer who exploits people and makes a mint while paying minimum wages? Surely it is peanuts for them. Why should the considerations be purely on the employers side anyway.

Lou, for about the hundreth time, the OP doesn't want to work for any other reason than to get paid SMP from the taxpayer.

That is NOT the same thing as a person wishing to advance his/her career to better their lives as a whole through monies they earn from work.

Lots of people work when they don't NEED to, are they unfair to take jobs?

and a lot of people sit on the dole, which is taxpayer money, because they're entitled to the money and it's makes their lives easier than working.

is that okay, too?

"the extra money we would get from mat leave would make it some much easier for us."

From the OP.

I don't see the problem with this statement. She will work for a number of months, then get SMP, her legal right by virtue of having worked.

the way I see it, the new level of maternity rights serves several purposes. It has protected women who wanted to return to work after having a baby without their careers being damaged irreperably. It also allowed women who did not know how they would feel about returning to work the option to delay making that decision until the had decided for themselves. Lastly it would give them some money so that they did not have to hurry back to work. (pittance though it is)
It was not designed for people to rip off that system to the detriment of employers IMO.
There are never guarantees with employees. And I would look as dimly on someone who took a permanent job if they knew they would be leaving in four months, or the other examples described. But at least you are able to ask those kind of questions at interview! And you can employ on the basis of those questions: they would have actually lied in those examples and that would have put them in the wrong.

suey2, just curious how long do you think someone should be with the same employer before getting SMP and the right to return to work?

I have been employed by county for 3 years and worked in my present school for over a year. I will have been at my present school for 18 months when I go on maternity leave. I will return a year after the baby is born.

Am I ripping off the system? Technically I am employed by county and not the school.

My sister decided to be a SAHM - she also wanted to get preg again quickly after having first - she pretended to set up a co. selling toys so declaring herself self emp. paid a basic stamp for a few month and then claimed SMP from the govt.

I thought it was out of order but I guess many work the system.

she doesn't want to go back to work! she just wants the SMP.

different story.

dh has paid into the system, too. i think he should just fuck around, get sacked and then go on the dole because hey, he's entitled.

i'll go on income support. why not?

it's easier than working and i've paid taxes for years.

Not read the whole thread but I think you should do it. People work because they need the money. The OP needs the money. What's the problem with that? Should she not get a job because she MIGHT get pregnant in the next few months?? It can take ages to get pregnant after all. Why should she miss out on the income if she is willing to work? You are being far too harsh.

I have already said that I have no problem with your position, really tired. I think the minimum time should stay as it is. For example, There will always be people who get pg accidentally and they need to be protected, too: but not if they are pg before they start work. Pg is a huge inconvenience and financial expense for the employer, so I don't think those rights should be extended to those already pg

I agree with you that its silly to extend maternity rights to those who are already pregnant.

When I applied for my job I the last thing on my mind was having a baby. I just wanted a bit of mental stimulation and the extra money.

What changed my mind is that there is a woman at work who has a precious first born who is 16 years old. She is even more batty than me. I only have one child and I hope I don't bore everyone senseless talking about him.

This particular lady could not see that her showing off that her son has perfect pitch is a bit tackless when my child has hearing difficulties.

I think that having a second child will be good for our family. It will mean I am not 100% obcessed with one child.

'Pg is a huge inconvenience and financial expense for the employer' even if that employer is say a massive supermarket making millions?

Also, what do we expect in a society that expects women to slot into mens working patterns and pays lip service to maternity rights and flexible working. Either we want mothers to have a choice to go into work or we don't, someone has to care for the kids/babies.

If someone gets a job for SMP then, so what, they would only get it if they worked for it surely? I am a SAHM and get nothing as I don't want to do paid work at present. If someone is willing to then they should get the rights whatever reason they are going back.

At DC school there was a TA who had a baby and came back pregnant 3 times in a row. She has hardley been in. It can be annoying for the kids to keep getting used to new TAs but at the end of the day why shouldn't she have the number of children she wants and SMP and her job back if she wants it? There will always be this problem while there are unpaid workers doing the caring and while we live in a system such as ours which considers only profit.

the principle remains the same imo, small company or large.
I do not disagree with maternity rights in the slightest, but I think that people need to recognize the reality of the situation. It is always an expense and inconvenience to the employer, but I am happy to take that on as I am very pro employing women. I think that every job involves give and take between employee and employer: also between employees and co workers. If you respect your employees and pay them well, I think you should be able to expect a little loyalty: not have someone join for a short period of time, expecting time off for appointments and with the possibility of a large amount of sick leave. Also not knowing exactly when they will leave

Suey, they are not 'expecting time off' - they are entitled by law to the time off.

Claiming benefits when you are fit and able to work is very different to working so that you can claim a benefit.

I sympathise with suey2, bubbles and other employers on this thread. I am an employee and totally agree that there must be give-and-take and a sense of fairplay on both sides. Otherwise it will always be the sort of job where both sides are feel the other is ripping them off, and it is never going to get better. I wonder if this attitude is more prevalent in relatively unskilled jobs.

I was lead to believe you had to have 26 weeks work behind you to qualify for maternity pay, so lets hope if you do go back to work you dont get pregnant before then otherwise you will be buggered

No you don't Dresdenfiles - you have to have 26 weeks work behind you the week before you give birth (to qualify for Maternity Allowance at £117.18 for 39 weeks).

You only have to have 26 weeks work behind you by the 25th week of pregnancy (i.e. Have worked for your employer a week before the start of your last LMP) to qualify for SMP.

just go for it, get the SMP, take advantage of it. I would if I was in your situation OP.

do you think all laws are fair, lou? There are often loopholes that will lead to abuse, or at least allow people to claim who were not the initial aim of the law. I do not accept your 'it's less bad' [than being fit to work but claiming benefit] argument.
How do you feel, for example, about the rich who avoid taxes by legitimate accountacy techniques?
To the op: the money you would be claiming would have otherwise gone to state pensions or the nhs: it is not money out of thin air:
Blueshoes I suspect you are right: I can see how folk would think it was ok if they are working for a big retail chain, for example. But the smp is always paid by the state which is why I think it just as bad.

I'm not sure I understand the OP (and I realise it's really old now) - you want to go back to work now even though you are trying to get pregnant as this means you'll then get maternity pay again?

I'm not sure what's wrong with that really - if you need a job now for money then why wouldn't you?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding?

couldn't find the post again to double-check, but I'm sure the OP said she would be working 1 day per week earning £60 per day.

You won't qualify for SMP at this rate. You may be entitled to Maternity Allowance at 90% of these weekly earnings depending on how long you work (£54 a week).

The only questionable part is whether OP is 'tricking' her employer by going back with the intention of leaving again - that can be solved with a bit of honesty on her part. They can't sack you for suggesting you may want to get pregnant! But maybe a temporary contract would be a better route.

Lots of people take on work or extra work in order to save up for something specific in life - such as holidays & travel, weddings, homes, etc, etc.

suey2, it's unfortunate that you have had a bad experience as an employer, but it is increasingly sounding like you think no-one should get maternity pay or leave as we are taking that money from elsewhere (hell I'm feeling guilty about ever claiming SMP just reading your posts). I think you are letting your personal gripe against your "friend" cloud your judgement somewhat and I would be a very scared and intimidated employee of yours if I ever had to tell you that I was pregnant!

If she works for the required amount of time before getting pregnant and taking her leave, she is legally entitled to the benefits. End of discussion. Whether she wants to do it for a bit of extra money now or after the baby, or both is immaterial imvho. She isn't doing anything wrong per se; she didn't set the guidelines, the goverment did.

Go for it OP and enjoy whatever work you end up doing.

not at all, daisy. I am very pro women working and the current maternity benefits as they stand. I claimed maternity allowance myself, so would be pretty hypocritical otherwise!
I think it is a very good use of tax pounds to support women in this way for the reasons I described before. The same as many other benefits (such as family tax credit) and even things like the post office which cost money to run, but are good for society. I think cameron's idea of paying SAHMs 6K pa is also an excellent idea.
What I don't think is morally and ethically ok is someone who is a SAHM (therefore financially doesn't NEED to work) going back to work temporarily in order to claim a benefit.