How to make unpaid mat leave fair with DP?

[Fairpay]

Hi all, I have a 5 month old DS (first child) with my DH. We have similar jobs with similar pay - he earns about 10% more than me but followint my next pay review shortly that gap may narrow.

I’m on mat leave at the moment and get 6 months paid, 3 months SMP and 3
months unpaid.

We jointly own the house and pay the mortgage 50/50 though I own a greater share for now as I contributed more of the deposit. All bills are split 50/50 from our joint account.

My question is - for those with DPs and children, what arrangements did you make during mat leave to make the unpaid bit fair? Should we say he’s saving £X per month on childcare and so shoud give me the equivalent amount, or half of that? Or he should pay my share of the mortgage and bills for three months? And so increase his share of the house more quickly during that period?

I appreciate this depends in part on the sums involved, but I’m interested to get a sense of what other people did.

FWIW, this isn’t a situation where he is unwilling to pay! I read so many posts about crap partners like that on here. He is very much a 50/50 parent and wants to do what’s right and fair, but we can’t quite work out what that looks like!

Thank you!

We do pool literally everything. I have earned more than DH in the past and now much less (post kids).

We still have separate interests and buy our own things. We have an agreement that over a certain amount (which has fluctuated depending on how much money we have) we will discuss it with the other person. This has always been the same number for both of us regardless of who was earning more at the time.

Honestly we have never had an issue or argument about money. It’s not a case of controlling one another. I also think the argument about women losing out by sharing finances doesn’t usually play out like that. Typically more women with separate finances than fully joint finances will struggle if they are on maternity leave or working part time to care for the couple’s shared children.

Legally though it is joint money and you don't get to keep 75% of the house even with agreeing before marriage. If you split he can claim half the house and your pension if you are the higher earner.
Remember marriage is a legal contract not what bits suit.

@Kite22 you're definitely right that we need to think through all the various life events that might come our way during our marriage and how we would manage them financially. Neither of us would deny the other anything in the event of sickness etc and one person just topping up the joint account more than the other for a while would perhaps not cut it.

@Dancingwithhyenas I like the idea of agreeing a level over which you ask the other person. I think what has put me off the idea of totally joint finances is having to constantly say to the other person “is it ok if I buy X”. It feels like I would keep my independence more by just keeping hold of my own income. But having a pre agreed threshold could help.

Gotta get to sleep now as the baby is asleep but probably not for long! Thanks for all your comments - definitely food for thought!

It’s fine to have your separate money when you earn the same, will you split the child care costs equally too? However there are times in a long term marriage where you will need to prop each other up, maternity leave is one, illness, part time working or job loss can be others. You don’t have to morph together to do this but it’s a shit marriage if you can’t either pool the money or subsidise the other person when funds are unequal.

If you are truly equal in job prospects and earnings then fair enough but if one person sacrifices their career progression and earning power, to look after the DC’s (and it is usually the woman) I don’t understand how one person can be left with more leisure money than the other in that family set up.

This is what we did OP. We are not married but have 2 DC and are also tenants in common in my favour. We are reasonable equal in salary. Him basic pay and me basic plus extras covering an on call type shift which incurs overtime. We are lucy to be able to save every month.

We keep our salaries. Pay an equal amount into a joint account for bills and food, kids stuff days out etc go on a credit card that is cleared equally each month.

As soon as I found out I was pregnant I saved enough to cover my personal Direct Debits every month whilst I was on Maternity leave. This included my contribution to the joint bill account. It also included spending money for me going out etc. DP covered the joint credit card bill which covered everything else.

I agree with you OP. Just because you get married doesn't mean you have to merge everything in life. Maybe it comes from being independent for so long. The thought of having my salary going Into a joint account where someone else can spend it just doesn't seem right to me.

We used to earn roughly the same so we worked out the household bills for the year and put that in the joint. The rest of our own money was for savings and spending how we each wanted. It works as he has to claim expenses back so his salary fluctuates. I couldn’t cope with that on a pooled joint account.
Mat leave 1) I paid my share from savings. Mat leave 2) my savings had gone. I’d gone part time so less mat pay this time and he’d had career advancements. I’d assumed he’d made savings like I had but he hadn’t as he’s a bit of a spender. It made me anxious about money.
He pays about 2/3 household expenses and I pay 1/3 plus childcare. He pays for big things like holidays, my car tax and my car insurance. He has far more disposable income and he gets a bonus. I do resent this, particularly as we end up working similar hours. More so as my career is well, down the pan and just a job now due to having children. I learned to be very careful with my finances which is not a bad thing! You are assuming you’ll be on a higher wage and your career will continue but that might change for either of you. You need to plan for the future and how future expenses will be managed.

We've been married nearly 25 years during which time I have been at various times the considerably higher earner, earned the same as DH, or earned nothing for a while due to babies and study.
We are a family and have family money. Everything pooled and all spending whether personal or family related goes on individual credit cards which are paid off in full each month. Can't see each other's transactions.
When things have been tight for money we have careful spend limits, for both family and personal spending. More relaxed when we are both earning decent amounts.
We both have similar attitudes towards money and neither cares if his golf cost more than my hair or vice versa.

Just put into the joint pot proportionate % wise to your income, mat leave or not. And adjust accordingly.

I can slightly understand your thinking on the day-to-day (that you'd feel guilty having your nails done using money that may or may not have majoritively come from his earnings), but this whole 'contributed more to the house deposit so he needs to contribute more to close the gap' thing does not make sense, since if you divorce (which is the only scenario in the marriage where a division of money will be realised) the family assets (house, savings, shares, pensions) will be pooled by the courts and split in half.

You don't seem to be reading the posts, as there's a very easy solution that's been suggested many times and fits in with your unusual attitude.

Everything goes into the joint account. Joint expenses come out. A joint savings amount goes out if you like. The rest is split 50/50 and sent to your personal accounts.

You have your own money, you don't need to ask each other if you can spend from your personal amount, and you both get the same.

If you're expecting to have more personal spending money when you earn more, or less when you're on maternity leave... well all I can say is that isn't a marriage.

It’s interesting that some people here see the total joining of all assets as a crucial part of the marriage. For me that feels a little outdated.

The law doesn’t agree with you that it’s outdated, though! As soon as you put a ring on it, you became a joint financial partnership. Marriage isn’t romantic, it’s contractual.

The reason I said ‘overthinking’ is because you’re doing all these complicated mental gymnastics about something that’s really simple- you want your own money to spend each, then you want joint funds for family life. There’s no reason why you can’t set that up and each be equal in terms of spending power from now on, regardless of which of you is ‘working hardest’ or earning most. It makes sense you’re higher earners as it sounds like you’ve never had to have discussions about restricting spending - but also you’ve never discussed joint savings goals?

What works perfectly when just 2 of you definitely starts to work less well the more children you have - not just maternity leaves and childcare but extra incidental spends for the children. It’s so much simpler to agree an appropriate disposable income spending amount for the 2 adults to have each per month, than to constantly renegotiate what’s available in the joint account and what each needs to
contribute.

I never understand this kind of splitting my money and his money when people are married and have kids. I was a SAHM for years, should I never have been allowed to get my nails done 😂

We don't pool OP. Joint account we both pay into for main bills then our own accounts. I'd personally never pool money. But we are a blended family, and I was raised in a blended family so I like that separation. Doesn't mean our relationship is weaker.

I used savings to cover maternity leave and DH covered gaps. All just kinda worked. He had two other children to cover at that time though.

As you both ear roughly the same
All money in 1 account
Only money left for bills and food and petrol in this (and childcare and child's cloths ect)
Split out the same amount into savings for you and DH
Split out the same amount into spending for you and DH
So each person should have access to 3 accounts,

I pooped everything in my first marriage, which I'm sure works for some, but I'd never do it again for various reasons.

In my current relationship, 14 years, we have joint bills accounts and a general groceries etc. We split bills etc 50/50 and pay that into the joint accounts. The rest of our earnings is ours to do with what we see fit.

This is the issue with not pooling money. Why should you have less disposable income? You are doing an essential task in the home, which enables your DH to earn his salary without paying for childcare. Why is it only the woman's income that's compromised?

We’re trying to make sure that I’m not penalised for taking leave to take care of our baby, but I also don’t want free rein with his money to spend as I please.

The first part of that is common sense for your family. Making sure you don't lose out on your earning power over the long term is best for everyone.

The second part I don't really think is of any importance. You are married. Those vows include everything that is his being your, yours being his. And even if you didn't give it much thought when you said it, that is the contract, that is how married people are supposed to live, it is what courts try to ensure happens when a marriage ends.

You are talking about 3 months, 16 weeks, out what should be 40+ years of married life. It REALLY doesn't matter.

How you do it is up to you, but there are plenty of ways in this thread, form total pooling to a fairly strict accounting for and formalising of the financial split. Pick one that makes sense to you but, for the sake of the kid you now have, stop thinking of yourselves as wholly independent individuals and start working together as a team.

I would say he should pay everything when you go down in pay, just until you are back at work. X

@dustandroses Yes we will split the childcare costs equally when I go back to work, though if I go back to only a 4 day week, I think it would make sense for him to contribute more to reflect the fact I would be sacrificing a day’s pay to look after our child.

I agree it would be rubbish for one person to have less in the way of “leisure funds” if salaries are unequal, and particularly if they were affected by sick leave or sacrificing their career etc over the course of the marriage. Those are the posts that have been particularly helpful in making me think and will prompt a chat with my DH about future proofing the way we do things! Both of us would be completely willing to contribute more of our “personal” money where needed, but I’m still not sure that means pooling everything we have right now. But as I say, we need to give it some thought - this thread has been very eye-opening and helpful!

Pension? Will your pension be affected by you taking maternity pay? Will you have less pension or lump sum as a result of maternity or part-time working?

You don't have to pool everything and have no personal funds but the administrative set up (everything into one pot then transfer back out money that becomes "yours" again) means that it's not the person earning nothing having to be transferred an amount that's only agreed at the time, but instead a join decision.

E.g. it might be (give you said you're both fairly high earners)

£2500 in each. Total in £5000.

£1000 out on Mortgage, £500 on agreed joint bills. £1000 on child care, £500 into joint savings. £2000 left.

Leave £500 in there for food and petrol.

Transfer £750 to each of you to pay for personal savings and whatever things you don't class as joint (e.g. maybe one person wants a really fancy car whereas the other is happy with a reliable A to B car).

There's a difference between doing that and each person just transferring in £1750 because if you get to a point where now the income coming in is only £3000, you then both together have to decide to reduce both your personal allowances, which bills to cut etc and that's definitely conceptually different from person A having £500 and B having £2500 and A has to cut their contribution to the pot and B increase theirs. It can end up with practically the same end point but the process is different and I think less divisive at a time that is likely to be fraught - because not having money is always a bit fraught.

if I go back to only a 4 day week, I think it would make sense for him to contribute more to reflect the fact I would be sacrificing a day’s pay to look after our child.

What does that mean? He should have less personal spending money?

I don't understand your setup, or your thinking, at all.

Yeah having kids does generally mean less personal spending money 😉 he’s going to have less whether the child is being looked after by a parent or is in childcare. I think her setup (having separate money pre kids) and her thinking (around changing the setup now they have kids) both make perfect sense.

OP we don’t pool everything, we just split everything 50/50 after bills. That way no one has to ask permission or justify any spending.