Sharing leave with dad

[Tom]

Hi all

I'm wondering what mums thoughts about the Tory proposal that maternity leave could be shared between mum and dad. The Labour party is seriously considering placing this into the election manifesto too.

I think the basic idea is that the entitlement that mums have after the initial 6 weeks would be able to be transferred to dad in something like month blocks. So instead of only mum being able to take up to a year off, she could transfer, say, three or four months to dad - perhaps to go back to work after 7/8 months and instead of having to use childcare, dad can stay at home.

We've found this issue important, because it is a way in which the leave system can signal the SHARED responsibility of mums and dads for children. At the moment, the system forces couples into very traditional roles - only mum can take time off with job protection, and dad has to specialise in being a breadwinner, even if the couple wants to live less traditional gender roles.

I'd be really interested in hearing mums reactions to this idea, to help inform our (Fathers Direct) thinking. Any comments most welcome

this is done in Canada - there is 52 weeks between the mum and dad and the parents decide who takes it great idea I think

Hello Tom. I'm all for this plan. How can men and women hope to have equal opportunities if the law doesn't support it?

I think that this is a birlliant idea dn would have appreciated it when ds was born.

Does anyone know though:
whether the leave could be split say - mum for 3 months, dad for 2 months, mum again for 2 months - or is it one then the other

I also think that if dads are sharing the leave then they should have equal entitlement - ie job protection etc

I'm for it in principle, but it still doesn't address the woeful financial provision. My dp did have time with ds (but that is because of the nature of his job - uni lecturer - summer hols...), but as main breadwinner I really had to return to work to pay the mortgage. The allowance is such that often whoever the breadwinner is (be they male or female) they can't afford to take the time...(I know others would say you find a way to afford it, but I don't think it is necessarily that easy..)

TBH I don't think that 6 weeks is very long to have off after going through birth and trying to establish breastfeeding.

I can see where you are coming from Tom in your beliefs on the role of the father and I do think that fathers should be seen as having more responsibility for the family eg having time off for sick children/appointments seems more acceptable for mothers than fathers which is wrong. But the sticking point really is breast feeding. Its hard to work and exclusively breast feed (I've never managed it).

But I suppose a lot of people have given up breast feeding by then and those that haven't can use their common sense and decide whether the mother needs to have the leave because of the breast feeding. Agree with Blackduck though - don't know many people who've had a full year off anyway. Most people have had either the 6 months paid like me, or managed to stretch to an extra month or two.

Also bear in mind that at least half of that 6 weeks is probably going to be before the birth.

I think it's a great idea. Not that I wanted to go back to work - I was quite happy to quit and let dh carry on .

However, there are lots of women who would like to get back to work and if they went back and dp could take over for a few months I would imagine it'd be a great option.

About time Dad's got a bigger role in the early months. Dh got 1 week off - how crap is that? I know you can get 2 weeks off supposedly paid but we'd have been seriously out of pocket if we'd taken them up on that!!

I can beat that gobbledi......my Dh got 1 day when Ds2 was born and 3 days whne ds3 was born. Now that is crap.

I think this is a fantasic idea too BTW.

I think it is a wonderful idea, as long as it is at 90% of pay for both (Full pay would be great but you can't have everything) But there is a huge difference betwen having legislation that says Dads can take time off and not sufer for it in the workplace, and the cultural attitudes changing to make this a reality - most women still get discriminated against in terms of career progression if they take time out, men are less likely to stand for this. It's a chicken and egg scenario. With or without legal rights men who take time off will suffer until it becomes normality - but until more of them do, it won't become normal.

But the 90% of pay only applies for the first 18 weeks prufrock - so in fact until baby is about four months assuming the mother worked very late into the pregnancy. Think this is a big issue.

Think I was making a similar point about cultural acceptability but not as eloquently.

Bozza are they proposing 90% for the first 18 weeks? That would be a bit of a shift - cos its currently only 6 weeks....

yes, it would be good to not have to live the traditional roles - our lives are very fluid around work and whoever isn't working as much takes the lion share of responsibility for dd. it would, therefore, have made a huge difference for us if dh could have taken some of my maternity leave.

it's interesting that a lot of the friction i've experience in my relationship with dh since dd was born relates to the enormous pressure he has felt being shoehorned into a traditional breadwinner role. we had a really equal relationship before dd came along and it has been very uncomfortable being in the 'traditional' roles. it was a massive relief when i went back to work and he was able to take over some of the childcare.

Not saying I think taht waht I have seem of either parties ideas are wonderful - just the general principle of fully shareable childbirth leave

I have 2 points of view here, that of a mum and that of an employer.

As a mum I would be concerned about the impact on breastfeeding. I had to fight and struggle to breastfeed with a non supportive dh who wanted me to give up. If he had been entitled to take part of my maternity leave then I would have felt under immense pressure.

I do agree that fathers should have the option of spending time with their children but I feel that the most helpful time in terms of the family unit as a whole is in the first few weeks after the birth. I therefore think that vastly increased paternity pay for those first few weeks would be of more value.

As an empolyer (or rather my parents are employers) we would be concerned at the impact on planning. A woman taking maternity leave has to currently give so much notice, even so it can be difficult for employers to plan/cover this. To keep employers happy you would have to give some sort of notice period for fathers to take these blocks of leave, but what would appen in practice if after giving the notice the mum, for whatever reason (perhaps PND or other difficulties) changed her mine.

Also what provision would there be for conflict between partners. Would the courts decide who takes the leave if both parents wanted to and disagreed or would the final say be down to the woman.

I don't understand how there could be a dispute. Mum could have 6 weeks. Dad could have 6 weeks. If they both take it at the biginning, the why is that a problem. 6 weeks together or 12 weeks of taking turns.

Of course fathers should have to give notice too. I think that's only fair to the employer. And if mum changes her mind? Well, I think that PND is a separate illness, and shouldn't effect Dad's right to paternity leave.

But the propsals involve a mum "giving up " some of her maternity leave to the dad. That COULD cause dispute.

Using PND was just an example. Another example is that I planned to return to work very early. However huge breastfeeding problems meant that I had to re-think that plan. My dh's answer would have been to just give up

Don't really know, I suppose that would be for you and DH to work out. Personally, I'd have tohold a gun to DH's head toget him to look after a newborn. But, I'd be willing to do that if necessary.

When DD was very young, DH's work never understood that he had to stay home when she was sick. His boss even once said "don't you have a wife?" I told hime to say, "yes, and she has to go to work"

Anyway, just think that we too have the right to go to work whilst our DH/P does some of the parenting.

sounds like a great plan but

I WILL NEVER VOTE TORY

what rates of pay would the fatehrs leave be at thou, as some parents maynot be able to afford for the father to be off of work even if the montheer is working.

I'm for 90% of his usual salary -- not that anyone is considering this. But it seems the only fair option to me. But, of course, no one will be able to fund this.

well it will be the usual 90% for 6 weeeks then the rest at £100.00 or 90% which eva is the lower. i imagion.

I think there are a number of ideas being discussed, the main ones being:

• Paternity leave is paid (for 2 weeks) at 90% pay.
• Maternity leave is paid at 90% for 6 weeks, and this can only be taken by the mother
• After 6 weeks, the mother can transfer some of her leave (in month blocks) to her partner if she and he agree.
• 20 weeks of this is paid currently at SMP rate, and if any of this leave was transferred, then so would the pay. The other 26 weeks are unpaid.
• The government will invest in creating as simple a system for managing this as possible for employers.

Tom, dump the idea of maternity leave paid at 90% at 6 weeks.

Paid maternity leave needs to be as long as the breastfeeding guidelines. I don't know where the 6 weeks arbitrary figure comes from.

And paternity pay needs to be longer than 2 weeks, otherwise the expectation is that fathers return to work after 2 weeks.

This has to be enforced otherwise father will not have a real opportunity to take this. In my workplace, fathers are frown upon for taking the 2 weeks, so it would be impossible for them to try to take more even if they were entitled to it. I think father should have a few months they'd have to take at the end of mum's leave. Full pay!