Please or to access all these features

Sponsored threads

This topic is for sponsored discussions. If you'd like to run one with us, please email [email protected].

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Shared Parental Leave: share your views and you could win £300! NOW CLOSED

354 replies

AnnMumsnet · 17/03/2015 09:06

Parents with children due or adopted from 5 April will be among the first to take advantage of Shared Parental Leave. To coincide with its introduction Shared Parental Leave, we have been asked by the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills to find out what you think about this new policy for parents.

The team there say "From April 2015, parents will have greater choice and flexibility over how they share the care of their child in the first year of their life. Shared Parental Leave allows working couples share up to 50 weeks of leave and 37 weeks of pay in a way that suits their work and family needs. For example, parents can take time off together or they can tag team, stopping and starting leave and returning to work in between if they wish.
Check your eligibility and how much pay you can get here. We'd love to know what you think about this and how you'd use it for your family."

So, please have a look at the information provided here and let us know on this thread what you think. If you or your partner is pregnant and your baby is due from 5 April do you think you'll use it? Would you have used it when you had your last child if it had been an option? Do you think you will share leave with your partner if you have children in the future? How would it work in your family?

Have a look at the video:

Add your comment by 30 March 2015 at 9am and you'll be entered into a prize draw where one MNer will win a £300 voucher for the store of your choice (from a list). Insight T&Cs apply

Thanks and good luck
MNHQ

OP posts:
jandoc · 19/03/2015 12:30

It's a good policy for the ones that will use it

JobofMum · 19/03/2015 14:00

I am a Mum of Two and would have loved to have allowed my husband to take more of a part in those early days. He seemed to miss out on such a lot, however, I did breastfeed until both babies were 9 months old and would not have been able to do so had I handed the reigns over to my husband.
As an Employment Solicitor I am extra keen to learn whether this will be something which is utilised, as since 2011 mums have been able to transfer up to 26 weeks of their leave to dads and it was hoped that this leave would give families the opportunity to combine work with caring responsibilities. However, it has been highly publicised that the 2011 changes do not seem to have had much of an impact and the Government have therefore spent some time and consideration looking at this area and how they can assist families with the work/life balance, which so many struggle with.
Shared Parental Leave will allow greater flexibility giving dads chance to be there to see key milestones, to see the baby smile for the first time, crawl, walk, start talking, (not to mention getting involved in nappy-changing) whilst having an extended eligibility for statutory pay so they can continue to support their family - at least to some degree.

It really will be interesting to see whether people utilise this right come the 5 April!

WarmHugs · 19/03/2015 14:16

I think this is fantastic for those who need it. Plenty of female breadwinners who need to go back to work, with SAHD's.

This wouldn't have worked for our family though, DH couldn't breastfeed!

Guyropes · 19/03/2015 14:39

We both really want to do this, but my oh's employer have not yet said whether they will be offering any enhanced pay for dads. As he is by far the higher earner it would be impossible for him to take any shared leave if all the offer is the statutory ie £138/w

Luckily he has been saving up some annual leave and toil so he will get some time off.

They need to put more money into it to make it work for families with a big disparity and the dad earning more than the mum.

parkingpearlclutching · 19/03/2015 16:50

Yonic, I didn't say that men taking leave would stop women breastfeeding. I said that it just makes the bf-ing woman shitter if she is expected to work as well.

In principle, this is just an extension of possibilities that gives families more options.

In practice, this is a way of giving men more options which de facto puts more pressure on women in too many cases (sometimes it just feels like families are machines to put pressure on women and the law should look at lessening those pressures and protecting them before it does anything else)

to be quite clear: I am all in favour of men taking part in childcare. Also doing all the stuff at home that comes from this.

BUT this approach seems to

a. minimise the very particular physical part that a mother plays in baby-parenting, and the effects on her body and mind of pregnancy and childbirth itself

b. start from the premise that men just need permission or the phsyical possibility to do childrearing and domestic tasks. This is not the issue. The issue isn't that LYFE stops men pulling their weight at home. The problem is they don't want to do it.

Some men will say that they can't progress at work if they take this leave, blah blah, others will take it and then take the piss. A minority will use it for what is for. Good old Miles. (But honestly, Miles is the sort who probably would have worked out how to work nearer to home and on a 4 day week anyway.)

Let's look at the precedent: women storming the work place, led by second wave feminists, because of the outrageous injustice that the world of work was rigged to stop women having access to material independence. Well done. I bless those women and I owe them my job, my options, my freedom, my livelihood.

BUT it DOESN'T make men do ANY GODDAMNED THING AT HOME that their women are out at work as long, or longer than them; bringing home as much, or more money.

So I think it is absolutely wrong headed to answer the question:

Q - how can we get men to take more responsibility in the home, and de facto improve their wives' job prospects and other options?

A - give men more freedom and more privileges

BECAUSE THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY USE THEM FOR.
And we have millennia of historical precedent that have taught us that

On the other hand, if we ask a different question:

Q - What happens when women get more independence, more material security and better education?

the answer is always:

A - their children benefit

If you want to help children, you "privilege" women. Actually, I want to help women, per se, for their own sake; but women prioritise children and this has been shown again and again and again.

parkingpearlclutching · 19/03/2015 16:51

I mean it makes the breastfeeding woman's life shitter!

YonicScrewdriver · 19/03/2015 16:59

". A minority will use it for what is for. "

I disagree with you on it belng a minority - I think the majority of those who use it will use it for what it is for and many men/women/couples will decide they prefer to stick with the status quo and the woman will take most of the leave.

You obviously have a bleaker view of men as a class than I do, so I'll leave you to that.

parkingpearlclutching · 19/03/2015 18:01

Maybe Yonic, but how do you explain why this will be different from the army of women who got jobs thinking "then dh will have to see that he needs to do his bit at home" and the dhs just didn't?

In my opinion the babyhood part of a child's life is not the whole issue here and actually both men and women should find it easier to manage work and absences from work so that they have a decent family life.

But I think that tinkering with existing rights for women to allow men more rights over the baby part isn't the way to do this.

Men having more flexibility in order to improve their contribution to family life should be done in addition to existing maternity rights. And / or maternity rights should be financially enhanced such that any leave the father chooses to do (in consultation with his partner of course) is more viable (as opposed to a situation where the lack of the woman's earnings ties the man to his job even more tightly).

Later, help with childcare costs would help both partners to work some of the time.
A more flexible approach to work in general - part time work, flexible hours, work from home - applied to all jobs - would benefit all humans, not just parents.

There are a million things that could be done for families without weakening the mother's right to her maternity leave and I think we should be looking at those first. Then, when fathers have proved themselves as equal to mothers in every way they can be, then maybe maternity leave shoudl be changed to parental leave.

Londonbridgeisfallingdown · 19/03/2015 19:16

It's brilliant for us. I'd like DS to be a year old before he goes to nursery, but if I take a whole year off then I'll be returning to work at a very busy time and I'd prefer some adjustment period before then. So I'm going back to work after 10 months and DH is taking over. He gets to spend some lovely time with DS, I have what I imagine is the far gentler experience of returning to work leaving DS with with DH rather than nursery to begin with, and financially it works well for us as I'm the higher earner, so although by the time DH takes paternity leave it will no longer have any pay attached to it, I'll be back to earning my salary. Looking forward to taking full advantage of the new rules for DC2!

Jellybean2011 · 19/03/2015 19:30

Our family are hoping to use the new shared parental leave. Have been told by where I work today that head office HR have nothing in place yet and it may be complicated to get it all sorted. DH also thinks his work won't like the idea of him having time off for childcare. Hoping it will all work out.

mummymerser · 19/03/2015 19:47

Seems like it could work well for some families. Not sure how it would've worked for me, being a teacher. If I could be "back at work" for July and August then on leave again afterwards the money would've helped :-)

YonicScrewdriver · 19/03/2015 20:14

Jelly, I'm sure lots of workplaces don't "like" women having ML either.

It's the law, so your work will have to get it sorted!

mjmooseface · 19/03/2015 20:15

Shared Parental Leave is a long time overdue. Men and Women who have a child together, become parents at the same time, so why shouldn't they have flexible leave? We are always being told how vitally important those first few weeks and months of a newborns life are, so having a policy that means both parents can take that time off together is great.

When my son was born, my husband was unemployed and I hadn't been working either. It was great having my husband around for those first few weeks and months. The way it should be, imo, where possible. Now he is working full time and by the time we have our second child (a few years down the line yet!) I will be working, too and we will probably take advantage of Shared Parental Leave, although, as it doesn't apply to us right now, I am not fully clued up on it. I'm sure I will have a better idea of it when the time comes to use it.

I just hope that everyone who can benefit from Shared Parental Leave is aware of it and makes good use of it, as it applies and helps them.

Princessxo · 19/03/2015 20:22

I think it's great for couples where both partners want to work, but for me, I would want to be there for my baby every step of the way. I'll be the one doing the breastfeeding, the looking after and I know there are stay at home dads etc. but I think a womans role in her childs life is very different and important in a different way to the dads role.

YonicScrewdriver · 19/03/2015 20:26

Which is why it's great both styles can be accommodated in the new set up, Princess.

lottietiger · 19/03/2015 22:11

We did this last year when I had my son, I took five months off and then DH took the next 4 months off. It did work brilliantly as I was able to go back to work without worrying about who was looking after DS. By the time DH went back I had got used to leaving in the morning as it wasn't as hard as it otherwise would have been.
Financially though it was tough as we only got SMP and had to use savings and credit cards to get by. Worth it though.

buckley1983 · 19/03/2015 22:43

I think it's a fantastic option for parents to have. I really struggled with PND after the birth of my son & was desperate to return to work (although now I look back I'm so glad I didn't as this was really important bonding time for little one & me) - this option would have allowed us the flexibility to do this. Many dads want to take a more active role in bringing up their children & this provides a route for dads to take centre stage in the early years! Hurrah for modern life!

mrpeterhall · 20/03/2015 00:02

Bearing in mind one person in a couple tends to earn more than the other, I can't see there would be too much take up. Having said that, I do think it's a good thing

julker · 20/03/2015 00:15

I think its great for parents but could cause problems for employers, especially if its a small company and both parents work there.

FidgetPie · 20/03/2015 00:44

I think it is wonderful we used this (it's predecessor) with DD (now 15 months).

I took 6 months mat leave then DH took 4. Because of annual leave that meant we overlapped for 2 months. (I had to go back to work for 1 day before taking my annual leave).

It was wonderful for DH to spend time with our 2 kids, build his confidence in being a great dad and generally have a once in a lifetime chance to be with them so intensively. DD1 started school during it so he was there to help settle her in.

Because I earn more than DH, it made the best financial sense.
And it didn't t prevent me continuing breastfeeding (one of the criticisms I have seen of it).

I would encourage everyone to at least consider it.

YonicScrewdriver · 20/03/2015 06:11

"Bearing in mind one person in a couple tends to earn more than the other, I can't see there would be too much take up. "

I think earnings tend to be more closely matched before the birth of at least the first child. And arguably some of the overall difference in earnings is linked to women's maternity leave. And if the woman is the higher earner then that would tend to indicate more take up
Too.

YonicScrewdriver · 20/03/2015 06:13

"I think its great for parents but could cause problems for employers, especially if its a small company and both parents work there."

Possibly if the leaves overlap significantly, but otherwise, why?

parkingpearlclutching · 20/03/2015 08:10

Women without children earn less than men too, after a certain age, when the glass ceiling kicks in. (it's partly coincidental that age happens to be the age when many women have or have had children)

Alanna1 · 20/03/2015 08:56

We shared our leave with both our children and this would have been fantastic, as opposed to it being a struggle. Sharing leave was fantastic despite some of the struggles and meant my husband has played such a major role then and going forwards in our children's lives. I never feel like we aren't equal partners on everything to do with our children and we both fully understand the challenges and the benefits. He is as likely to sort out new shoes as I am. It is a wonderful benefit for me, and my children, and him. I wish everyone felt they could have done this and this will help them do so.

I also think it will really help equality and the "glass ceiling" that impacts some women in their child-bearing yes, if responsibilities are equally distributed and if dads are just as likely to take parental leave / cover sick days / organise school run etc.

We did it because I'm self-employed and the bigger earner and so I had to go back at 5 months. I also continued exclusively breast feeding till 6 months, and with support (my place of work made a lockable room available for me to express in) that is also quite doable.

YonicScrewdriver · 20/03/2015 09:01

Parking, I think it's also partly down to the current assumption that any woman of childbearing years might take maternity leave, whereas almost all men are "safe" from this.