Shared Parental Leave and Parental Leave – what do you think and know? Chance to win £100! NOW CLOSED

[AnnMumsnet]

As part of the Mumsnet Family Friendly Programme we'd love to know what you think about these new employee benefits which have been introduced in the last few years.

You can read about them below - please share on this thread your experience of them and your thoughts on them. Have you taken them up? Do you think you would? Have you heard of Parental Leave? How do you think employers feel about them? Has your employer promoted them to you/ employees? Has your partners company promoted them?

All comments welcome!

Shared Parental Leave - this is for new parents and is designed to give greater flexibility around the first year with a new baby
Government info here
ACAS guide here

Parental Leave - this is unpaid leave for parents to take care of a child's welfare - employees are entitled to 18 weeks’ leave for each child and adopted child, up to their 18th birthday with their job protected
Government info here
ACAS guide here

Both are obviously subject to specific terms.

Add your view and you'll be entered into a prize draw where one MNer will win a £100 voucher for the store of their choice.

Click here to learn more about companies who are working to make the UK a more family friendly place

Thanks and good luck
MNHQ

Standard Insight T&C apply

[northdownmummy]

I'm going back to work in 12 weeks and my DH is taking shared parental leave for 4 months to use up the full allowance. As the higher wage earner it makes sense for me Togo back, we couldn't survive the nill pay period on just his salary.
He's excited but a bit apprehensive, for both of us we were the first in our companies to use this option. Shocking considering he's civil service.

What I find sad is that women seem to be the biggest barrier. I've lost count of the number that have said I must be mad, they'd never "give up" some of their maternity leave. Until it is no longer assumed to be the right of the woman and anything else an exception I doubt there will be a significant uptake

[Iizzyb]

As an employment solicitor I know how confusing the shared parental leave rules can be for employers but I think it's a great idea & as more women are now the main earners it has to make sense. Take up seems to be higher in "public sector" type organisations I've found. I've saved all my parental leave (ds is 3). I'm hoping to use it towards school holiday cover when he's older (in theory at least!) because it's unpaid there's very little take up as far as I can tell.

[MaGratgarlik1983]

I think it's a good idea and more choice is good although for us we choose for me to take the leave.

[DontCallMeBaby]

There has been high take-up for ShPL with my employer. A couple of my colleagues in HR went to a workshop in London about it and were astonished to have by far the highest take-up in the room - 40-odd cases, compared to single figures elsewhere. And not because we're especially huge - the Royal Navy were there, stating they were actively discouraging it. I get that a couple of weeks off to look after the baby isn't very practical if you're on a warship in the Gulf, but not everyone in the RN does that. Poor show.

We pay equivalent to maternity/adoption leave, which is 26 weeks full pay, so the pattern seems to be mostly that it's men whose partners have lower entitlements from their employers who take ShPL with us.

It's horribly complex on paper, but often simpler in reality. All the notice periods, three opportunities to change your plans, negotiation with the employer, default to continuous leave if non-continuous isn't approved - all so off putting. In reality it's usually straightforward, once people have understood a few things. Having time off together is difficult for people to understand, having periods when you're both back at work, and the fact that the partner can be on ShPL while the mother/primary adopter is still on mat/adoption leave are the tricky ones. I had a very hard time persuading our pay dept that the couple could be off at the same time!

We haven't got our heads round some things as an organisation - we're used to KIT and newsletters for people being off for 6-12 months, we don't quite know what to do with shorter periods of ShPL.

I've heard some slightly funny attitudes from colleagues - almost that certain things are 'cheating', like both of you being back at work for a while, so the baby is with someone else while you're 'supposed' to be on maternity leave. I don't know what immediate line managers are like when asked, but there seem to be enough approved requests coming through that the attitudes can't be too bad.

I do think it's great, but so complex. I'm the only person in my organisation who really understands it (although I'm not hot on entitlement) even though it's not really my job. I was just supposed to review the policy, concluded it was as good as it was going to get, and have spent hours sorting out guidance instead.

[MCMLXVII]

My employer is based in the States and their attitude is a bit antediluvian, so as a bloke I'm grateful to get official recognition of equality: I'm allowed time off too!

I just wish I could afford to use it.

I do like the idea of 2 days/3 days, we might have afforded that.

[ThinkAboutItTomorrow]

It gives a useful wake up to both fathers and employers of fathers to change their perception of women and childcare responsibility. My DP shares parenting responsibility very equally but balked at the idea of sharing maternity leave. The disruption to his work, projects etc and the way he would be seen by his (single, female) boss was just too daunting. I pointed out that I had faced this twice now with both DC and he didn't have much to say in response.

[RedToothBrush]

geekaMaxima Thu 07-Apr-16 14:07:31
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why they think SPL is incompatible with breastfeeding. It really isn't.

BertieBotts Thu 07-Apr-16 16:05:57
Yes I don't think it's incompatible at all. Plenty of people go back to work at 6 months and breastfeed.

Well bully for you two!

Personally I struggled breastfeeding at all. DS didn't until he was four months old. The reality of expressing for four months is that you pretty much don't have time for ANYTHING else if you are looking after a baby. I mentally and physically could not have gone back to work at 3 months and still expressed even if DH had taken on the role of primary carer and looking after the house.

At four months, DS refused the expressed bottles and then started breastfeeding. Just like that. No reason or explanation. He refused bottles from that point on, and refused to eat solids until he was about 10 months old. This was not for lack of trying. So what would have happened if I had intended to go back to work at 6 months?

I suppose I could have starved him into submission, but I don't think that would have done my mental health any good. Besides which he was a low centile weight (which is consistent with DH and I and no cause for concern) but this was still meaning the HVs were constantly on my case about his weight and in turn this preyed upon my own anxieties of whether I was doing all the right things. (I genuinely don't think I could have done anything different with the benefit of hindsight).

Perhaps I am an exceptional case. Perhaps I'm not. I don't think its particularly relevant. What is, if purely the fact that me and DS NEEDED longer to get the food thing sorted.

Yet I have to come and justify and explain why SPL might be incompatible with breastfeeding, because lots of women in other countries manage it without problems? Really? What about the women in those countries who DO find it impossible? Don't they exist just because the stats say that more women on the whole breastfeed in other countries? Perhaps you would like a lesson in what stats say and what they don't say? They don't show the whole picture and they don't show the social side of what that might also be saying.

The simple truth is that it SPL at 6 months would not have been for us, and it would have caused no end of additional stress and worry if that had been our plan before DS had been born. Please do not deny that women will be in this situation. I am not arrogant enough to believe I am unique and I find it quite frankly insulting to be told that I have to challenge the attitude that its dead easy.

On top of that, do you know how much support there is for expressing in the UK? If you think support for breastfeeding is poor and not readily available you should try and find it for expressing...

You know its GREAT that SPL is being encouraging. It will be a massively positive thing for so many people and a step in the right direction. But it won't be right for everyone. And its wrong to suggest that it will be a breeze for anyone breastfeeding to return to work. We need to be honest about potential problems and issues so that women can make an informed decision about the difficulties and practical obstacles they might face if they did intend to.

Personally despite managing to exclusive express for as long as I did, I applaud any woman who manages it later on, as its a different ball game and I have not been able to produce any quantity of expressed milk after 6 months.

Having had so many problems myself I completely understand why so few women get to the 6 month point. I have total sympathy and really don't want to sound militant about it. You have to do what's best for you both mentally and physically under the circumstances.

But the fact remains that the health messages and evidence are at least six months and the advice is two years. The trouble is the mentality in the UK seems to be that breastfeeding ends at 6 months, despite that. Even the stats you see, tend to only look at up to 6 months. After that it seems to be at best invisible, at worst viewed as weird. I'm not talking about extended breastfeeding. I'm not even necessarily talking about breast feeding after 12 months. More stating that this 6 months weaning thing is also unhelpful and misleading too and many babies naturally won't 'get' food until later than that.

If we are encouraging women to go back to work sooner than they currently do, there should ALSO be a parallel more to support working mums and breastfeeding and a drive to make it an acceptable part of the workplace eg is there even somewhere available for them to do it. (Along with an all together healthier and more supportive attitude to breastfeeding across the board which is better than the shitty woman bashing 'breast is best' crap)

Employers will need to think about providing space to do this as well as changing attitudes to men taking leave. There needs to be government backed support and funding for women who want to go back to work and continue to breastfeeding / express. The assumption that formula instead or weaning at 'the correct point' is the solution is actually not good enough and is not consistent with other government policy.

As I say, more SPL is great, but I think there is a danger that breastfeeding will be driven into being more and more of a lifestyle choice or something that only women with partners who earn more than they do, can afford to do and something of a luxury particularly past the magic 6 month point if consideration to the practicalities / difficulties of breastfeeding are not given proper due thought.

Is that necessarily to the benefit of children, women, men or families as a whole? It should not just be about finances. Personally I think there does need to be a more balanced approached and there needs to be more depth to the policy.

[Tangoandcreditcards]

I'm currently on SPL. My partner is SAHD and SE (he doesn't qualify for SPL, but earns enough to qualify me). The main benefit is that I can take discontinuous leave, which suits both me (earnings-wise) and my employer (as my work is project-based and cyclical) whilst keeping maternity benefits and rights.

My employer is quite progressive and maternity and SPL leave pay is supplementary to statutory, and equal.

Whilst I think the legislation has gone a long way to enabling progressive companies to grant equal leave and benefits and also allow such-minded couples to split childcare duties, it does absolutely bugger all to incentivise it. We did it because my employer is flexible and DP is already primary carer, but without a greater financial incentive for high earning partners/dads to push them out of the cultural comfort zone - it won't bring about change v quickly.

[BertieBotts]

Red, I'm sorry you had trouble with breastfeeding. I do understand that it can be challenging for many women. But SPL isn't being forced on anybody. It's a choice. I don't see how it's different to somebody deciding (due to the pay cut) that they would only take 6 months ML and then realising that they needed more time to establish breastfeeding.

This is not the kind of thing you can plan before the birth and SPL doesn't change that. In fact doesn't SPL slightly increase ML, since ML always used to be 9 months (with a further 3 months but this was unpaid) - SPL is 12, isn't it, to be split however the couple choose? (I might be wrong here).

What would you like to see instead? SPL to 18 months? (Would be great but I doubt it would happen.)

[SuzCG]

I think both ideas are great and major steps forward in helping families balance work and child care - if you've actually got a man who wants to help out more. Wouldn't have worked for us at all - my DH much prefers to be at work... Not sure how smaller business/companies would actually facilitate the parental leave bit though?

[geekaMaxima]

Red - your story sounds really tough and I'm sorry you and your ds had such difficulties with breastfeeding and weaning

It is still quite separate to SPL, though. If someone really was already planning to take less than the full 12 months mat leave (for financial or other reasons), then SPL just opens up the possibility of their partner taking an extended period of leave as well. No one has to take it up, so a mother can still take all 12 months if she wants.

An individual mother's workplace might not be sufficiently supportive of expressing, but that's a separate issue that affects women regardless of SPL. An individual baby might be an adamant bottle refuser, but again it's a problem that parents face regardless of SPL: sometimes the solution is cup feeding or trying out a million different teats, and sometimes the solution is for the bf mother to delay returning to work. SPL doesn't change these options; you're not locked into the dates you book and can cancel or move them with notice.

SPL is not incompatible with breastfeeding, but it would be a shame if bf mothers held back from using it out of fear that it was.

[Redhead79]

We are currently sharing leave and so far it's going well. After the first 2 weeks paternity I took sole leave for around 6 weeks, we then had around 6 weeks off together which was lovely and now I am back at work DH is taking the rest of the leave.
Our choice was mainly financial as I'm self employed and the higher earner and while I would love to be the one at home all the time it is a great opportunity for my husband to spend time with our daughter. I 'flexi" my hours so I'm only working 4 days. There would have been no option for me to take more than 6 months maternity (and even this would have been difficult) so SPL has meant my daughter is able to spend time with her dad rather than be in nursery.

Initially he did find it very difficult and we have had lots of support from family, plus I think it really helped having time off together so each of us know what the other is going through especially how hard it can be and how sometimes nothing else gets done!

I am still breastfeeding and after a bit of a battle she will now quite happily take expressed milk. I haven't found it a problem and express before I go to work and 2 or 3 times at work (my baby is still to little to be weaned). Sometimes my husband will bring her into work for me to feed.

I did find it difficult to get information about SPL as being self employed does make it a bit more complex, even the people I've spoken to have admitted they're not really sure what's going on and some of the systems are not in place.

[minipie]

I love the idea of shared parental leave. In general I am in favour of anything that allows or encourages men to take on more childcare responsibility, because 1) it's good for children to get to know both parents and 2) that is the only way women will stop having to take on a disproportionate share of house and child related stuff to the detriment of their careers.

But. We didn't do it. Main reasons: I got generous maternity pay from my employer whereas DH's employer offered 2 weeks paid and no more. DH is paid more than me, so any period of unpaid leave of his is more expensive than mine. More than that, however, DH was convinced that taking APL (DD1) or SPL (DD2) would torpedo his career prospects. And sadly I think he is right. He works in a very male dominated industry where the hours are intense and virtually everyone is either single or has a SAHW (and often staff as well) to do all the domestic stuff. I think jaws would have dropped through the floor if he's asked for SPL, swiftly followed by rapid discussions of how to nudge him out.

[DingleberryFinn]

In reality, shared parental leave in the first year wouldn't have worked for us, but the right to have Parental Leave to cover sickness (e.g. Chicken Pox = 10 days, split between the two of us x 2 DC) is pretty necessary.

[VilootShesCute]

My husband would not be able to afford to have that time off even if it was offered. Good idea for those who can though.

[helterskelter99]

The thing that shocked me most, as an older parent was actually still women's earning, attitudes and ambition. I never thought about having children until my mid 30s and was 40 before we actually had a pregnancy go to term. My partner worked his hol and paternity leave so was off for a month at the start which was brilliant but I was surprised at how few other fathers did that amongst people we met. The expectation is still child rearing is "women's" work and fathers merely assist. Until these attitudes change, women earn more or equally it will always make more sense for women to take the maj of leave, especially as a large maj of women seem to return pt and decide that their job is not as important, even if pre kids it was. I know not all women do this but enough do to make employers think this.

[Lyn29]

Going to be honest but the shared leave really isnt for me but I think it depends on everyones individual circumstance and and relationship. I loved my maternity with my daughter, breast fed until she was 17 months old and enjoyed the baby toddler classes and meeting other mums. If my partner had been at home I dont believe that he would of taken her to any classes such as baby bounce, swimming, boppins bunnies etc so I think she may of missed out. I think you have to do whats best for your child and you as a family.

[EDisFunny]

In theory I like the shared parental leave but I think the protected amount for women should be 6 weeks. I say in theory as I would have had giving up any of my time with my babies in favour of my then husband.

[flamingtoaster]

I think it depends on the job/career of the father and it will take a while for society and thinking to catch up. I think there will always be a worry that a father taking extra time off will damage his career prospects.

[Sammyislost]

My husband is a primary school teacher, I'm unaware but pretty confident that they would not support him with shared parental leave.

It made sense for me to take the full maternity leave, although if I had the chance to give my husband 2 weeks of paternity leave (he was granted 2 days with our first, and 1 week with our second) I would have gladly done so!

[shoebedo434]

i took 7 months off when we adopted our son, at the time, I wasn't entitled to the same benefits as birth mothers so really struggled financially, however the law has now changed so the benefits are the same. my husband took 2 weeks off from the day we met our son although he had to take holiday as he wasn't allowed any parental leave. I think companies are fairer to woman than men, his boss wasn't happy at all, luckily he now has a job with fair, nice people

[lolly1182]

Yes - Why not. You don't get much for free these days and you pay enough in taxes over the years. For those families with stay at home mums it makes much more sense. People must be given flexibility to choose. Think what's right for the family and its different to each one.

[hdh747]

I think both sound very useful in theory, but in practice I'm not sure how some employers would actually react. In my experience employers often find ways 'around' schemes they don't feel profit them directly. The financial reality for many people would make it a no go.

[claireblaney123]

I love the idea & think it will be a great help to new mom as its one of the hardest parts of you life raising & newborn, so if that dutie could be shared its perfect

[Topofthemorning3]

I think it's great to have the option and flexibility of shared parental leave. Each family situation is different and it could be an ideal option for some (eg where woman is main breadwinner).

I personally didn't do it as I get enhanced maternity pay and my dh would have got statutory pay.

I think the media gave it some interesting coverage this week almost writing it off before it really started. The thing is that something like this needs quite a cultural change to make it something most couples would seriously consider - most people regard maternity leave as something a woman would do. Baby groups and maternity 'life' are very much geared up for women. Employers might raise eyebrows at a man taking the leave.

Working in HR, I know that the leave is really hard to administer and understand. There are many legal aspects to it that haven't yet been tested in tribunal so carry risks. Employees don't always understand it . If there are complicated family situations, it can be a minefield. (Eg man fathering different children at same time)

For equality, I think it's really positive - For less scrupulous employers, why would you not give a woman of childbearing age a job when any man could realistically take the dreaded 'maternity' leave anyway? For society, it supports the focus on parenthood and not just motherhood. We girls have just got to get our heads around sharing - that may take a few generations yet!