Would you and your partner take time off work if companies offered 6 months paid parental leave for all?

[JustineBMumsnet]

This activity is now closed

Having a new baby is an exciting time regardless of whether you’re a mum or a dad, and spending time with them in those first few months is a precious experience. A year ago Aviva introduced its equal paid parental leave policy, where all employees can take up to 12 months off, with no need for mums to share their maternity allowance. With this in mind, Aviva would like to hear your thoughts on giving all parents the same amount of time off.

Here’s what Caroline Prendergast, Interim Chief People Officer at Aviva has to say: “We decided to make all parents at Aviva eligible for the same amount of paid and unpaid time off, regardless of gender, sexual orientation or how they became a parent. We thought that dads would want to spend time with their new arrivals, just as mums do. One year on, our experience shows that with financial barriers removed, they do just that.”

You can find out more about Aviva as an employer here.

If all companies offered 6 months paid parental leave, do you think your spouse or partner would be prepared take the time off work to share childcare duties? If not, why not?

All who post below will be entered into a prize draw where one MNer will win a £300 voucher for the store of their choice (from a list).

Thanks and good luck!

MNHQ

Insight Terms and Conditions apply

Brilliant idea, although I can't imagine my husband taking the full 6 months - he'd get bored at home (and drive me up the wall). Having a longer time in the early days would have been good though - the shock to the system when you're left on your own with a baby for the first time is a big one, and delaying it would be no bad thing.

I think it would be amazing if a company did this so you have time to bond n not worry about money

It's an amazing idea. I think some are missing that it's at full pay and doesn't affect the other partners leave, and that it applies to both sexes, 6 months full pay is quite generous even compared to many maternity pay policies.

Absolutely

I am the main breadwinner so could only afford to take 10 weeks off (6 weeks mat leave paid, 4 weeks holiday)
The level of SMP after that made it impossible

However, we could have afforded for DH to take the 6 months (or 12 months!) at SMP

As I work from home it would have been an absolute godsend for DH to have that time off paid. At the time I was really annoyed that I couldn't share leave with him.

(& ended up doing an article in the Times after ranting about it on Mumsnet!)

Would have been much easier than having nursery call me when dc woke up so I could pop 5 mins down the road and feed them...

If it was full pay then we absolutely would have taken it up. It would have really helped me after DC1 when I was really (mentally) unwell following a traumatic birth.

Great idea.

My partner would love this if we had a second. We have even spoken about sharing mat leave anyway, but if he could take it as the same time as me it would be lovely.

I would love this! The more time he can have off paid to spend with the baby the better. He would take every minute

Of course! With our first, I took 8 months of leave and then went back to work. My husband then stayed home for 3 months, which I felt really helped me reintegrate into the workforce stress-free —and he LOVED the time he got to spend with our daughter! We’re in Canada so he was able to claim employment insurance during that period off, but it was nowhere near his salary. I think if his employer offered 6 months pay he would be very likely to take at least 4 months of it. It’s such important family time!

I think it's a fabulous idea to have the option even if you choose it's not for you. I always consider the contract terms carefully when looking at new jobs as it's a really good way to judge how a firm values their employees. I don't know if we would use it or not - for us currently I'm as senior as I'll get without changing role whereas husband is progressing in his current job so more important for him to stay put. But if that weren't the case we might well.

My husband's employers frowned at two weeks, he only took one in the end. I found it incredibly hard work as he works very long hours too and believe if he had 6 months off I would have been a far better mother, my DD would have benefited immensely as would my mental health. But I still can't see his employer approving and would have pressured him to refuse it.

that is brilliant news, Aviva! With time it could definitely revolutionise things. No, it won't make sure that all marriages or partnerships are equal in taking responsibility for baby care, no it won't guard against people being penalised in the workplace for prioritising their newborns over work, but what a great thing to do! Imagine the support available to all those mums who might be struggling in those first months, through post-partum depression, through C-section recovery, through the intense care for a premature baby or baby with intense medical needs. Brilliant!

I agree with buckley1983

All companies should offer this. If it was offered to my DH, he would definately take it up. Great stuff Aviva. Other companies should follow up on this. Of course a dad would like the opportunity to bond more and understand what wife goes through in the first 6 months and support her more.

I absolutely support this, and whilst it may not be the right thing for many families, having the choice would be a big step forward. With my DCs, my DH got two weeks of paid leave, and had to take this when DD was born, no choice to take later. Even at the time two weeks full pay was better than most. Obviously this was before mat/paternity new rules in force. If we had more DCs (highly unlikely!) My DH would probably take a greater share of the parental leave, as I am the higher earner and my job doesn't 'stand still'. I have a male friend who has just returned from 5mths of parental leave with his DS,and has such a great bond with his son.

I think it’s a good idea - just because it’s available doesn’t mean you have to take it or split it but at least there’s the option. For us personally it wouldn’t have worked. My husband earns too much conpared to me for us to have considered it at the time. He also has less patience with the whole being at home all day with kids and if he took time withvme together, it would just annoy me being at home with me as I’d end up looking after him too! I breastfed our kids (they are at school - obviously are a bit older now) for almost a year so that also is a bit of an issue I can see for some. However, with different circumstances (and maybe a different husband!!) i love that it can be split. Can’t really understand why it hasn’t been the case until recently. Many of my friends who had babies a decade ago who were the breadwinners would have loved to have their partner take pat leave for more than 1 or 2 weeks. Actually one friend’s husband gave up his job to look after the kids with no extra benefit financially as it actually was the best option for them. Had he not, the childcare cost would have been more than he earnt.

Yes definitely. It would be a fantastic bonding experience and take some of the pressure off new mum’s.

I haven't rtft but what I have seen is based on personal examples of why it wouldn't work.

It's about flexibility of choice. 6 months full pay with option of additional 6 months no pay for both parents is a winner. I work for university with 16 weeks full pay, then smp then no pay with max 52 weeks off (their spl is different I think).

The choice comes in if couples want take time together, swap around or have it contiguous.

For me, having the option above would have saved us a bomb in childcare. With 2nd baby I went back full time at 12 months and my husband did a compressed 25 hour working week. Finances aside (a life saving option actually) he got to spend soooooo much quality time with both children and got to enjoy a lot of 'firsts'. He says he feels very lucky to have had that time.

With ageing population who out of us are going to be young and fit enough to look after grandchildren as so many do now? Who will be able to afford fulltime childcare never mind will there be capacity to provide it. An alternative has to be found.

It's a great idea, but in practice my husband won't take it. He is an academic and works mostly from home, yet he works all the time. So even if he takes parental leave he won't be able to stop working...so for us it won't make any difference.

My husband 100% would! He has already said he’d love to but we just can’t afford to because he earns the most money so we would notice a big dent, even if I worked full time and he stayed at home it still wouldn’t work because I don’t earn enough money full time to pay the bills etc. We are having twins too so it would be practical for a family with multiples to have that long off for both parents! I think it’s a good idea!

I think this is a positive step - people underestimate the emotional impact it has on dads not being able to be around in the early weeks and months. However it is a very subjective issue. For example, I don't think my DH would have enjoyed being at home as much as I did. He isn't very patient so I think he would have found elements of an extended paternal leave to be frustrating and rather boring. He had two weeks and I think he was quite glad to return to work even after that short time. For those families where the dynamics are different then it could work very well, particularly if the mum is the higher earner f the two.

Paid at SMP? Then no, because while we could cope without my wage, DH's paid the bills.

If at full pay then definitely.

The problem with this fails to factor in that woman are usually the lower paid in a relationship. There are complex reasons for that, so on a family by family level, it often would be better if the mother takes the time off, not the father.

(I'm sure lots of people will respond that they earn more than their DP, but across the nation, it's not the case.)

It's a good step forward. Is there scope for taking the leave a couple days a week, working part time?
I had 9 months on 90% pay, and needed almost all of it to recover from birth. I then had 2 months unpaid before returning part time - it would have been great if DP could have had paid leave then. It would also have been better for him and his team and me if his paternity leave was simply an extra 10 annual leave days rather than having to be taken as a two-week block.

@OrdinarySnowflake - but it isn't paid at SMP, and what Aviva found is that with their equal leave policy, that allows men working at Aviva to take up to 12 months leave without affecting the mother's leave, and gives them 6 months FULL PAY, then the majority of new dads will take it up when the financial barriers are removed.

www.aviva.com/newsroom/news-releases/2018/11/avivas-paid-parental-leave-shows-men-are-eager-to-share-childcare-duties/

New fathers at Aviva UK have taken an average of 21 weeks’ paternity leave since the policy was introduced, compared to two weeks in the previous year
67% of Aviva UK new dads opted to take six months2 off work to care for their new arrivals
95% of Aviva UK new dads took more than two weeks, the entitlement typically offered through statutory paid paternity leave

We would have loved this! Dd is 4 months old and adores her dad but always settles best with me and looks for me. DH works shifts and does everything he can do bond with her. 6 months together would make a huge difference especially with that bonding and helping at night's. The lack of sleep is a challenge so with him being available to help it would help with my sanity and possibly keep pnd at bay!