Maternity leave

[Soar Fox]

http://news.sky.com/story/1175201/maternity-leave-new-shared-rights-unveiled

[The God Emperor]

this should help gubbermints mates in big business. cripple competition from small businesses even more 

[Captain...]

One question that wasn't answered in the article was what about if the woman is not working?

 

Can the father then take the full quota of Paternity leave ?

 

With regards to working couples then it makes a lot of sense, if taken up then it might even take away some of the concerns about giving women top jobs as they could take 50 weeks off work.

[DennisNedry]

I fully support this, hopefully it'll be law by the time I'm at the stage of life where having children becomes a possibility.

[Guest MattP]

Mixed feelings.

 

Seems nice for the blokes as we are finally seeing some equality in this sort of thing.

 

Small businesses have to be exempt though, it's bad enough having to find reasons to not numerous employ women of child bearing age to make sure you keep your company stable without having to worry abotu geezers.

 

Maybe we'll have to employ gays, or do they get 50 weeks off work as well nowadays after they adopt?

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Absolutely ridiculous idea. What a namby pamby nation we are becoming! If people want kids, why should the man be entitled to any form of payment for time off? No damn right at all. Ludicrous idea, but I am sure it will happen.

[Jon the Hat]

Who the hell can afford to

live on statutory paternity pay?

[Rincewind]

Who the hell can afford to

live on statutory paternity pay?

I can think of a couple who think it would be easy.

[Jace]

Absolutely ridiculous idea. What a namby pamby nation we are becoming! If people want kids, why should the man be entitled to any form of payment for time off? No damn right at all. Ludicrous idea, but I am sure it will happen.

You know the man would be taking over the woman's maternity leave so the time taken off and the maternity pay is still exactly the same as what it's always been?

[Dr The Singh]

http://news.sky.com/story/1175201/maternity-leave-new-shared-rights-unveiled

In principle sounds great, in practice it may inpact those companies that struggle to give 10 days paternity

[Captain...]

I don't get this whole small business struggling thing, I thought that maternity and therefore paternity was claimed back from the gubbermint, so nobody is actually out of pocket, or am I wrong? I could be I'm very pissed.

[pSinatra]

I don't get this whole small business struggling thing, I thought that maternity and therefore paternity was claimed back from the gubbermint, so nobody is actually out of pocket, or am I wrong? I could be I'm very pissed.

 

If you're a small business, you don't have the capacity to replace or cover one person going on paternity leave for months on end.  A larger company has more employees & can more than likely shift people around to cover.  If that man (or woman) is an integral part of the business.......it somewhat drops you in the shit.

 

Fair or not, it has probably meant that women of a child-bearing age have been discriminated against.  This has the potential for men to be discriminated against too.

 

I'm self-employed & if I was to take someone on, I would not be employing someone who is likely to clear off on paternity leave several times over the next few years.  The Govt may cover the cost of his leave, but it isn't about the money.  I employed that person because I needed him to do a job.

[Jace]

Well if you had been fair and considered employing women then this could benefit you because now they may decide to let their partner take the maternity leave and decide to continue working rather than themselves taking the leave when they have a child. This new law should help employers too

[pSinatra]

Well if you had been fair and considered employing women then this could benefit you because now they may decide to let their partner take the maternity leave and decide to continue working rather than themselves taking the leave when they have a child. This new law should help employers too

 

I'll be honest & say that I would more than likely employ a man over a woman, due to the physical nature of the work that I do.  I've absolutely no problem working with women, but why buy a Fiesta when you can have a BMW for the same price?

 

A woman is going to need some time off regardless of the new laws being introduced........until men are able to give birth.

 

I'm all for parents spending as much time as they can bonding with their newborn.  I would want that for myself & for my family (albeit impossible)  Looking at it from a small business perspective......it wouldn't benefit me in the slightest.  Out of the blue, I would lose 50% of my workforce.  Do I employ someone else on short-term contract?  Would anyone of any ability be interested in applying for a short-term contract?  The hassle & cost of recruiting.  Agency staff - a lottery & expensive.  Finding the time to train a new starter, only for them to disappear a few months later?  Or do I simply employ someone in the first place who has already had a family & has no interest in having anymore children?

 

That's discrimination, but it's the real world.

[Webbo]

I'll be honest & say that I would more than likely employ a man over a woman, due to the physical nature of the work that I do.  I've absolutely no problem working with women, but why buy a Fiesta when you can have a BMW for the same price?

 

A woman is going to need some time off regardless of the new laws being introduced........until men are able to give birth.

 

I'm all for parents spending as much time as they can bonding with their newborn.  I would want that for myself & for my family (albeit impossible)  Looking at it from a small business perspective......it wouldn't benefit me in the slightest.  Out of the blue, I would lose 50% of my workforce.  Do I employ someone else on short-term contract?  Would anyone of any ability be interested in applying for a short-term contract?  The hassle & cost of recruiting.  Agency staff - a lottery & expensive.  Finding the time to train a new starter, only for them to disappear a few months later?  Or do I simply employ someone in the first place who has already had a family & has no interest in having anymore children?

 

That's discrimination, but it's the real world.

Spot on.

[Jace]

I'll be honest & say that I would more than likely employ a man over a woman, due to the physical nature of the work that I do.  I've absolutely no problem working with women, but why buy a Fiesta when you can have a BMW for the same price?

 

A woman is going to need some time off regardless of the new laws being introduced........until men are able to give birth.

 

I'm all for parents spending as much time as they can bonding with their newborn.  I would want that for myself & for my family (albeit impossible)  Looking at it from a small business perspective......it wouldn't benefit me in the slightest.  Out of the blue, I would lose 50% of my workforce.  Do I employ someone else on short-term contract?  Would anyone of any ability be interested in applying for a short-term contract?  The hassle & cost of recruiting.  Agency staff - a lottery & expensive.  Finding the time to train a new starter, only for them to disappear a few months later?  Or do I simply employ someone in the first place who has already had a family & has no interest in having anymore children?

 

That's discrimination, but it's the real world.

All true completely agree with you unfortunately there will always be this problem. Imagine what it's like for some employers who employ the majority of women who go sick for the majority of their pregnancy then take 12 months off only to find by the time they come back they are owed a years worth of paid holiday, only to find out when they return they have gone out and got pregnant again and the cycle restarts only to decide another 18 months later they are not going to come back for child care purposes. Must be a nightmare

[Captain...]

If you're a small business, you don't have the capacity to replace or cover one person going on paternity leave for months on end.  A larger company has more employees & can more than likely shift people around to cover.  If that man (or woman) is an integral part of the business.......it somewhat drops you in the shit.

 

Fair or not, it has probably meant that women of a child-bearing age have been discriminated against.  This has the potential for men to be discriminated against too.

 

I'm self-employed & if I was to take someone on, I would not be employing someone who is likely to clear off on paternity leave several times over the next few years.  The Govt may cover the cost of his leave, but it isn't about the money.  I employed that person because I needed him to do a job.

 

Fair enough, but maybe small business should be looking to be more flexible, it's not just leave, it could also be long term sickness. How do you cope when someone is on holiday? (I know it is a much shorter period of time)

 

Under these new rules how much notice do new dads have to give before taking their leave. If you knew 3 months in advance they were going to take paternity leave for 6 months what would you do?

[pSinatra]

Fair enough, but maybe small business should be looking to be more flexible, it's not just leave, it could also be long term sickness. How do you cope when someone is on holiday? (I know it is a much shorter period of time)

 

Under these new rules how much notice do new dads have to give before taking their leave. If you knew 3 months in advance they were going to take paternity leave for 6 months what would you do?

 

I agree with what you're saying.  I don't mean to sound like I would be an absolute shit of a boss, because that would not be me.  I believe in fairness & quite often to my own detriment, but flexibility is near on impossible.  The employee would need holidays & what do you do when it comes to sickness?  I don't know?  Quite often, being self-employed is flying by the seat of your pants & quite a fragile existence.  It would be nice to have £50k sitting in the bank for such contingencies.......but I haven't.

 

Those same circumstances also apply to me.  Who pays for my holiday?  What happens if I injure myself & cannot work?  My pension?  Who pays for my paternity leave?

 

I might be able to look after myself, but I wouldn't want the responsibility of looking after the welfare of an employee.  The only way around it, that I can see.........he would have to be self-employed too - effectively a sub-contractor. 

[Strokes]

Fair enough, but maybe small business should be looking to be more flexible, it's not just leave, it could also be long term sickness. How do you cope when someone is on holiday? (I know it is a much shorter period of time)

Under these new rules how much notice do new dads have to give before taking their leave. If you knew 3 months in advance they were going to take paternity leave for 6 months what would you do?

They are being more flexible, zero hour contracts

[ADK]

At the end of the day business owners want employees that behave like machinery while the employees want flexibility. It's always a compromise and you have to come up with sensible legislation to stop certain groups being discriminated against.

[Strokes]

At the end of the day business owners want employees that behave like machinery while the employees want flexibility. It's always a compromise and you have to come up with sensible legislation to stop certain groups being discriminated against.

Most employers just want value for money, if you give them it they will bend over backwards for you.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

You know the man would be taking over the woman's maternity leave so the time taken off and the maternity pay is still exactly the same as what it's always been?

Ah, right. Thanks for putting me right. I take it all back.

[Captain...]

They are being more flexible, zero hour contracts

 

Well that might be a way forwards, but with a minimum amount. If you have a small business, having 3 people working 30 hours a week is better than having 2 people working 48 hours, it allows for much more flexibility, as long as all over time is factored in up to a 48 hour contract, and holiday and sick pay is factored in to be extended in line with the number of hours worked.

 

There is nothing that says that people must work 48 hours.

[Captain...]

I agree with what you're saying.  I don't mean to sound like I would be an absolute shit of a boss, because that would not be me.  I believe in fairness & quite often to my own detriment, but flexibility is near on impossible.  The employee would need holidays & what do you do when it comes to sickness?  I don't know?  Quite often, being self-employed is flying by the seat of your pants & quite a fragile existence.  It would be nice to have £50k sitting in the bank for such contingencies.......but I haven't.

 

Those same circumstances also apply to me.  Who pays for my holiday?  What happens if I injure myself & cannot work?  My pension?  Who pays for my paternity leave?

 

I might be able to look after myself, but I wouldn't want the responsibility of looking after the welfare of an employee.  The only way around it, that I can see.........he would have to be self-employed too - effectively a sub-contractor. 

 

Sorry I thought you were a small business and not self-employed.

 

Fortunately my experience of being self employed had been IT contracting, so I could take holidays and just didn't bill for that day.

 

I assume that your paternity leave would be paid by the government based on the salary you pay yourself, or are you set-up as a sole trader?

[Webbo]

When my kids were born I took a couple of days off. What you don't earn the govt don't tax you on, that's all I got.