Should women who choose too / cannot have kids be granted 9 months off?

[the-lioness 10]

You sort of implied it though. "I know quite a few women ... " is a misleading phrase to use if what you mean is "I"

 

 

 

I'm not bothered about you being bothered, just just seemed to be being evasive about it in a way that suggested you didn't want to admit that it bothered you - perhaps because it bothers you now, but you know you might feel differently in the future if you get chance to find out what 9 months "off" feels like

 

true enough! I suppose you could say I was being evasive- I do sometimes look at women who have numerous kids and never work and think ''hmmm that must be an easy life'' but the media tends to focus on the worst cases of this and we dont get to see the majority who do a good job of it.

[Number Six 10]

true enough! I suppose you could say I was being evasive- I do sometimes look at women who have numerous kids and never work and think ''hmmm that must be an easy life'' but the media tends to focus on the worst cases of this and we dont get to see the majority who do a good job of it.

 

"women who have numerous kids and never work" are not the same people as those who are taking maternity leave, though.

 

Looking after kids is not in any way easy. It's tiring, it's emotional and it's a constant worry - but the rewards are immense.

 

Of course, simply keeping kids alive is easy. That's not the same as looking after them though. Sadly a lot of parents seem to opt for the former.

[AJ sheffield 11]

Cannot believe he aint here yet, must be skiing somewhere

[retrogo 10]

Just been discussing this at work- it seems unfair on those who would like to have kids but cant, or people who choose not to have kids- that they do not get the 9 months off work and still have a job to return too.

 

Maybe they have other interests outside of work that they would like to pursue but cant because they have to be in work or loose their job?

 

what are your views?

 

I think maternity pay must put a lot of clever employers off hiring women. The large companies I've worked for, tend to have an influx of woman taking maternity leave. Then the employer can't afford to hire in temporary staff and the existing staff can't cope with the increased workload.

 

In future, to reduce costs, the clever employer will hire maturer women who have already had their families.

[Number Six 10]

I think maternity pay must put a lot of clever employers off hiring women. The large companies I've worked for, tend to have an influx of woman taking maternity leave. Then the employer can't afford to hire in temporary staff and the existing staff can't cope with the increased workload.

 

As an employer you can claim the cost of statutory maternity pay back in your employers NI payments - so it doesn't cost you anything to offer SMP.

 

If they are paying above SMP to a level they can't afford, you have to ask why.

[duckweed 10]

Well these so called clever companies are going to be well and truly stumped now because a man can be a father at any age from 14-100 So are they only going to employ only elderly women then?

[Ms Macbeth 73]

As an employer you can claim the cost of statutory maternity pay back in your employers NI payments - so it doesn't cost you anything to offer SMP.

 

If they are paying above SMP to a level they can't afford, you have to ask why.

 

I had my children in the days when we just stopped working outside the home, but I support giving new mothers time off. As you say, SMP really costs nothing, and the person receiving it will have paid their NI contributions, so why not. Its not a fortune, but it helps.

 

The public sector generally have good maternity terms and conditions - its mainly small private employers who can't afford to pay over the odds. Something to be weighed up when taking on employment.

 

I'm all for mothers working if they want or need to, I don't believe that working/staying at home is the most important element of good parenting. Its what the parents do when they are there, and who they trust to look after their children when they aren't that counts.

[retrogo 10]

I had my children in the days when we just stopped working outside the home, but I support giving new mothers time off. As you say, SMP really costs nothing, and the person receiving it will have paid their NI contributions, so why not. Its not a fortune, but it helps.

 

The public sector generally have good maternity terms and conditions - its mainly small private employers who can't afford to pay over the odds. Something to be weighed up when taking on employment.

 

I'm all for mothers working if they want or need to, I don't believe that working/staying at home is the most important element of good parenting. Its what the parents do when they are there, and who they trust to look after their children when they aren't that counts.

 

I think my employer pays full pay for so many months, then drops to half, then smp after that. And they definately don't hire temporary staff unless its a manager whos on leave.

[Leah1705 10]

Hmmm interesting...I'm with the school of thought that ALL employees should be legally entitled to a 12 month sabbatical...if some people choose to have children with their time that's their choice. I was once the only childfree woman in a large , mostly female,office..after a few years of regularly taking on maternity leave workloads but never getting any kind of extended leave myself, I went self employed

 

To have children is a lifestyle choice, not a job.Why do so many women have children then moan about the '24/7' responsiblity etc...we all know about that..so why choose a lifestyle and then complain about it? I have never cost the NHS a penny in (large) costs associated with child birth, done everybodys' work when they've all gone on maternity leave over the years (for their own lifestyle choice), do the same job as the lady at the next desk but she takes home more than me in tax breaks just for having children, and get last pick at when I can take my holidays due to school holidays etc...no wonder some of us would like the option of 9 months to a year paid leave It would be a much more fair system, imo.

[Mr Prime 10]

absolutely true. Bringing children into the world is one of the most important jobs a woman can do but the 'jeremy kyle rabble' think its en excuse to never work a day in their lives.

strange how they have so much time to raise their kids but still tend to be s**t parents.......

 

And the same useless parents walk around estates resplendent in tracksuits with a fag hanging out of their mouths protesting about 'paedofils'. Never mind the fact they do more harm to their kids than any fantasy bogeyman.

[jenand8285 10]

I think maternity pay must put a lot of clever employers off hiring women. The large companies I've worked for, tend to have an influx of woman taking maternity leave. Then the employer can't afford to hire in temporary staff and the existing staff can't cope with the increased workload.

 

In future, to reduce costs, the clever employer will hire maturer women who have already had their families.

 

I am sure I read that during an interview the recruiter should not ask what your relationship status is or whether they have a family or plan to have a family - obviously this would be discrimination.

I am a 26 year old female, I have been married 5 years and have no kids. I was recently worried any potential employers may think I would be looking to start a family.

But on the other hand I have worked for a small business that had just started up and know they would not have been able to support someone on maternity

[chem1st 10]

Hmmm interesting...I'm with the school of thought that ALL employees should be legally entitled to a 12 month sabbatical...

 

Benefit implications?

 

Perhaps a work from home arrangement through the state?