Paternity Leave???

seamus · 17-08-2017 1:14pm

xalot wrote: »

Slightly off topic but I was wondering about this, my husband works in a company that top up maternity pay (to full pay) but not paternity pay at all. Surely this is discrimination?

He was the first person to take leave once the paternity leave option came out so maybe they were finding their feet, but it's a massive organisation, I would have thought they were leaving themselves open for a discrimination suit?

Just curious if anyone else had come across a similar situation?

Yes, it's discrimination.

It's not been tested in court, but the accepted wisdom is that the conditions applied by a company for maternity and paternity leave must be the same. Like you say, many companies kind of got caught on the hop with it, so may have applied it poorly.

I think it would be worth your husband querying this with the head of HR in the company in a non-accusatory way. S/he may not even be aware of the discrepancy.

Bobeagleburger · 18-08-2017 7:11am

pwurple wrote: »

*KLAXON* Sums fail. The 230 is taxed at the higher rate too buddy. Try again.

And excuse me now, it most CERTAINLY cuts it.

Assuming, yes assuming you are in the enviable position of not being part of the squeezed middle, and you can save something in the first place without being harassed by a bank or a landlord, assuming that is the case.

Maternity and paternity benefit is changed in almost every budget. It's a constantly moving target. Will it be taxed, not taxed, nobody knows! How very exciting.

Babies take 40 weeks to gestate, and even if everything goes swimmingly during that time, and you don't end up having to take 6 months off for pelvic separation, or puking so hard you lose the lining of your esophagus, or blood pressure so low, or so high you pass out when you stand up... assuming all that common stuff doesn't happen and you don't end up on sickness benefit for most of it.... even then, it's not completely out of the sphere of reason that SOMETHING changes during that time. Work changes, it's taken over by another company, your office moves 40km off in another direction, a big client decides not to pay you, one of our parent's needs a carer or a nursing home, your car keels over, your dog needs 1000 of surgery, all 7 of your brothers decide to get married that year in different exotic locations. Life happens.

Also, I don't know if you know any biology, but pregnancy isn't quite as simple as just rocking up swinging around wildly without a condom on, and bingo you're up the duff that day. It can be accidental, unplanned, or the opposite, planned for years and never happen at all, or take 20,000 euro worth of IVF treatment before it happens.

Sure, some people can have a swimmingly simple time of it, but a hell of a lot of people in the real world are getting tossed about in a financial storm.

So yeah, it cuts it.

Did you even read my post

The money excuse doesn't cut it in the vast vast majority of cases.

My post was general about peternity leave. My point was not a huge amount of money needs to be saved to make up the difference between regular wager minus paternity leave cash.

Landlords, bank harressments, money problems, medical problems. No **** this happens, I think we all know the problems life throws up. Everyone goes through ****ty times, and get on with it. Humans are resiliant.

Also, I don't know if you know any biology,

:rolleyes:

judeboy101 · 18-08-2017 7:33am

seamus wrote: »

Yes, it's discrimination.

It's not been tested in court, but the accepted wisdom is that the conditions applied by a company for maternity and paternity leave must be the same. Like you say, many companies kind of got caught on the hop with it, so may have applied it poorly.

I think it would be worth your husband querying this with the head of HR in the company in a non-accusatory way. S/he may not even be aware of the discrepancy.

Totally against the rules, depends how the fella wants to swing it with company. Personally id contact HR with query, then not push it but keep it in my back pocket for future ammo against company, if they are willing to screw someone over once they'll try again.

Bobeagleburger · 18-08-2017 7:35am

seamus wrote: »

Yes, it's discrimination.

It's not been tested in court, but the accepted wisdom is that the conditions applied by a company for maternity and paternity leave must be the same. Like you say, many companies kind of got caught on the hop with it, so may have applied it poorly.

I think it would be worth your husband querying this with the head of HR in the company in a non-accusatory way. S/he may not even be aware of the discrepancy.

Great point

Westwood · 18-08-2017 8:11am

Someone in my job mentioned an additional 3 days leave on top of the 2 weeks, anyone have more info on this? Thibk it was originally 3 days leave?

Bobeagleburger · 18-08-2017 8:21am

Westwood wrote: »

Someone in my job mentioned an additional 3 days leave on yop of the 2 weeks, anyone have more info on this?

That might be just a company policy where you work? Our place is 2 days

pwurple · 21-08-2017 7:55am

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Did you even read my post

My post was general about peternity leave. My point was not a huge amount of money needs to be saved to make up the difference between regular wager minus paternity leave cash.

Landlords, bank harressments, money problems, medical problems. No **** this happens, I think we all know the problems life throws up. Everyone goes through ****ty times, and get on with it. Humans are resiliant.

:rolleyes:

Yes, "Peternity" leave is two weeks. So... depending on what you earn.... 2 or 3k out of pocket maybe? Obviously that's not a lot of money to you, but it's a few months of creche payments or rent payments that plenty of people don't have.

Especially when your wife is also looking at a hole of 20-50k in her earnings, and you have the expense of a new baby, with creche fees loomimg shortly.

Who can absorb that easily?

Yeah yeah, we are all terribly resilient , but all the grit and determination and rolling up sleeves doesn't make thousands of euro reappear when you have a new person to maintain.

shesty · 21-08-2017 8:37am

I understand exactly what the problem is...for many fathers it's not worth taking the leave because they can't afford the wage hit so it'd easier to just take annual leave.But the reason behind that is because it's 'only' 230 a weekk, which is what mothers have been paid on leave for years, and the point I'm trying to make is that it hasn't bothered too many people in the country what mat leave pay is because it simply hasn't affected the male half of the country that much.But now that it does (or might) have an impact on them, it suddenly gets questioned.The point is....apparently it's only when it hits a man's pocket that it suddenly becomes an issue.

As for topping up paternity pay...my company do actually, but they don't have to.I'd imagine that will get tested in the courts eventually because it is discrimination.Mind you, any company with half an insight should move to put in a policy of topping up paternity pay even just to avoid a potential lawsuit.

Pwurple do I know you?!!!I didn't go through quite the hardship you did ( ;-) ) but I am also an engineer. I am working in a very male dominated workplace but I'm lucky, they are very good to their staff when it comes to flexibility and leave.

I just think in general, many companies treat pregnancy and child rearing as a sort of inconvenience, rather than accepting that human beings reproduce, and putting measures in place to work with parents.Aside from anything else, it's a good way to hold on to your staff longterm.

Dr.Winston O'Boogie · 07-10-2019 9:05pm

I see there is going to be an extra two weeks paternity leave for parents of children born from 1st November. We are expecting our third child (due 18th October) however would this mean we miss out?? I've heard talk they backdate it to 1st Jan.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-to-extend-maternity-paternity-leave-by-two-weeks-1.4042032%3Fmode%3Damp&ved=2ahUKEwjeluPd-IrlAhU-UhUIHdSvBy0QiJQBMAB6BAgIEAQ&usg=AOvVaw1qxClLRXAfhFOfs25XOXCC&ampcf=1

AulWan · 07-10-2019 9:16pm

pwurple wrote: »

God yes. It crippled us when we couldn't do that. I cannot figure out what difference it makes to the govt to restrict which spouse goes to work.

The simple answer is that it makes sure the mother gets adequate time to recover physically from 9 months of pregnancy followed by birth.

Paternity leave is welcome, but a man has nothing physical to recover from.

Uriel. · 08-10-2019 7:57am

Dr.Winston O'Boogie wrote: »

I see there is going to be an extra two weeks paternity leave for parents of children born from 1st November. We are expecting our third child (due 18th October) however would this mean we miss out?? I've heard talk they backdate it to 1st Jan.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-to-extend-maternity-paternity-leave-by-two-weeks-1.4042032%3Fmode%3Damp&ved=2ahUKEwjeluPd-IrlAhU-UhUIHdSvBy0QiJQBMAB6BAgIEAQ&usg=AOvVaw1qxClLRXAfhFOfs25XOXCC&ampcf=1

It literally says in the article who it applies to. No backdating.

Expectation is that the law will be passed and will apply to children born or adopted from 1st November.

You can view the full bill here.
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2019/75/

See section 5(6) for confirmation of the date from which the entitlement applies.

seamus · 08-10-2019 8:14am

AulWan wrote: »

The simple answer is that it makes sure the mother gets adequate time to recover physically from 9 months of pregnancy followed by birth.

Paternity leave is welcome, but a man has nothing physical to recover from.

Sure. But even a c-section has a recovery period of 4-6 weeks, maximum.

It's incredibly rare, like fractions of a percent, of women who would need the full six months to recover from their pregnancy & childbirth.

Arguably staying at home to mind the child is harder than going to work, so new mothers aren't exactly getting to rest up and take it easy

The primary purpose of paternity and maternity leave is provide hands-on care to the child in the first crucial months. Maternal recovery is somewhat incidental.

The system in Sweden offers 12 weeks for both parents, with a further year (paid) available as a pool for either or both to use. This makes a whole lot of sense since it cannot be assumed that the mother wants to be the one staying at home or that the family can afford to have the mother stay at home.

jlm29 · 08-10-2019 9:15am

AulWan wrote: »

The simple answer is that it makes sure the mother gets adequate time to recover physically from 9 months of pregnancy followed by birth.

Paternity leave is welcome, but a man has nothing physical to recover from.

No, the simple answer is that it’s old fashioned and a bit backward, and how society thinks it should be. I know lots of people who have had babies, l only know of one who needed more than a few weeks to recover from a birth.

AulWan · 08-10-2019 10:15am

seamus wrote: »

Sure. But even a c-section has a recovery period of 4-6 weeks, maximum.

It's incredibly rare, like fractions of a percent, of women who would need the full six months to recover from their pregnancy & childbirth.

The Master of the Coombe told me himself that it takes a woman 9 months to gestate a baby, and 9 months to fully recover from pregnancy.

I think I'll take his word for it.

I have no issue with paternity Leave, but not if it comes at the expense of the mother's recovery time. Fathers are entitled to Parental leave, maybe more should be encouraged to take this up.

iamwhoiam · 08-10-2019 10:22am

jlm29 wrote: »

No, the simple answer is that it’s old fashioned and a bit backward, and how society thinks it should be. I know lots of people who have had babies, l only know of one who needed more than a few weeks to recover from a birth.

Post C section recovery is much longer than a few weeks . Its considered major abdominal surgery

PhoenixParker · 08-10-2019 10:25am

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Post C section recovery is much longer than a few weeks . Its considered major abdominal surgery

It may be, but if someone has major abdominal surgery they don’t get signed off sick for 6-9months.

Maternity/paternity/parental leave in this country is long overdue for a major overhaul.

AulWan · 08-10-2019 10:27am

Neyite wrote: »

It does if you are barely making ends meet on two small salaries and don't have any extra spends left over. Lots of couples were juggling bills because they didn't have enough income to pay them as they arrived. So a drop to statutory maternity pay means they had to scrimp and save even more.

The paternity benefit might have been just beyond their very limits.

If you can't afford 20 quid a week, then you can't afford a/nother child.

AulWan · 08-10-2019 10:29am

Dr.Winston O'Boogie wrote: »

I see there is going to be an extra two weeks paternity leave for parents of children born from 1st November. We are expecting our third child (due 18th October) however would this mean we miss out?? I've heard talk they backdate it to 1st Jan.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-to-extend-maternity-paternity-leave-by-two-weeks-1.4042032%3Fmode%3Damp&ved=2ahUKEwjeluPd-IrlAhU-UhUIHdSvBy0QiJQBMAB6BAgIEAQ&usg=AOvVaw1qxClLRXAfhFOfs25XOXCC&ampcf=1

Any chance you'll go over?

AulWan · 08-10-2019 10:36am

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Maternity/paternity/parental leave in this country is long overdue for a major overhaul.

Less and less private sector companies now pay maternity top ups, as it is. Those that do usually have a claw back clause that if the mother does not return to work for a set period, the top up has to be repaid.

The only result I can see from father's looking for paternity benefit to be topped up, is more companies no longer offering maternity top ups (to new employees) to avoid being accused of discrimination.

Public sector may be different.

jlm29 · 08-10-2019 10:38am

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Post C section recovery is much longer than a few weeks . Its considered major abdominal surgery

As someone else mentioned, for no other surgery would you get six months paid leave. It obviously depends on many factors, including the type of labour and delivery someone has, as well as the type of job they do.
I think it could be assumed that someone could use their judgement and know themselves when they’re fit to go back to work. They could even get their GP to sign them off as fit to work if needs be.

I’m not saying that maternity leave should be reduced, but as pwurple rightly pointed out, in many cases it might benefit a couple for financial or other reasons, if some of it could be used by the parent who didn’t give birth, and it’s obviously the couple who are in the best position to decide that, not a government policy.

AulWan · 08-10-2019 10:58am

jlm29 wrote: »

I’m not saying that maternity leave should be reduced, but as pwurple rightly pointed out, in many cases it might benefit a couple for financial or other reasons, if some of it could be used by the parent who didn’t give birth, and it’s obviously the couple who are in the best position to decide that, not a government policy.

I appreciate what you're saying but the issue I would have with that is women who would go back to work too soon just for financial reasons.

No woman should have to do that, which is why I believe there should be a minimum recovery period reserved for the mother - maybe not the full 26 weeks, but at least the first 12 weeks after giving birth, even 16 weeks would not be unreasonable.

I remember when maternity leave was 12/16 weeks, and it was not enough, even without a C-Section. When I had my own, I returned when they were 4 months, and found it extremely difficult and exhausting as my body had definitely not recovered fully.

meeeeh · 08-10-2019 11:21am

Not every couple is in the same and not every woman needs the same amount of recuperation. I'm pretty sure people would be able to decide by themselves who is better placed to stay at home. Best argument for maternity leave is that only women can breastfeed but since majority of women don't in Ireland there is no reason why 6 week health check couldn't determine if someone is ready to get back to work and let the couple decide who is better placed to stay at home.

iamwhoiam · 08-10-2019 11:26am

PhoenixParker wrote: »

It may be, but if someone has major abdominal surgery they don’t get signed off sick for 6-9months.

Maternity/paternity/parental leave in this country is long overdue for a major overhaul.

Well the maternity leave is not only intended for the mothers recovery it is intended to give the baby the best possible chance in its early months . And that is to be with a parent , mother or father . I think Mat leave should be 12 months and could be taken by either parent as it suits that family

TheBoyConor · 08-10-2019 11:41am

With a parent? Yeah but really at the end of it all the best place for the baby is with it's mother. Father's job is to help the mother and support her.

AulWan · 08-10-2019 11:45am

I think Sweden's system is a good one. Each parent gets 240 days, but 90 days are reserved as for the mother and 90 are reserved for the father, leaving the balance interchangeable between them.

I assume most mothers would use their 90 day reserve period directly after the birth - which would be the logical and sensible thing to do.

iamwhoiam · 08-10-2019 11:51am

TheBoyConor wrote: »

With a parent? Yeah but really at the end of it all the best place for the baby is with it's mother. Father's job is to help the mother and support her.

I would presume most parents would actually know whats best and take the leave accordingly

PhoenixParker · 08-10-2019 12:06pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Well the maternity leave is not only intended for the mothers recovery it is intended to give the baby the best possible chance in its early months . And that is to be with a parent , mother or father . I think Mat leave should be 12 months and could be taken by either parent as it suits that family

That’s the point we’re all making, well except Aul Wan.

Leave needs to be longer, available to split to some proportion between mother and father and better paid.

At a minimum maternity benefit should equal minimum wage for anyone who’s been working.

AulWan · 08-10-2019 12:19pm

The point I'm making is that women who have just given birth deserve statutory protection for a guaranteed period of recovery time.

Not everyone falling all over themselves to be PC and making sure all things are "equal" for the sake of it.

I wouldn't put it past some men to shove their wives out the door after 2 or 3 weeks, seeing as so many think maternity leave is women sitting on their arses doing nothing, anyway.

I also don't agree that it needs to be longer. 26 weeks paid leave is perfectly adequate, after that, parents should foot the bill themselves in terms of the unpaid leave that is allowed or parental leave.

jlm29 · 08-10-2019 1:39pm

TheBoyConor wrote: »

With a parent? Yeah but really at the end of it all the best place for the baby is with it's mother. Father's job is to help the mother and support her.

But if the mother is the main earner, and her mat leave comes with an associated difficulty with paying the mortgage and buying food for the family, then maybe that’s not right? No two families are the same, the cookie cutter method of one thing fits all is not necessarily right

AulWan · 08-10-2019 2:05pm

jlm29 wrote: »

But if the mother is the main earner, and her mat leave comes with an associated difficulty with paying the mortgage and buying food for the family, then maybe that’s not right? No two families are the same, the cookie cutter method of one thing fits all is not necessarily right

If she is, then they better get organised before the child is born. They have the whole pregnancy to get themselves in order financially.

In theory the whole equality thing may seem like a good idea, but in reality it will result in an erosion of women's existing rights.

Like was said in the earlier part of this thread, no one was that worried when it was only women getting paid SW rates while on maternity leave, now suddenly they're worried.

Paternity Leave???

Comments