Afternoon:
10°c
Call to give fathers four months' parental leave
Ellen Widdup31 Mar 2009
New mothers should get less time off work and new fathers more, says a report out today.
The study, by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, has suggested statutory maternity leave be cut from nine months of paid leave to six, with an optional four months "parental leave" for fathers. The group believes the changes would shift perceptions that only mothers looked after children as well as prevent women struggling in the workplace and being seen as less attractive employees.
Equality and Human Rights Commission chief executive Nicola Brewer said: "Changing the way we approach parental leave could be one way of tackling the gender pay gap." The report wants fathers to be able to tag-on the extra paternity leave after the mother's six months of maternity leave finishes.
It also argues that maternity leave, which is paid at 90 per cent of their salary for the first six weeks and the statutory rate of £117.18 a week for the remainder, should be changed to allow eight weeks at 90 per cent of salary.
Fathers would be given the first two weeks of paternity leave at 90 per cent. The extra "parental leave" would be allocated on a "use it or lose it" basis so fathers would not be allowed to transfer unused leave to their partner.
But business chiefs are likely to balk at the scheme, which would cost about£5.3billion to introduce over the next decade on top of the £2billion it currently costs.
Reader views (18)
Two points here: Maybe I'm old-fashioned (raised my children in the 60s and 70s) but do women really want their husbands/partners around for four or so months following the birth of their child? How feeble of them, and anyway it would be like having another child around. Secondly, I agree with the comments re. covering for employees with children, having worked for and with such women (and it is usually women) before I retired. They call themselves feminists and talk about women's rights, but I am a woman and where were my rights when they were "sciving off" to pick up the children or the children were ill and I had to do all the work. After working from the age of 16 with only short breaks until retirement, and managing to raise 4 children without all today's benefits, I can tell you that these women will "dump" on their fellow women far more than any man I have ever worked for or with. Selfish people.
- Pat, East Kent UK, 01/04/2009 12:52
Report abuse
It was interesting that when this story first broke Sky News interviewed a bloke who 'could't afford' any more time off standing in front of his £1200 TV set! If you can't afford kids, don't have them, period. Perhaps more time should be spent in schools explaining to the little loves just how much it costs to raise a child through to when they leave full time education - that will put them off far quicker than any gory films about abortion or STDs.
- Paul, London, 01/04/2009 10:42
Report abuse
I so agree with Sarah Bradshaw. The cult of parenthood makes me sick. And as for stay at home fathers - don't fall for it guys. Your brain will turn to mush while you are at home with the kiddly winks and someone will nick your job while you are away. It's just a feminist con trick - they wanted out of the nursery - they want you in!
- Janina, London UK, 31/03/2009 08:28
Report abuse
Goodness - what a lot of bitter child haters there are out there. Nobody is asking you to support those of us who have children. Most of us with children have to work extra hard so we don't face the 'it's not fair you get time off for your kids' brigade who whinge about us at every single opporunity! Don't forget our kids will be your drs/nurses/carers etc when you're in your lonely old age and their taxes will be paying your pension.
- Hat, London, 30/03/2009 22:27
Report abuse
Well I can catagorically state that my husband would not have wanted 4 months off on either occasion. Or even 4 days. I suspect a lot of new fathers would prefer the opportunity to work a bit of over-time . . . !
Sue in Orpington is doubtless working extra-hard to change the status-quo, and to pay for all the costs of her own pension, as well as all the costs of her own healthcare - even if she is forced to retire early with ill-health - and won't need the next generation to subsidise it all when they grow up.
- Roz, Chamonix, France, 30/03/2009 15:25
Report abuse
Elmo, isn't it more likely your piles were merely coincidentally timed? But thanks for lowering the tone anyway!
- Jane Snookes, Bromley, Kent, England, 30/03/2009 14:57
Report abuse
Children belong with their mothers in the first 5 years of their life, studies have shown this is by far the best thing for them.
As for Sarah's comparison with the 60s, dad's went to work and mum's stayed at home, things were easier then. So children of that generation had a much better start in life. Employers' are a disgrace and need to get back in their boxes. Most of them would only be happy if workers were in dorms living on a pound a week!
- Darren, london, 30/03/2009 14:53
Report abuse
We can not afford all the rights parents have at the moment - do we want to see all our comapnies do to India and China??
Jeremy E - A father.
- Jeremy E, London, 30/03/2009 14:41
Report abuse
Suck it up princesses. If you opt to have children and a career you should be prepared to make the sacrifices, instead of your colleagues having to pick up the slack because you're not around. I don't see those left doing your work getting paid extra for it. My mother had 4 children and didn't have this sort of pampering and time off work and there was absolutely no harm done to any of us because of it. If anything, it made us stronger because we weren't wrapped in cotton wool.
- Geraldine, London, 30/03/2009 14:22
Report abuse
Nine months in total is plenty enough. How the parents share it out should be up to them. Like other people posting here I have also had enough of covering for other people on parental leave. My view is "Your child - your responsibility!".
- Michael, London, 30/03/2009 14:15
Report abuse
Lack of sleep is bad for anyone, and crying babies wake neighbours as well as partners - you don't see them asking for ime off. However, I don't think men also suffer from sympathetic iron level depletion, overworked kidneys, overworked livers, overworked hearts as well as the muscle strain, back strain and sickness that comes with pregnancy and childbirth. Come on, give me a break!
- Smb, London, UK, 30/03/2009 14:00
Report abuse
I am sick and tired not only of covering other people's work but sick to death of hearing about parental rights and what's best for other people's children. Not only because I am not interested in children and see no reason why I should be (I do not expect other people to share my interests) but because in my day (born mid 60s) nobody was wrapped in cotton wool and yet my generation obviously turned out a whole lot more capable than the latest waves of mollycoddled brats. The whole prospect of giving parents yet more ammunition to regard themselves as self-satisfied, smug-faced breeders makes me want to vomit. And as for breast feeding - if anyone tries that around me in the future I think I will stick my fingers down my throat and puke at their feet. And if that offends anyone GOOD!
- Sarah Bradshaw, Enfield, Middx, 30/03/2009 13:12
Report abuse
Actually SMB, as a man I can confirm that i had sympathetic piles and I was waking often in the night to visit the toilet in the latter stages of my wife's pregnancy - and many sleepless nights afterwards too, as the noise of crying still came through the spare room walls. Us men do suffer too you know!
- Elmo, Barnet, 30/03/2009 12:14
Report abuse
The Equality and Human Rights Commission, in conjunction with the UK government over the past 10 years, have done more to harm the human rights of the people they are trying to protect, than any other group involved in the whole debate. As an employer, I understand and accept the reasoning behind a lot of what the commission is trying to do, but the pendulum has swung so far against the employer and towards the employee that most employers will do their best to avoid getting themselves in such a situation - they simply will not give a job to a woman of child bearing age if it might mean they are without a key employee for months on end. I am sure that this was not the intention of well meaning but naive law makers and policy makers - but it actually makes things harder for the groups the commission is trying to give rights to. Alan Sugar made a similar point recently on BBC TV - albeit in a more direct and blunt manner!
- Dc, London, 30/03/2009 11:06
Report abuse
No Nic, and its not fair that others have to do extra work in the office when woman (and men) are off work to look after their offspring! Ever heard of Mother's expressing milk? Your comments are typical of today's whingers, never satisfied!
- Sue, Orpington, Kent, 30/03/2009 10:50
Report abuse
Maternity leave is also to protect the health of the woman, who's body has taken a huge toll after childbirth. It take nine months to nuture the baby, but woman are expected to recover in record time these days - not helped by celebrity fads. What effect to a man's health has childbirth taken? None!
- Smb, London, UK, 30/03/2009 10:40
Report abuse
I'm sick and tired as a single person of "carrying" those who decide to have children and don't support them themsleves.Surely if people decide to have children, why do the rest of us help support them? Its single people like me who have had to carry their work laods while they are off continually, and that's not for the long periods alone. We always have to carry them while off for dentist trips, school duties, or a simple cold etc. They are allowed to change their hours at work and we can do nothing about it. This government needs to look after us ALL not just families. We, especially single people with mortgages and bills should all be considered equally.
- Janis, Worcester Park, Surrey, 30/03/2009 10:36
Report abuse
Thats all very well but what if you breastfeed? Should we not be encouraging this? My husband would have loved to stay off work for a bit longer with our first born child but wasnt given the chance.....if after 6 months we had to make the choice between him or me taking the next four months off then because of breastfeeding it would have to be me. Thats not fair on him if other fathers who are bottlefeeding their children get the opportunity he doesnt.
- Nic, Cambridgeshire, 30/03/2009 10:05
Report abuse
