How did you cope & for how long?

nadnad

meigle21 wrote: »

Ooops forgot to add, my main gripe, other than living on a fraction of my wage.

So much for equal rights, woman are not put to any disadvantage taking time off to have children. Hang on, when I am only earning £117.18 a week, instead of an annual salary of £20k my 6% + employers 6% pension contibutions are going to drop. I can get all the benefits under the sun, but that won't top up my retirement fund and the government certainly won't pay for me when I finally get to retire

Equal rights when it comes to having children dont exist - how can they! men dont bear children so having equal rights on the subject is an impossibility. I truly believe women in this country are very well looked after when it comes to maternity benefits - possibly too much! I'm sure every small business owner groaned at the prospect of 9 months maternity leave (or 12 some unpaid), this very fact makes companies sometimes unwilling to employ women.

Lets face it if you owned a company and had a male and female candidate for a job, both aged say 25-35 or thereabouts, both with exactly the same experience and qualifications - who would you hire? the obvious answer is the man, no risk of hiring and training him only to find out he's pregnant within a year meaning you have to advertise, hire and retrain someone else - all at your own expense. I'm not saying its right (far from it) but its the sensible thing for any business to do.

Correct me if i'm wrong but I think in the USA women get 6 weeks unpaid maternity leave and then straight back to work.

You make a choice to have a baby (well most of us do), and with that choice comes the knowledge that the money coming into the household is going to fall. This isnt new information and I don't understand anyone who complains about it. Why should you get paid for having a baby? Why should employers have to let you off? Its your choice after all.

I may be playing devils advocate a little here, but I just want people to realise that maternity benefits and rights in this country are actually very good.

fernliebee

I kind of feel a bit similar to nadnad regarding monetary benefits, however feel that with time and flexibility the UK should fall in line with a lot of Europe, as there are many other countries where parents- not just mums- are given time of to be with their children some paid, some unpaid but their jobs are kept open. Personally I would still have had my DD when I did without SMP, but we would have been so much worse of and would have been so much more stressful. I truly do appreciate the governments SMP and tax credits but for many workers who have contributed thousands of pounds to tax revenue and never claimed any benefits, it doesn't seem fair that they should not be able to stay off work while many people on benefits their whole lives can. This is not a benefits bashing post as I myself am on benefits of sorts but it does seem that hard workers are penalised. Maybe a maternity scheme like a pensions scheme would be fairer ie you pay into it direct from wages and the company matches it????? Who knows the answer, wish I did!

nadnad

fernliebee wrote: »

Maybe a maternity scheme like a pensions scheme would be fairer ie you pay into it direct from wages and the company matches it????? Who knows the answer, wish I did!

wow i actually think thats a realy really good idea :T . It would help people to budget for when the time comes, companies maybe wouldnt want to be paying long term into such a thing - but there are some companies who give additional maternity benefits and this may be another option for the like of them.

that would be much fairer than the suggestion below

meigle21 wrote:

I wrote to my local councilor about SMP. I suggested a fairer system by making the payment means tested, as one payment doesn't suit everyone. I have just received the reply, unbelievably, completely ignoring my point! So, not one to give up, I'm drafting another one. Maybe if we all get onto their case, they will reconsider it?

as i dont see how means tested payments would be fair - why should people who earn more money and therefore pay more money into the tax and NI system be penalised by getting less maternity benefits? The same payment for all mothers regardless is the only way that is fair. But maybe fernliebee's suggestion could be used as a sort of top up benefit on top of standard maternity pay - its not like its gonna happen but its a good idea!

the_other_mce

meigle21 wrote: »

Ooops forgot to add, my main gripe, other than living on a fraction of my wage.

So much for equal rights, woman are not put to any disadvantage taking time off to have children. Hang on, when I am only earning £117.18 a week, instead of an annual salary of £20k my 6% + employers 6% pension contibutions are going to drop. I can get all the benefits under the sun, but that won't top up my retirement fund and the government certainly won't pay for me when I finally get to retire

But you aren't 'earning' £117 a week - it's a benefit. You are spending time with your baby... why should your employer/government pay into your pension? You are choosing to have a baby - no-one is forcing you. If you are only earning £20k you could look at alternatives to working full time - a nursery will eat up half of your income at least. Maybe an evening job/childminding etc?

lynnexxxo

meigle21 wrote: »

We're in the same boat, affording a child isn't the problem, it's having 9 months off work at £117.18 a week thats the problem.

I don't mind cutting back, I don't mind saving, but there is only so much you can do. We have a modest sized house, but need the best part of two wages to pay all the household bills, and we do not have anything extravagant.

I wrote to my local councilor about SMP. I suggested a fairer system by making the payment means tested, as one payment doesn't suit everyone. I have just received the reply, unbelievably, completely ignoring my point! So, not one to give up, I'm drafting another one. Maybe if we all get onto their case, they will reconsider it?

I was wondering about your idea of being means tested, would that not be worse? Surely the problem is the drop in income. For folks on minimum wage then £117 per week, while is a drop in income is not too bad, for folks on around 30k the drop is from much greater. The people will higher wages will (in general) have higher mortgages , probably car payments and maybe other debts so 'need' more to service them. Thus the only way I could see the means testing to be fair is if you got a percentage of your current salary. However I could see the headlines now - 'high flying lawyer/doc/etc gets 70k per year maternity pay while poor shop assistant has to surivive of 7k'.

I'm due twins in May and hoping to stay off till christmas. My savings target is to get enough to pay the mortgage for the months that I will be on SMP (have accured nearly two months holidays and will have 6 weeks at 90%). I have am also making sure that yearly things, like car and house insurance are paid for in advance of my maternity leave. I'm also planning on not renewing my mobile contract, cancelling sky and plan on doing a bit more home cooking and cutting down on convience foods. Also plan on walking more and taking the car less to cut petrol costs.

However I plan on enjoying my time off with my new babies and if things are really tight I have a credit card!! I certainly don't plan on running up huge bills or buying daft things but if i end up coming back to work with a couple of hundred pounds credit card bills then so be it!

Susan_Frost

I agree ALL mums should get the same payment. Or you could argue, mums who earn more should get more - as they are losing more. Wow, that would be a first.

The fact is that all mums (and dads) are in the same boat. It is a difficult time financially, especially as not all pregnancies/jobs/interest rates, etc. etc. can be planned to precision.

If you took a bank loan out for a car, you would not expect someone else to pay for it.

Back to the original question.

Dont panic
You can only do your best, but try to enjoy your time with your baby.
Dont buy any normal clothes from now to going back to work (fashions change)
You will save on work clothes, travel, lunches, etc. (working costs money)
Having a baby early spring is more cost effective heating wise, go back to work in winter and you dont have to heat the house all day, every day.
If home in winter, heat just one room during the day, keep doors closed.
You have the time to make more time consuming, but cheaper meals.
Cut back on the cost of gifts for birthdays, Christmas, etc.
Plus all the other things recommended in other posts.

Money probably will be tight (it was for me) but look out for small opportunities to earn some if you can, if you need it.

Good luck all

jellyhead

Spendless mentioned nursery vouchers - might be worth looking into for when you go back to work. I think there's an article about it somewhere.

If you get the family element of tax credits (it's about £10 a week for those whose joint income is approx 28-66k I think) then it will be doubled until baby is 12 months old, so that's an extra £547 over the first year.

When you claim tax credits (when baby is born) you give your income for the previous tax year, or you can give your estimated income for the current tax year. Most of the SMP is ignored I think, around £100 a week - so your income for tax credits purposes is going to be lower than usual during the tax year when you're on maternity leave. Useful if your joint income that year might fall below the threshold of around 28k-ish. If it does you can also claim the surestart grant of £500.

The healthy pregnancy grant of £190 (I think?) is for everyone regardless of income, so that's a bit more help, maybe enough to buy a set of washable nappies.

consultant31

nadnad wrote: »

Equal rights when it comes to having children dont exist - how can they! men dont bear children so having equal rights on the subject is an impossibility. I truly believe women in this country are very well looked after when it comes to maternity benefits - possibly too much! I'm sure every small business owner groaned at the prospect of 9 months maternity leave (or 12 some unpaid), this very fact makes companies sometimes unwilling to employ women.

You make a choice to have a baby (well most of us do), and with that choice comes the knowledge that the money coming into the household is going to fall. This isnt new information and I don't understand anyone who complains about it. Why should you get paid for having a baby? Why should employers have to let you off? Its your choice after all.

I may be playing devils advocate a little here, but I just want people to realise that maternity benefits and rights in this country are actually very good.

Hear, hear!!

ethelsmum

We was very lucky when I had my first baby as we had been able to put half of my full-time wage away in the months before I went on maternity leave so we had a nice amount of savings for when I was on mat leave. We were lucky as we was renting a small flat at the time and the rent was minimal and we didn't have any other debts/loans etc and didn't drive at the time. 2nd baby was more difficult as we had a bigger house, bigger rent, more bills etc and some debt. I didn't go back to work after my maternity leave finished and the following year was a real struggle and completely wiped out our savings - but that was what we had saved it for.

skintchick

Gosh. What if everyone decided NOT to have babies,because the money would fall? What would society do then?

Society as a whole should support mothers to have babies and stay at home with them during the early years because it benefits society to have well-adjusted, happy children growing into well-adjusted, happy adults who can contribute to society.

A selfish, 'your baby, your problem' attitude erodes a civilised society and betrays an unpleasant personality.

On a personal note, I was made redundant and so will also miss out on SMP and get MA only. Luckily, my parents have financially supported me in buying a house (before I got married) and we therefore have no mortgage, so can survive on one wage. If that weren't the case, I really don;t know what we'd do.

But the attitudes of some people on here really surprise, sicken, shock and sadden me.