Underdog

ktothema

teajug wrote: »

I am sorry, but I feel I have to say this, having a child is a lifestyle choice nowadays and people should not have children unless they are able to provide for them.

Disable employee are discriminated all the time and becoming disabled is NOT a life style choice, therefore they should get more concessions that people that choose to have children.

I totally agree with you. It's sad and wrong that they don't.

Mischa8

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

If they worked in the same company then the company should define that only one of the parents is eligible for 26 weeks at full pay.

However, in this case, if you're the mother employee, you are allowed a full 6 month top-up but if you're the father, you are only allowed 6 weeks (with the remaining 20 being paid at stat mat).

I think there is a case for equal rights here given the new maternity/paternity legislation. Why is one sex getting preferential treatment over the other? - what is the companies answer to this question? That is the bread and butter here.

Sure it is their package, their perk but I can defo see that it is more favorable towards a woman. Why that is, I have no idea. Until you find out, there isnt much to go on.

And no - the woman pushed a kid out is not a valid reason. It must be legally sound without discriminating you.

Still though - 32 weeks at full pay is pretty slick.

Actually a mother depending on birth (eg caesarean etc) and if she is breastsfeeding will have more 'need' of the leave than the father. She has carried the baby for 9 months not the father so would in all fairness need the rest more than him.

I suggest that unless you as a man give birth then maybe keep quiet. We all know here you'd be after leave from a job with this one (current job) or previous one which you tried to skive in.

dandelionclock30

6 months off, wanting full pay to bond with a baby what a load of old

cobblers.

Mischa8

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

If they worked in the same company then the company should define that only one of the parents is eligible for 26 weeks at full pay.

However, in this case, if you're the mother employee, you are allowed a full 6 month top-up but if you're the father, you are only allowed 6 weeks (with the remaining 20 being paid at stat mat).

I think there is a case for equal rights here given the new maternity/paternity legislation. Why is one sex getting preferential treatment over the other? - what is the companies answer to this question? That is the bread and butter here.

Sure it is their package, their perk but I can defo see that it is more favorable towards a woman. Why that is, I have no idea. Until you find out, there isnt much to go on.

And no - the woman pushed a kid out is not a valid reason. It must be legally sound without discriminating you.

Still though - 32 weeks at full pay is pretty slick.

Why ON EARTH you bang on about a woman pushing a kid out being no valid reason?? I'm also not quite sure why/how you put the *legally sound without discriminating you* - do this apply to *no, the woman pushed a kid out is not a valid reason*!

also why you are asking is it more favourable to the woman and why is one sex getting more preferential treatment than the other?! I think you must come from a background where women are downtrodden or (as you say in other posts) the women don't tend to work much e.g. *I'll give the woman X number of babies and she will not need to work*.

The primary carer for a baby IIRC in first few weeks would be a mother. Even factoring in childcare such as a nanny.

The vast majority of births take their toll on the mother physically and mentally, THEN they have to adjust to feeding plans be it bottle/breast etc AND sleeping plans. Last time I looked fathers were able to help in:-

a) Bottle feeding
b) nappy changing
c) getting up in the night occasionally to deal with baby

Also, mother and baby bonding is more important and happens first IIRC than father.

finally 32 weeks at full pay is pretty slick - well it is. and it is well deserved. Remind me next time you give birth eh?? :rotfl:

Mischa8

Miabsdad wrote: »

Hello Everyone,

I am after a bit of advice on a work situation.

I work for a bank which is one of the biggest in the world, I don't get these ridiculous bankers bonuses that investment bankers get, i just work in the back office dealing with customers accounts.

My wife and I had a little girl born September 2011, my wife took 6 months out of her work on maternity leave up until January 2012. I then used the new legislation which says Fathers can take additional paternity leave, provided the Mother returns to work. This means i will receive statutory paternity pay from the government, provided my wife returns to work therefore her statutory maternity pay will stop.

Now the whole point of this legislation is so that fathers can spend time bonding with there child as a mother would. The leave i take is exactly the same as what my wife had taken (To care and nurture our child).

My employer is very generous with its enhanced pay around leave, in the companies policy relating to Maternity Leave they pay a whopping 6 months full pay (26 weeks) so they basically top up the statutory pay to the mothers normal wage.
The companies policy for Additional Paternity leave is less favourable, this states as a father wishing to take Additional Paternity leave they will pay statutory Paternity pay (equivalent of Stat Mat Pay) and will only enhance pay to full salary for a maximum of six weeks provided the leave is taken on the 20th week of the mothers Mat leave.

My problem with this is that as the leave is for the same purpose Fathers are being treated less favourable than a mother who would take Mat leave within the company. I am struggling to get my head round the issue as technically i am being left short for wanting to spend time with my Daughter. I have referred to the Equality act and the legislation regarding Additional Paternity Leave and I am confident that this is wrong by the company.

I have raised a grievance about this to the company who squashed it saying that they are following legislation regarding this.

They refer to the following snippet.

Additional Paternity Leave is for a maximum of 26 weeks. If your partner has returned to work, the leave can be taken between 20 weeks and one year after your child is born or placed for adoption. You may be entitled to receive Additional Statutory Paternity Pay during your partner's Statutory Maternity Pay, Maternity Allowance or Adoption Pay period.

the company state that as they only enhance Mat leave for 26 weeks, they will pay the remaining 6 weeks of enhanced pay to me (provided leave starts on the 20th week) However, my wife does not work for the company so why can't they enhance my pay for 26 weeks like they would for a person on Mat leave?

I have joined a union but as this issue was prior to me joining the will not let me use the free legal services through them which i understand, but they have said as this is the first case of its kind it will naturally receive a lot of attention (as its new legislation). Hence the underdog title.

I am after opinions/advice on what you all think, I have appealed this and when i return to work i am to have my appeal, should that come back as the lame excuse i received before i would consider a tribunal.

This is more of a thing for other fathers within the company who might want to take the leave, as i am the first i do not want them to be put off taking this leave because of the lack of support from the company as the time i have had off so far with my Daughter has made me realise what life is all about.

Any advice is good advice.

Thanks

MiaBsDad

Personally you're on a ride to nothing - I think you and sho_me_da_money should join forces (he also wants to take his wife's firm to a tribunal where she'll lose) and fight useless tribunals together.

seriously - what planet do you guys LIVE ON??!! :eek:

sharnad

ILW wrote: »

I would suspect that whilst OP is going on about rights and wanting to take years off to bond with his daughter, someone else will be taking his job off him.
That is unless he is public sector.

Yes if he is a puoc sector worker his job won't excist to go back to

Miabsdad

Right thanks for all the replies regarding this, my work have contacted myself about this and informed me after speaking to the legal/policy team they had missed out a part of their policy on additional paternity leave which had originally been drafted up, They have confirmed that they will pay a father up to 26 weeks full pay, the maximum of 6 weeks for fathers is based upon the mother working for the company.

This does not mean anyone gets more than the other person, just that if the mother does not work for the company the father is entitled to the Company's Enhanced pay.

Person_one

marybelle01 wrote: »

Of course women don't have careers to further, never get better paid than men, don't contribute financially to their children's education, and provide utterly no positive role models to their children.

Jeez, have some of the posters here actually managed to carve doors for the cave yet?

Don't forget, men don't need to bond with or spend quality time with their children and they certainly aren't capable of providing decent care or emotional support for them!

Thoroughly depressing thread.