Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • keighley.johanne
    • By keighley.johanne 12th Dec 18, 11:12 AM
    • 16Posts
    • 29Thanks
    keighley.johanne
    Maternity pay ... need help
    • #1
    • 12th Dec 18, 11:12 AM
    Maternity pay ... need help 12th Dec 18 at 11:12 AM
    Hi,

    I was planning on TTC in the new year. I employed for a year so I knew I would have been covered for maternity.

    I was made redundant on 22nd Nov and walked into a new job on 23rd Nov.

    I am struggling to get my head around when I can actually start trying.
    I have to work for the company for 26weks prior to the 15th week before giving birth? It so confusing now.

    Any and all help would be greatly appreciated
Page 3
    • onomatopoeia99
    • By onomatopoeia99 12th Dec 18, 6:20 PM
    • 5,161 Posts
    • 11,570 Thanks
    onomatopoeia99
    I am earning just enough to pay the bills.
    Originally posted by keighley.johanne
    If your employer pays SMP only, which is likely if it's a small business, then you may be facing a considerable cut in earnings.
    INTP, nerd, libertarian and scifi geek.
    Home is where my books are.
    • Threebabes
    • By Threebabes 12th Dec 18, 6:27 PM
    • 1,227 Posts
    • 1,382 Thanks
    Threebabes
    Iíve been with my partner for 15yrs in April. Unfortunately we havenít been blessed with a child yet. We have saved £10k to help with loss of my earnings during maternity.

    I have been told by my go that they wonít help us until we have been actively trying for 18months, which I need to inform him when we have officially started.

    Thanks for input
    Originally posted by keighley.johanne
    Good luck honey X
    • keighley.johanne
    • By keighley.johanne 12th Dec 18, 7:01 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    keighley.johanne
    I am currently taking home £255 a week (I was on £345 before redundancy) I know smp is £145 a week this is why we saved for the past several yrs.

    If I fall pregnant before I am entitled then I will have to deal with it, but I would like to know how long I have to be there in order to qualify. It would just make things that little less stressful.
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 12th Dec 18, 7:16 PM
    • 2,394 Posts
    • 3,662 Thanks
    badmemory
    Have things changed a lot? Surely if you are not entitled to SMP via your employer but have been paying NI for the relevant period then you would get it from the DWP? Yes I know I am out of date on a lot of things but surely entitlement has increased on many things not decreased. After all it is almost 40 years since I moved across country over 100 miles when 7.5 months pregnant so I had to resign to join my then husband whose job had moved & I know I got SMP.


    OP try the benefits board.
    • dawyldthing
    • By dawyldthing 12th Dec 18, 7:43 PM
    • 3,278 Posts
    • 3,245 Thanks
    dawyldthing
    https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/maternity-allowance#who-gets-maternity-allowance

    Iíve had a bit of this dilemma as although Iíve worked for the employer for some time Iíve had to drop my hours. But as long as you can find

    You may be able to get it for 39 weeks if:

    youíre employed but you canít claim Statutory Maternity Pay
    youíre self-employed and paying Class 2 National Insurance contributions*
    youíve recently stopped working.
    In the 66 weeks before your babyís due:

    you must have been employed or self-employed for at least 26 weeks, and
    you must have earned £30 or more a week for at least 13 of those weeks Ė the weeks donít have to be together.

    Youíll get something. Yeah we all have to cut back, but hopefully itís worth it
    roll on 27th April 2019 or there abouts *26 done* = *14 to go*
    • sazpot
    • By sazpot 12th Dec 18, 7:45 PM
    • 106 Posts
    • 106 Thanks
    sazpot
    Please look up Maternity Allowance, it is £145 a week for 9 months and given to those that do not qualify for SMP as long as they have paid enough in tax and NI in the previous X number of months. It’s quite straight forward to claim. All you would miss out on if you were even pregnant already is the enhance SMP rate based on your salary for the first few weeks.
    • Kynthia
    • By Kynthia 12th Dec 18, 9:10 PM
    • 5,419 Posts
    • 7,587 Thanks
    Kynthia
    Basic biology suggests that it takes two to make a baby - which is exactly what I was saying and you know it.
    Originally posted by Comms69
    Men don't face pregnancy discrimination. They don't face losing their job, harassment, or nasty comments and judgement about claiming smp or having to get a new job when possibly pregnant. When men are having a baby they are free to change employers, apply for promotions and not lose their jobs. Women just want the same.
    Don't listen to me, I'm no expert!
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 12th Dec 18, 11:17 PM
    • 6,491 Posts
    • 6,905 Thanks
    Comms69
    I don’t have an issue with that per se.

    I have an issue with expecting an employer to be compelled to accommodate personal choices.

    Equality isn’t really possible I don’t think. Fairness is, on the broader scale. But people aren’t the same.
    Last edited by Comms69; 12-12-2018 at 11:25 PM.
    • SingleSue
    • By SingleSue 13th Dec 18, 12:11 AM
    • 10,415 Posts
    • 58,947 Thanks
    SingleSue
    And you think it doesn't happen...
    Originally posted by andydownes123
    I was actually quite shocked to be asked what plans I had (if any) for further children by a prospective employer and how that would be a definite no no.

    What was more shocking was that the question was asked by a woman and not years ago but within the last 3 years. To be honest, I don't think she believed me when I said my child bearing days ended in October 2001 when I had a hysterectomy as she asked me if I was sure and could I guarantee it......
    We made it! One graduated, 2 currently at university, been hard work but it shows there is a possibility of a chance of normal (ish) life after a diagnosis (or two) of ASD. It's not been the easiest route but I am so glad I ignored everything and everyone and did my own therapies with them.
    Eldests' EDS diagnosis 4.5.10, mine 13.1.11 eekk!
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 13th Dec 18, 7:52 AM
    • 6,491 Posts
    • 6,905 Thanks
    Comms69
    I was actually quite shocked to be asked what plans I had (if any) for further children by a prospective employer and how that would be a definite no no.

    What was more shocking was that the question was asked by a woman and not years ago but within the last 3 years. To be honest, I don't think she believed me when I said my child bearing days ended in October 2001 when I had a hysterectomy as she asked me if I was sure and could I guarantee it......
    Originally posted by SingleSue
    Obviously you turned down the job
    • SingleSue
    • By SingleSue 13th Dec 18, 9:12 AM
    • 10,415 Posts
    • 58,947 Thanks
    SingleSue
    Obviously you turned down the job
    Originally posted by Comms69
    I didn't have to, they didn't much like the fact I have a crutch and wheelchair either (they were pretty shocking in their response to that too) despite being completely open in my application about my disability. I had got down to the final two so thought they were ok with it but it seems the actual boss of that location was far from ok with it.

    Had it been offered, I probably would have turned it down though due to the hours being completely different to that advertised and a few other things, had it been as advertised, I would have found a way to get around their attitude in the short term to enhance my prospects elsewhere in the long term.
    We made it! One graduated, 2 currently at university, been hard work but it shows there is a possibility of a chance of normal (ish) life after a diagnosis (or two) of ASD. It's not been the easiest route but I am so glad I ignored everything and everyone and did my own therapies with them.
    Eldests' EDS diagnosis 4.5.10, mine 13.1.11 eekk!
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 13th Dec 18, 9:23 AM
    • 6,491 Posts
    • 6,905 Thanks
    Comms69
    I didn't have to, they didn't much like the fact I have a crutch and wheelchair either (they were pretty shocking in their response to that too) despite being completely open in my application about my disability. I had got down to the final two so thought they were ok with it but it seems the actual boss of that location was far from ok with it.

    Had it been offered, I probably would have turned it down though due to the hours being completely different to that advertised and a few other things, had it been as advertised, I would have found a way to get around their attitude in the short term to enhance my prospects elsewhere in the long term.
    Originally posted by SingleSue


    See I would turn it down on principle.
    • SingleSue
    • By SingleSue 13th Dec 18, 9:57 AM
    • 10,415 Posts
    • 58,947 Thanks
    SingleSue
    Sometimes you have to play the long game. At the time, I was looking for an in after spending a lot of time out of the employment market being a carer for a family member and would have put up with a fair bit just to get that recent bit of employment history onto my CV to allow me to move to where I wanted to be.

    I'm lucky in that I am pretty pragmatic about things and don't easily take offence but in that particular instance, I had already decided I wouldn't take the job if offered due to other things which made their attitude pale into insignificance.
    We made it! One graduated, 2 currently at university, been hard work but it shows there is a possibility of a chance of normal (ish) life after a diagnosis (or two) of ASD. It's not been the easiest route but I am so glad I ignored everything and everyone and did my own therapies with them.
    Eldests' EDS diagnosis 4.5.10, mine 13.1.11 eekk!
    • andydownes123
    • By andydownes123 13th Dec 18, 10:43 AM
    • 452 Posts
    • 597 Thanks
    andydownes123
    When men are having a baby they are free to change employers, apply for promotions and not lose their jobs. Women just want the same.
    Originally posted by Kynthia

    But you can't have the same, you're having a baby.



    Men are free for promotions etc. this is true, however this allows extra provisioning for the baby too.



    You see, many are obsessed with equality of outcome at the moment...this can't happen. Men and women compliment each other, one is freed up to do the caring (usually the women as women are programmed to be more maternal and have a way more caring nature than men). One parent can then provision (men are porgrammed to provision) knowing that the role of caring is fufilled. It's yin and yang. Complimentary.


    By having a baby you are effectively giving up the provisioning role yourself, which is usually fine as the slack is taken up the partner (most of the time the man).



    You need to think about it without the lense of "I want the same"...you can't, it doesn't work that way, it's been the same for millions of years across many cultures and many species. You're having a baby, it changes your life, you can't have your cake and eat it and if you try to, people suffer as a consequence.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 13th Dec 18, 11:01 AM
    • 6,491 Posts
    • 6,905 Thanks
    Comms69
    But you can't have the same, you're having a baby.



    Men are free for promotions etc. this is true, however this allows extra provisioning for the baby too.



    You see, many are obsessed with equality of outcome at the moment...this can't happen. Men and women compliment each other, one is freed up to do the caring (usually the women as women are programmed to be more maternal and have a way more caring nature than men). One parent can then provision (men are porgrammed to provision) knowing that the role of caring is fufilled. It's yin and yang. Complimentary.


    By having a baby you are effectively giving up the provisioning role yourself, which is usually fine as the slack is taken up the partner (most of the time the man).



    You need to think about it without the lense of "I want the same"...you can't, it doesn't work that way, it's been the same for millions of years across many cultures and many species. You're having a baby, it changes your life, you can't have your cake and eat it and if you try to, people suffer as a consequence.
    Originally posted by andydownes123


    People who claim they want the same; don't.


    I don't know anyone who argues that they would prefer higher incarceration rates, with longer sentences.


    - Other examples available
    • spadoosh
    • By spadoosh 13th Dec 18, 12:05 PM
    • 6,135 Posts
    • 8,635 Thanks
    spadoosh
    Men don't face pregnancy discrimination. They don't face losing their job, harassment, or nasty comments and judgement about claiming smp or having to get a new job when possibly pregnant. When men are having a baby they are free to change employers, apply for promotions and not lose their jobs. Women just want the same.
    Originally posted by Kynthia
    This is a poor argument. The people you talk of are breaking the law.

    The discrimination men face as new parents is written in law. When we had our child it just made sense for me to take the parental leave, she earns a lot more than me. However my say in that matter is null and void unless she is willing to sacrifice her maternity leave. Now, how many women do you know willing to do that? We just want the same.

    For what its worth im a 21st century man, i do most of the cleaning, cooking, childcare whilst working full time. My OH does a few hours (4 at most) a week more than me but is less flexible due to shifts. I got two weeks off paid, in those two weeks i did everything for the child after a complicated c-section whilst also looking after OH. When i was back at work i had a few more weeks of the same. My wife would be the first person to say im at least on par with her in terms of parenting ability yet i face discrimination everytime i go out with my daughter. Using the womens toilet in a swanky london bar to changer her nappy. The patronising "daddy's day care" comments when i spend more time raising our child than OH does. And as she earns more its me and my job thats at risk when the inevitable call from nursery or sickness comes along.

    Ill be honest its not something i try to go out of my way to complain about. Its the best job ever and i love every second. I dont resent my OH at all for taking advantage of getting paid time off as she says shell probably never get the same opportunity to spend as much time with her daughter as she did. Still, as a dad, that opportunity doesnt exist. So when you say you want the same i highly suspect you dont. You want to be treat the same, well you are, people judge and discriminate against you.

    Im of the same opinion that in terms of law i think its wrong forcing companies to pay. The onus should be on the employer to decide what they pay. If they dont offer good parental packages then theyre unlikely to benefit from employing parents. The market should dictate business policy not the government.

    I dont see anything wrong with what the OP is doing. Any fault lies with the law and it seems apparent there are issues surrounding parental leave and parental expectations. The majority of people who work for us are parent age women. We have a fantastic retention rate for staff because we offer good flexibility that parents typically like. The business has to be flexible if it didnt then we would struggle a lot more accommodating the at least 10% of the workforce that are constantly on parenting leave (its maternity leave really, we had one guy take a few days off and the reason for that was because he was under the impression blokes didnt get paid for time off after a child!!). Were almost certainly at a big loss financially when it comes to new staff falling pregnant and ultimately never returning. The justification excluding it being a legal requirement is that it makes those who do stay more committed and better employees so there is no issue with us employing pregnant age women, if we didnt wed struggle to employ people.

    Out of everyone i know who has got pregnant recently (im early 30's and babies are flyingout everywhere) only one woman earned less than their OH yet every single one took the full SMP. It appears to be an unwritten rule that isnt discrimination?!



    To the OP with regards to your question you should be able to start trying now. I dont really know how it works with conception date and or date of first expected period and so on so maybe leave it a few weeks to be sure. With it being a mechanics and a likelihood of little experience in the matter allow them a bit of flexibility in handling it/getting up to speed. just ensure you know what youre entitled to and ensure you get it. Good luck on the conceptioning!
    Don't be angry!
    • dirty_magic
    • By dirty_magic 13th Dec 18, 8:25 PM
    • 1,088 Posts
    • 1,871 Thanks
    dirty_magic
    Employers claim back 92% of SMP payments. Very small businesses can claim back 103%. If the company chooses to pay an enhanced package that's up to them.

    I'm not denying that it happens but I think the real reason some companies are put off employing women is because many want to return part time and they become more unreliable as it's usually women who do the lions share of childcare.

    I do think equality is a long way off because the mindset of society would need to change and we're not there yet.

    Most women do want to take maternity leave to spend time with their baby even if they are the higher earner. There's a reason take-up of shared parental leave is estimated to be as low as 2%.
    • Savvy_Sue
    • By Savvy_Sue 14th Dec 18, 2:26 AM
    • 39,390 Posts
    • 36,391 Thanks
    Savvy_Sue
    I understand the position of the OP and would probably be asking the same question if I was in her position but I wish people would see that this sort of situation is why some employers are put off employing women in the first place.
    Originally posted by gettingtheresometime
    I'm still on the fence with regards to maternity vs parental leave (and the role of business in supporting the personal choices of their employees)
    Originally posted by Comms69
    But at least you are aware that both men and women are legally entitled to PAID time off from their employment following the birth of a child.

    I know it's going to take a while before many men take advantage of this, but who will employers employ then?
    Still knitting!
    Completed: 1 adult cardigan, 3 baby jumpers, 3 shawls, 1 sweat band, 3 pairs baby bootees,
    1 Wise Man Knitivity figure + 1 sheep, 2 pairs socks, 2 hats, 2 balaclavas for seamen, 1 balaclava for myself, multiple poppies, 3 peony flowers, 4 butterflies ...
    Current projects: ready to decrease / decreasing on all parts of the mohair cardigan pattern! but moved onto wrist warmers for friends at Christmas ...
    • Kynthia
    • By Kynthia 14th Dec 18, 10:50 AM
    • 5,419 Posts
    • 7,587 Thanks
    Kynthia
    But you can't have the same, you're having a baby.



    Men are free for promotions etc. this is true, however this allows extra provisioning for the baby too.



    You see, many are obsessed with equality of outcome at the moment...this can't happen. Men and women compliment each other, one is freed up to do the caring (usually the women as women are programmed to be more maternal and have a way more caring nature than men). One parent can then provision (men are porgrammed to provision) knowing that the role of caring is fufilled. It's yin and yang. Complimentary.


    By having a baby you are effectively giving up the provisioning role yourself, which is usually fine as the slack is taken up the partner (most of the time the man).



    You need to think about it without the lense of "I want the same"...you can't, it doesn't work that way, it's been the same for millions of years across many cultures and many species. You're having a baby, it changes your life, you can't have your cake and eat it and if you try to, people suffer as a consequence.
    Originally posted by andydownes123
    Not wanting to be discriminated against is not "having your cake and eating it". Also your views about gender are very outdated. Assuming women are programmed to be more caring than men. We are all individuals and you do men a disservice.

    You also seem to assume every pregnant woman is being financially supported by a man so it's okay to not pay her well. What about those who are single, were abandoned or their partner earns less or is disabled? There are probably many other scenarios that don't fit your assumptions of the happy traditional couple with the male provider and the little woman happy to stay at home. It's because of people like you the law was changed to to make pregnancy a protected characteristic.
    Don't listen to me, I'm no expert!
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 14th Dec 18, 11:17 AM
    • 6,491 Posts
    • 6,905 Thanks
    Comms69
    Not wanting to be discriminated against is not "having your cake and eating it". Also your views about gender are very outdated. Assuming women are programmed to be more caring than men. We are all individuals and you do men a disservice. - studies have shown this to be broadly true. Even as babies and toddlers gender react very differently to stimulus. That aside I do agree we are all individuals, and therefore there are lots of exceptions to this. For example men are generally more assertive and aggressive; but obviously that is a sliding scale.

    You also seem to assume every pregnant woman is being financially supported by a man so it's okay to not pay her well. - well two points. 1. whether the partner is male or female isn't the issue. But broadly, yes if you have a child, then you should do so with someone who will support you. 2. Or accept that you will have a financial impact on your income and outgoings as a result of this choice. What about those who are single - don't have a child? , were abandoned - pick a better partner? or their partner earns less - wait to have a child? or is disabled - plan finances accordingly? There are probably many other scenarios that don't fit your assumptions of the happy traditional couple - i'm sure there are, that is no excuse to expect society and your employer to support your personal choices. with the male provider and the little woman happy to stay at home. - whatever works for the people in question, as long as it doesn't impact on others It's because of people like you the law was changed to to make pregnancy a protected characteristic.
    Originally posted by Kynthia


    Don't have an issue with pregnancy being a protected characteristic. (I don't see anywhere where Andy has said anything about that either).


    That doesn't mean that the law shouldn't be discussed, debated and potentially changed.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,920Posts Today

7,457Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LaraLewington: Inappropriate kisses, uncharacteristic formality, or simple nonsense. I'm stumped, how do you sign off work e-mails? Eve?

  • RT @BBCPolitics: "This is what annoys people. You're not answering!" Sparks (and papers) fly as @MartinSLewis challenges minister Chris Sk?

  • RT @Mattallwright: Spot on. I also hate train toilet seats that try and make me laugh. It's the same joke every journey. https://t.co/b1Tj4?

  • Follow Martin