Labour to double paternity leave

[Questions]

I took 2 days off each with my three kids.
Self employment does that to you.

Then again not everyone has good in-laws to help I suppose.

 

[Garage_Doors]

Please don't ever go into business employing people. You seem to know **** all about employment law. As has been pointed out....it's ALL already in place.

Yes fully aware of that, at an already rate of pay.
Labour want to double the monetary remuneration for this period.
Now back to the question in hand, who are they expecting to fund this additional expenditure.

 

[Nibble]

I really would not hold your breath.

Nor would I, the election's months away, I can only manage about a minute.

 

[seagull_in_malaysia]

This is the sort of policy that has led to the collapse of the Swedish and Danish economies.
(Per capita income, 2012, dollars PPP)

Thank God you don't have to live in one of those Socialist hellholes.

9	Sweden	42,865
10	Denmark	42,787
16	France	36,933
—	OECD average	36,847[SUP]e[/SUP]
17	United Kingdom	35,671

Where is Qatar on that list? I wonder what their policy is

 

[jackanada]

Nothing I said was incorrect. However 2014 was the last year of Single Farm Payment in present form...Farmers are now having to register for new scheme starting 2015. More legislation..All farmers have to now grow three different crops...on each area farmed..We still don`t know exactly what we have to do... And yes I`m a Farmer!!

Ah well fair enough then, I await the information as to whether large landowners will again be exempt from legislation. Please put 'Get Orff Moy Laaand' into the odd post to remind peolple you are a farmer.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

I took 2 days off each with my three kids.
Self employment does that to you.

Indeed it does.
There are two categories...the self-employed and the rest.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

By the way, all this speculation about Labour is a waste of time. They ain't gonna win. That was decided many moons ago by an accident of birth in North London.

 

[Biscuit Barrel]

If Germany's economy and society can somehow thrive on giving parents even better terms than what is being proposed I'm damn sure the UK can find a way.

I don't think we need a better way. I am talking as a dad and an employee. When my children were born I could afford to take the two weeks paternity leave off work with only the statutory paternity pay. If I could not have afforded it I would simply have taken it as holiday. I am a sales rep and I do not get paid any commission when I am not at work, so have the two weeks paternity leave did cost me a lot of money in lost earnings, but it was my choice. It would be nice to have a month off work on full pay when a child is born, but it is just not workable and over spending by the last Labour government is one of the reasons the recession was as bad as it was.

 

[soistes]

As an employer, I think this is a good idea. I would have liked to be able to spend more time with my kids when they were very young, and I'm glad that a younger generation of working fathers may be able to.

From a wider social perspective, increasing paternal involvement with young children can only be a good thing, and we all benefit from that in the long-term, including businesses and employers, so this "who's going to pay for it?" argument is pretty weak in my view.

Incidentally, as an employer of a workforce, 3/4 of whom are female, my experience is that the "costs" of good maternity leave, of offering flexibility in working time to working mothers etc, are hugely outweighed by the benefits in terms of commitment to the organisation, and of retaining good, skilled employees etc.

Ironically, extending some of these provisions to fathers might actually end up saving costs for employers like me, if some of the male partners of my staff are now able to start pulling their weight in terms of parental leave, and then when the kids get older, doing some of the childcare etc. At the moment, given that it's the women that seem to do it all the time, employers of mainly male workforces get off relatively lightly in making their contribution to society in this way.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

As an employer, I think this is a good idea. I would have liked to be able to spend more time with my kids when they were very young, and I'm glad that a younger generation of working fathers may be able to.

From a wider social perspective, increasing paternal involvement with young children can only be a good thing, and we all benefit from that in the long-term, including businesses and employers, so this "who's going to pay for it?" argument is pretty weak in my view.

Incidentally, as an employer of a workforce, 3/4 of whom are female, my experience is that the "costs" of good maternity leave, of offering flexibility in working time to working mothers etc, are hugely outweighed by the benefits in terms of commitment to the organisation, and of retaining good, skilled employees etc.

Ironically, extending some of these provisions to fathers might actually end up saving costs for employers like me, if some of the male partners of my staff are now able to start pulling their weight in terms of parental leave, and then when the kids get older, doing some of the childcare etc. At the moment, given that it's the women that seem to do it all the time, employers of mainly male workforces get off relatively lightly in making their contribution to society in this way.

Far too sensible for NSC.

The antithesis of a "Considerably more money than yow/George Integrity Whitebread" hybrid I heard on the radio yesterday saying that if one of his employees can be off for 4 weeks on Paternity Leave then the bloke is obviously not needed and won't have a job for long afterwards...

 

[Soulman]

I suppose if you are on the cards and get 4/5 weeks holiday and 9 months to put a few bob away for a baby that you chose to have, then you could you use part of the paid hols to be there. Presumably looking at some replies the new baby arrival would mean that the cost of a holiday would be out of the question

 

[The Camel]

This thread is so funny.

Tory supporters claiming it is bad idea and proposed purely to try and win votes.

If Cameron had come up with the plan, they would have loved it.

I don't really care who wins the next election - I don't think any party can change the course this country is headed, but ideas like this at least will ease the pain a little bit.

Frankly it's a much better spend of tax payers money than giving OAPs an interest rate boost on their savings.

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

Yes fully aware of that, at an already rate of pay.
Labour want to double the monetary remuneration for this period.
Now back to the question in hand, who are they expecting to fund this additional expenditure.

The increase brings it in line with minimum wage (40 hours a week at £6.50). Also this allowance is taxed for most people so it isn't going to be £260 in most cases.

 

[MattBackHome]

As an employer, I think this is a good idea. I would have liked to be able to spend more time with my kids when they were very young, and I'm glad that a younger generation of working fathers may be able to.

From a wider social perspective, increasing paternal involvement with young children can only be a good thing, and we all benefit from that in the long-term, including businesses and employers, so this "who's going to pay for it?" argument is pretty weak in my view.

Incidentally, as an employer of a workforce, 3/4 of whom are female, my experience is that the "costs" of good maternity leave, of offering flexibility in working time to working mothers etc, are hugely outweighed by the benefits in terms of commitment to the organisation, and of retaining good, skilled employees etc.

Ironically, extending some of these provisions to fathers might actually end up saving costs for employers like me, if some of the male partners of my staff are now able to start pulling their weight in terms of parental leave, and then when the kids get older, doing some of the childcare etc. At the moment, given that it's the women that seem to do it all the time, employers of mainly male workforces get off relatively lightly in making their contribution to society in this way.

Agreed - and I'd go further to say that I reckon you have to be either blindly partizan or a total fool to say otherwise.

 

[rippleman]

In a micro business, it is extremely difficult to plan for, and manage, a scenario where one of your few employees is absent for periods over and above the annual leave entitlement.

It means the remaining employees have to take on the additional burden of the absent employee's work, creating more pressure and stress on the remaining workforce. Whilst the response will be "pay them more money then", money won't always compensate for the adverse impact of the employees having to work longer hours / evenings / weekends and impacting on their home / work balance.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Tory supporters claiming it is bad idea and proposed purely to try and win votes.
If Cameron had come up with the plan, they would have loved it.

You've made an incorrect assumption that peoples lack of support or otherwise for this policy is based on their party alleigence.

 

[clippedgull]

4% interest on the bonds funded by the 'hardworking taxpayer', although the cost of this has yet to be mentioned by Osborne

On the Andrew Marr show on Sunday, Osborne squirmed around a bit but when pressed eventually said it would cost 'several hundred million pounds'

 

[looney]

It's actually just as much (if not more) for the father than for the baby. By having close contact with their newborn they form a bond that lasts for life. Fathers also experience significant hormonal changes.

Not only that, but the mother is likely to need quite a bit of support in the first few weeks, for a number of reasons (difficult births, post natal depression, first child, looking after other kids, etc.)



That's a very short-termist view. Having happy fathers and children = better more productive work = stronger economy.

It has nothing to do with fathers or babies. Its part of the feminist career agenda and that women fall behind by bailing out the labour market to care for kids so its about nobling men.

I mean if it was about fathers how about some equal rights? Equal right to know(paternity), equal right to choose(abortion) and equal custody.


Now you may well be right in what you say about modern men in the modern world needing a greater choice to care for their brats and TBH I would happy to agree with you. In turn you should be honest about what is driving the agenda and what the underlying issues really are.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

The first 6 months of a babies life is shithouse. Being woken in the middle of the night, mopping up shit and piss and constant crying if they have colic. I was pleased to go back to work.

You need more time off when they are at school age and fun to be around not the nursing stage.