Time off for husband during pregnancy?

nesf

The big issues are mostly with small firms where even one person missing puts a huge burden on the rest of the workers whether or not it is paid leave. There i quite reasonable problems on the employer's side here with granting a lot of paternity leave (paid especially) and this clashes with the parent's quite reasonable right to paternity leave. If you make it too employee focussed then you're just going to create a lot of problems on the company side of things and vice versa.

Implementing a blanket 3-4 weeks of paid leave for fathers after birth would be a pretty bad thing for the small firms sector. You could create incentives to grant such leave with the government subsidising X amount of the employees wage lessening the burden on the employer or something but expecting a small 10-20 person firm to be able to provide more than 1 or 2 weeks paid leave without suffering for it simply indicates how little you know about the sector works.

RainyDay wrote:

So what's the huge problem with expecting Dad to take some time out of (minimum 3 weeks paid) annual leave after the birth?

There is none really but a lot of people don't believe in the reality of the free lunch issue. I'd love there to be 12 or 14 weeks paid paternity leave but it simply isn't viable outside of high tax economics (Sweden et al).

Saving up holidays so you can take them after the birth is both reasonable and generally a good idea. Taking half days, again from annual leave, for check-ups etc is again reasonable.

Shelli

I don't think anyone expects the employer to bear the brunt of paying the father while he's on paternity leave, the government should make provisions for this, the same as they do for maternity leave. I certainly don't think 1 or 2 weeks paternity pay, (at the same rate as maternity pay) is asking for too much. Last year the max maternity pay you could be entitled to was €285 per week, are you telling me that the budget couldn't stretch to this for a week for fathers?

Kashkai

Shelli wrote:

I don't think anyone expects the employer to bear the brunt of paying the father while he's on paternity leave, the government should make provisions for this, the same as they do for maternity leave. I certainly don't think 1 or 2 weeks paternity pay, (at the same rate as maternity pay) is asking for too much. Last year the max maternity pay you could be entitled to was €285 per week, are you telling me that the budget couldn't stretch to this for a week for fathers?[/QUOT

Afraid the Exchequer couldn't stretch to this as the available funds are being used to buy the election, pay expenses to our TD's, Senators, Councillors etc. Wasting money paying a father to look after his wife and newborn just wouldn't do I'm afraid tut, tut:rolleyes:

I took all my annual leave and then 4 weeks UNPAID parental leave after my wife had our twins by c section. She was so sore for the first 3 weeks that there was no way she could have managed to look after our babies by herself. Of course when I went back to work, there were a few snide comments about how I was "missing for 2 months" to which I replied, that I was in the office everyday for the previous 9 months as I hadn't taken leave. I pointed out that each one of the smartarses making their comments about me where "missing" when they were on the lash in the canaries, on a cruise, too drunk to turn up for work on a Monday morning etc.

I probably don't need to point out that the eejits making the comments are either childless or belong to a generation who believed that babies should be looked after by their mother while man the hairy hunter goes to the pub after work with the lads.

I'll be taking a couple of months UNPAID leave shortly to look after my kids before my wife gives up work in June. We are in the situation whereby paying €600 a week for childcare just doesn't make it worthwhile for my wife to go to work. Getting by on the one wage however is going to be extremely tight and each mortgage interest rate rise is going to hurt. Not that this matters to the government who firmly believe that we are all doing wonderfully. If you hear reports of verbal abuse of FF and PD candidates in Kildare, you'll know where it came from:mad: .

Tazz T

RainyDay wrote:

I've seen parental leave used by many, many fathers in my last employer (hi-tech multi-national), include a couple of staff at Director-level. But this stuff about being 'looked upon very unfavourable' is a bad joke. If you're not prepared to stand up for your rights, you can't expect the state to step and offer even more leave (which presumably would be looked on just as unfavourably.

In a hi-tech multi national but in a small firm of 15 people with a high staff turnover (ie, people get fired on the spot for not performing) that simply isn't an option.

RainyDay wrote:

I've been through difficult times, including coping with my partner's 20 nights in Holles St prior to giving birth, and our baby's 25 days in neo-natal intensive care after the birth. So hope down off the high horse and let's get back to the discussion.

Then you should understand the need of paternal leave or did you spend all that time at work?

RainyDay wrote:

I guess I must have missed the announcement of your appointment as spokesperson for society at large.

I guess you did. As a member of society I have a voice.

Re your creche comment, Prosperous Dave answered that. But since you asked, my partner gave up work as it's uneconomical once the creche costs are taken into consideration. Believe me, it isn't easy on one wage.

I enjoy (and agree with) the majority of your contributions to the threads on Boards, Rainy Day, so, as a parent, I find it difficult to fathom why you're so anti-paternal leave.

nesf

Tazz T wrote:

I enjoy (and agree with) the majority of your contributions to the threads on Boards, Rainy Day, so, as a parent, I find it difficult to fathom why you're so anti-paternal leave.

Eh, he isn't against it. What thread have you been reading?

Tazz T

The thread that I'm reading is the one I'm debating the case for paternal leave while Rainy Day is suggesting, rather than paternal leave, one should save up their holidays to take time off when the child is born in order to save the economy.

CJhaughey

My wife just had a little baby girl last saturday and I have saved my annual leave in order to care for a) my wife and b) my 2 yrs old son.
I don't feel that I should have had to use leave when the rest of Europe has a statutory entitlement to it, I know that small firms have a tough time of it but look at the big picture, children are the foundation of the state, without new people coming onstream a country will wither and die examples of this kind of social engineering are Italy and Japan.
This Government needs to be beaten with the fact and you can bet that I will be pointing this out to the local politicians when the come a-calling during the election lead up.

RainyDay

BostonB wrote:

I never seen many fathers take it. Though I've taken it when a child was sick. Its not about right. Often theres a culture in a office/company that discourages people from taking there entitlements. It depends on where you work, basically.

Tazz T wrote:

In a hi-tech multi national but in a small firm of 15 people with a high staff turnover (ie, people get fired on the spot for not performing) that simply isn't an option.

You can't be fired for taking parental leave. You have the choice of standing up for yourself and changing the culture. This won't be easy, but it is possible. I'm sure mothers found the same culture when maternity leave was brought in, but they had the balls to make a stand.

Prosperous Dave wrote:

I probably don't need to point out that the eejits making the comments are either childless or belong to a generation who believed that babies should be looked after by their mother while man the hairy hunter goes to the pub after work with the lads.

You might find that we have a more productive discussion here if you focus on the debate, rather than slagging off contributors to the debate. And for the record, you are wrong on both counts.

Tazz T wrote:

I guess you did. As a member of society I have a voice.

It wasn't your voice I was referring to. It was your apparant ability to decide what is 'anti-societal' yourself, without any reference to the rest of us. You don't have a monopoly on wisdom or opinion.

Shelli wrote:

I don't think anyone expects the employer to bear the brunt of paying the father while he's on paternity leave, the government should make provisions for this, the same as they do for maternity leave. I certainly don't think 1 or 2 weeks paternity pay, (at the same rate as maternity pay) is asking for too much. Last year the max maternity pay you could be entitled to was €285 per week, are you telling me that the budget couldn't stretch to this for a week for fathers?

If we still have about 50k births per annum, the cost of this would be somewhere in the region of €14 million. Would you like to suggest where this €14 million can be taken out of this year's budget, or should we be raising taxes or borrowing to fund this proposal?

squire1

RainyDay wrote:

Would you like to suggest where this €14 million can be taken out of this year's budget, or should we be raising taxes or borrowing to fund this proposal?

That is less than 0.008% of the recent "announcment" that was made for the plan of spending €182,000,000,000 on "infrastructure". Seems to me a small price to pay for the increase in standard of living it would bring.

Shelli

RainyDay wrote:

You might find that we have a more productive discussion here if you focus on the debate, rather than slagging off contributors to the debate. And for the record, you are wrong on both counts.

I think he was refering to the people he worked with making snide comments when he returned to work after unpaid leave, and how he dealt with it, relevant to this discussion in my opinion.

RainyDay wrote:

If we still have about 50k births per annum, the cost of this would be somewhere in the region of €14 million. Would you like to suggest where this €14 million can be taken out of this year's budget, or should we be raising taxes or borrowing to fund this proposal.

And as for the 50k births in Ireland each year, how many of the fathers are in full time employment? How many of the fathers are even around? If you take these and other factors into consideration i'm sure the bill would be much less.
How much tax is payed matenity leave costing us? Should we cut that to save people tax?
There is no doubt in my mind that our government could afford to pay fathers at least one weeks paternity leave, and if they still claim to not be able to afford it, and people like you grumble about paying the extra few cent a week in tax to give fathers some rights and entitlements, then there is still a way around this.......give the mother the option of giving a week or two of her leave to the father.

Tazz T

RainyDay wrote:

It wasn't your voice I was referring to. It was your apparant ability to decide what is 'anti-societal' yourself, without any reference to the rest of us. You don't have a monopoly on wisdom or opinion.

I'm not deciding what is 'anti-societal' - the rest of Europe has already done that by making paternal leave national policy. Which means I certainly don't have the monopoly on wisdom either. The decision-makers in our government seem to have got the monopoly on ignorance though.

RainyDay wrote:

If we still have about 50k births per annum, the cost of this would be somewhere in the region of €14 million. Would you like to suggest where this €14 million can be taken out of this year's budget, or should we be raising taxes or borrowing to fund this proposal?

Lest we forget the bad old days of unemployment when there was always someone there to look after the family - we didn't have the people in work to provide the taxes for paternal leave or childcare - we didn't need it. We do now and we need it now. It's not a matter of saying where the 14 million should be taken from. It's already there as a result of people deciding to leave the children in creches and go to work instead. Lets not also forget that the economy is being badly affected by working mothers leaving the workplace to look after the children because it's uneconomical to put those children in creches. If it wasn't for immigration, these jobs would not be filled.

The fact is the money's there because we're all working more rather than spending more time with our familes - the government's simply using the cash for other purposes, some of which are quite questionable, as has been suggested earlier in the thread.

Kashkai

Rainy Day,

I was referring to the self absorbed morons I work with when I made the comment about them not understanding my predicament because they either don't have kids or have old fashioned attitudes towards childcare.

Its been said before in this thread, but our kids are this country's future. If the prohibitative cost of childcare results in people putting off/deciding not to have kids, then where do we go. We are already facing into a "pensions timebomb" in 20 years or so when the cost of maintaining an elderly population will fall onto fewer and fewer taxpayers.

In an ideal world, i.e. not Ireland Inc., fathers should get as a minimum 2 weeks paid paterity leave to look after mother and child. I resent having to use my annual leave as this means I don't have any more time to take off during the year if mother/child is sick or if we can afford to go on a holiday.

Finally, there's so much talk about how well this country is doing, but why does everyone look so bloody stressed out and is it a good thing to see infants in car seats commuting into Dublin at 6.30 - 7.00 am? There's something seriously wrong with this.

Tazz T

Indeed there is Dave. We're turning them into commuters way before their time.

Part of the point I'm making is that the reason we work is for our families and if we never see them (i know a few fathers who leave before their child wakes and returns when they're asleep, seeing them only at the weekends), then what's the point (apart from the obvious - paying the bills).

It's the old work/life balance thing. We've lost sight of why we do what we do. It's not so the Ireland's financial benefit, it's for us and our families.

Getting a bit away from the debate so I'll shut up.

RainyDay

Apologies to Prosperous Dave for misinterpreting his comments.

Suggesting that current expenditure (which will be repeated every year) such as paternity leave costs should be covered out of a once-off infrastructure budget shows a fundamental misunderstanding of government budgeting.

It is interesting to note that no-one has any sensible, specific suggestions as to how this cost could be funded.

squire1

RainyDay wrote:

Suggesting that current expenditure (which will be repeated every year) such as paternity leave costs should be covered out of a once-off infrastructure budget shows a fundamental misunderstanding of government budgeting.

Maybe this is aimed at me, I'm not too sure. It was not a "misunderstanding of government budgeting" (I'd actually call it electioneering propagand myself, but there you go) on my part. I was trying to simplify an example of cost/benefit analysis. If you dont fully understand this concept any basic economic text book will give you a better explination.

Do you really believe that your quoted figure of 14Million is a significant figure in modern national economic terms? This was the point which seems to have passed you by. Sorry if I didn't make my point clear enough for you.

Shelli

I suggest more tax, as I'm sure the bill would be much less than your over-view of €14million. It surely couldn't be that much of increase spread over the full working population.

Also, I don't know of one mother who would have a problem giving her partner 1 or 2 wks out of her maternity leave, most don't even use their full entitlement of 26wks, and even if they do they have their annual leave aswell. And in many circumstances, such as my own, as my maternity leave covers 2 years (Mid July 07 - mid Feb 08), I will have both years annual leave at my disposal, a total of 8 wks. Only a few days of which I will take before my maternity leave.

There are surely many ways of giving paid paternity leave, and many other countries can manage it quite well.

I don't pretend to understand the full ins and outs of the government budget, but I fail to see how it is not possible in some way.

BostonB

RainyDay wrote:

Apologies to Prosperous Dave for misinterpreting his comments.

Suggesting that current expenditure (which will be repeated every year) such as paternity leave costs should be covered out of a once-off infrastructure budget shows a fundamental misunderstanding of government budgeting.

It is interesting to note that no-one has any sensible, specific suggestions as to how this cost could be funded.

The money (billion-ish) thats wasted on decentralisation and the increases in expenses and operating costs caused by it. I'm sure if you poked around you'd find the money easy enough.

BostonB

RainyDay wrote:

You can't be fired for taking parental leave. You have the choice of standing up for yourself and changing the culture. This won't be easy, but it is possible. I'm sure mothers found the same culture when maternity leave was brought in, but they had the balls to make a stand....

All very noble. Apart from the difficulty at work in taking it, some people can't afford to take it. Nobility won't pay the bills.

Tazz T

Did we not have a huge surplus this year from record numbers of people contributing to the economy?

Or, how about taking it out of the massive increases in stamp duty revenue from increasing house prices (from people buying homes for new family members). Failing that, increase corporation tax/tax the employers - they're benefiting from people working for them rather then staying at home looking after their children.

What's better for the economy - more people staying at home to care for the nation's children, or letting father's have a couple of extra weeks leave (something that isn't going to happen more than a few time during one's entire working life) when they have a child?

I spend more days than that dossing at work each year

RainyDay

So let's say for the sake of arguement that the Govt can find a spare €14 million down behind the couch. Are we really sure that top priority area for spending would be paternity leave for Dads, given that many hospitals are cancelling vital operations due to a lack of intensive care beds?

Is keeping people alive less important that a couple of weeks off work for Dads?

Kashkai

€14 million is a tiny drop in the ocean when it comes to the nation's finances - €52 million was wasted on the e-voting machines, €35 million on the Dept Health's PPARS payroll package, millions more have been thrown away on the Tribunals. Need I go on???

At the risk of setting myself up as a hate figure, I work in the Civil Service :eek: and I have seen taxpayer's money thrown away on frivilous projects, consultant's reports, committees that talk a lot but do nothing substantial etc etc. In my own current position, I have come across disgraceful wastes of money by local authorities that are recouped in full by the Exchequer. When I tried to put a stop to this, I was told that I shouldn't cause waves as the local TD would call the Minister and complain that the funding for a particular project had been cut off. The Minister would then call my boss who wouldn't appreciate the tongue lashing and then I'd get it in the ear (which I may add wouldn't bother me) but the end effect is that the tap would be turned back on and the tax euros would be pissed away down the drain.

This is all off topic I know but it proves the point that if this government (and any other government for that matter) can throw your tax money away on worthless exercises, then they can surely fund 2 weeks off for father's to look after their wives and children.

Tazz T

RainyDay wrote:

Is keeping people alive less important that a couple of weeks off work for Dads?

In all fairness, you could say that about anything, ie, Is keeping people alive more important than street lighting?

Yes, the health system needs improving but that's a another debate. The country's richer than it ever was and the government's pissing it up the wall. We're just saying piss 14 mill in the direction of paternal leave to improve the quality of life for families. When it comes down to basics, it's just the right thing to do.

C'mon, Rainy Day, wouldn't two weeks leave for the birth of your next child put a smile on your face and that of your partner and make things just a little easier. You know you want it.

RainyDay

Prosperous Dave wrote:

€14 million is a tiny drop in the ocean when it comes to the nation's finances - €52 million was wasted on the e-voting machines, €35 million on the Dept Health's PPARS payroll package, millions more have been thrown away on the Tribunals. Need I go on???

I share your concerns about waste, but you are looking back instead of looking forward. Look forward at this year's budget, and tell us which €14 million spend you would cut as being less important than extra leave for Dads?

Tazz T wrote:

In all fairness, you could say that about anything, ie, Is keeping people alive more important than street lighting?

True, but you're not suggesting an extra €14 million spend on street lighting. The reality of budget planning for the Government (and indeed for any budget holder) is that you have to prioritise your spending. The discussion here hasn't really taken to heart the fact that something else will have to be shelved in order to facilitate this spend.

Tazz T wrote:

C'mon, Rainy Day, wouldn't two weeks leave for the birth of your next child put a smile on your face and that of your partner and make things just a little easier. You know you want it.

2 weeks leave is indeed a nice idea, but it really would be fairly low down the list of priority areas for spending IMHO.

Kashkai

RainyDay wrote:

I share your concerns about waste, but you are looking back instead of looking forward. Look forward at this year's budget, and tell us which €14 million spend you would cut as being less important than extra leave for Dads?

How about rowing back on the cut in the top rate of tax (election gimmick or wha'?) and use this money to fund paternity leave, special needs teachers, intensive care units for premature babies etc. I benefitted from the cut in tax but I'd give it back if it went towards some form of childcare, i.e. any of the above. My wife and I are probably past the point of having more kids but I'd always support extra care for parents/parents to be as I've learned that as soon as your wife and child are discharged from the hospital following the birth, you're pretty much on your own as far as the State is concerned.

RainyDay

Prosperous Dave wrote:

How about rowing back on the cut in the top rate of tax (election gimmick or wha'?) and use this money to fund paternity leave, special needs teachers, intensive care units for premature babies etc. I benefitted from the cut in tax but I'd give it back if it went towards some form of childcare, i.e. any of the above. My wife and I are probably past the point of having more kids but I'd always support extra care for parents/parents to be as I've learned that as soon as your wife and child are discharged from the hospital following the birth, you're pretty much on your own as far as the State is concerned.

As it happens, I wouldn't hugely disagree with your suggestions, but every opinion poll and focus group indicates that increased taxes is a huge no-no for the majority of Irish voters, so I don't think this is going to happen.

Crea

How about the next time the Govt plan to increase maternity leave they give it instead to the Dads? Therefore it wouldn't cost a huge amount more money.
I don't know how'd they'd regulate against the dads who didn't have anything to do with the mums or babs. Maybe the mums could assign who they wanted to give the leave to ie: a sibling, parent, friend who would help out if the dad wasn't around.