Paid paternity leave mooted

Seriously?

keane2097 wrote: »

The first is that men be granted paid leave for the first two weeks after their child is born. This is nothing to do with the woman.

We're on the same page here.

keane2097 wrote: »

The second is to do with the leave the woman is currently granted after the compulsory period. At the moment, only the woman can take that. The minister is proposing that the couple may decide to share it, with the woman - whose leave it is full stop at the moment - being the one to make the final decision.

It doesn't seem like a terribly sexist thing to allow a woman to decide whether to share her own leave or not.

Seems totally sexist if its meant to be "shared leave", that's not a group decision that's the womans decision.

Better to have one block assigned at the start for the mother and then a block available later divided equally between them.

newport2

Seriously? wrote: »

Better to have one block assigned at the start for the mother and then a block available later divided equally between them.

Exactly. One block for mother to recover. One block to be shared equally between parents to spend time with new child. Who could argue with that?

keane2097

Seriously? wrote: »

Seems totally sexist if its meant to be "shared leave", that's not a group decision that's the womans decision.

Better to have one block assigned at the start for the mother and then a block available later divided equally between them.

We're not a million miles apart really. The difference I think is you're looking at this from a blank slate perspective, I'm looking at it with the current situation in mind (also why we're arguing a bit over the value of incremental improvements).

At the moment, there is no "shared" leave, there's simply woman's leave. The proposal on the table is that the woman will be allowed to share her leave with the man. You can see the slight but important distinction between this and notionally shared leave.

The man's leave is the two weeks at the start, the woman's leave is what it always has been, the woman can now share her leave with the man if she decides.

I would agree that a fully shared set up would be an improvement on the suggestion here, but would feel that this is a reasonably positive change in the short term.

As an aside:

This is a situation where every change improves the lot of the man. The only person who can possibly lose out here is the woman who doesn't want to give up any of her leave. While the lot of the man isn't improved as much as it could be, I find it hard to see how any move in which the man wins every way can be anything but pro-man?

pwurple

newport2 wrote: »

Exactly. One block for mother to recover. One block to be shared equally between parents to spend time with new child. Who could argue with that?

I could.
Why can't the father take his time at the start as well?

Why can't the father or the mother take ALL of the second block? Say if the father is unemployed for example... And the mothers employer doesn't pay mat leave, so she is on the maternity social welfare payment too. Why can't the mother go back to work when she is recovered, and the father become the stay at home parent on the rest of all the leave.


It needs to be completely flexible. Otherwise you end up penalising someone, somewhere.

Seriously?

keane2097 wrote: »

We're not a million miles apart really. The difference I think is you're looking at this from a blank slate perspective, I'm looking at it with the current situation in mind (also why we're arguing a bit over the value of incremental improvements).

Yeah, my views are more aspirational, the proposed changes are great.
I just believe they should go further since I believe they can, it's a little too status quo in my view.

fits

In Nordic countries, the man has to take two months in order for woman to take her maximum amount. Paternity leave simply wasn't being taken until they introduced this measure.

newport2

pwurple wrote: »

I could.
Why can't the father take his time at the start as well?

He could. I mean say x months to mother to recover, and y months to each parent as time with child. No reason the father couldn't take his at start.

pwurple wrote: »

Why can't the father or the mother take ALL of the second block? Say if the father is unemployed for example... And the mothers employer doesn't pay mat leave, so she is on the maternity social welfare payment too. Why can't the mother go back to work when she is recovered, and the father become the stay at home parent on the rest of all the leave.


It needs to be completely flexible. Otherwise you end up penalising someone, somewhere.

Makes sense, but my issue with this is that I don't think anything would change. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it's totally flexible then I believe mothers would continue to take the leave as if it's just maternity leave. I think there needs to be paternity leave given to the father to take societal pressures/expectations out of the equation.

jester77

Here it is standard that the men will take 2 months and the women 12 months, although the time can be split up evenly if so desired. You get around 70% of your salary during this time. Most men tend to wait until around months 10-12 to take the time off and take just 2 or 3 weeks of normal vacation around the time of the birth. You have to take the paternity time in blocks of 4 weeks, and 4 weeks is not of much help at the beginning, especially when you have a nurse calling out regularly during the first month.

kunst nugget

newport2 wrote: »

He could. I mean say x months to mother to recover, and y months to each parent as time with child. No reason the father couldn't take his at start.

Makes sense, but my issue with this is that I don't think anything would change. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it's totally flexible then I believe mothers would continue to take the leave as if it's just maternity leave. I think there needs to be paternity leave given to the father to take societal pressures/expectations out of the equation.

If we substitute a few terms, is this not essentially the same argument for legislating for quotas which most people on this forum would be opposed to?

Maybe I'm wrong, but if it's totally flexible then I believe men would continue to get the top jobs as normal. I think there needs to be top jobs given to women to take societal pressures/glass ceilings out of the equation.

newport2

kunst nugget wrote: »

If we substitute a few terms, is this not essentially the same argument for legislating for quotas which most people on this forum would be opposed to?

No.

I'm saying maternity leave should be broken into two parts, one for the mother to recover and the second to be divided equally among both parent to spend time with their child.

A closer analogy to quotas would be that 50% of parental leave across the country MUST be taken by men. So if there was currently 10,000 adults going on parental leave, then after 5,000 women went on leave, the rest would be refused and it would only be available to men, irregardless of which parent is available or most suited to giving the time.

kunst nugget

newport2 wrote: »

No.

I'm saying maternity leave should be broken into two parts, one for the mother to recover and the second to be divided equally among both parent to spend time with their child.

A closer analogy to quotas would be that 50% of parental leave across the country MUST be taken by men. So if there was currently 10,000 adults going on parental leave, then after 5,000 women went on leave, the rest would be refused and it would only be available to men, irregardless of which parent is available or most suited to giving the time.

Quotas don't work by saying there are 10,000 men in the workforce. They next 5,000 hired must be women. They say that 30% of your company must be made up of women, just like you saying 30% of parental leave must be taken by men.

In essence you're saying that I, as a father would have to take time off even if I wanted to give the time to my partner to extend her leave? Your forcing us as a couple to adopt an approach to childcare whether we find it suitable or not. How is that different to imposing quotas on a company whether they are suitable for the business model or not?

mariaalice

I think it would take whole change of culture for this to work.

Say you started with five months parental leave for the mother and one month paid parental leave for the father, for it to work properly when the mother goes back to work that would mean leaving the father in charge the same way as the mother, no bottles being left( unless its breast milk ) no pointing out where the nappies are keep or where the baby food is.

The father would have to leave work for the month in a real sense that means no emails, no blackberry...it should not matter if you are a plumber or a banker. In the male world of work it would have to been seen that men might be gone for a month or more on paternity leave and this would have to been seen as normal no special pleading that a huge meeting about the financing of X development was coming up and you just have to be there, when you are on parentage leave you are on paternity leave.

kunst nugget

mariaalice wrote: »

I think it would take whole change of culture for this to work.

Say you started with five months parental leave for the mother and one month paid parental leave for the father, for it to work properly when the mother goes back to work that would mean leaving the father in charge the same way as the mother, no bottles being left( unless its breast milk ) no pointing out where the nappies are keep or where the baby food is.

The father would have to leave work for the month in a real sense that means no emails, no blackberry...it should not matter if you are a plumber or a banker. In the male world of work it would have to been seen that men might be gone for a month or more on paternity leave and this would have to been seen as normal no special pleading that a huge meeting about the financing of X development was coming up and you just have to be there, when you are on parentage leave you are on paternity leave.

Wow, that really is sexist… are you really saying what I think you're saying?

mariaalice

kunst nugget wrote: »

Wow, that really is sexist… are you really saying what I think you're saying?

Why? I am saying for it to work we would need a cultural change, I have talked to men about this and the more senior they are or if they work in a my knob is bigger than you knob type of organisation the less they see it being able to work. I do think there should be shared parental leave, but the world of work would have to see men going on maternity leave as normal as women going on maternity leave, as for men or woman answering emails or keeping the work blackberry on then you not really on maternity leave and you are putting pressure on others to do the same.

kunst nugget

mariaalice wrote: »

Why? I am saying for it to work we would need a cultural change, I have talked to men about this and the more senior they are or if they work in a my knob is bigger than you knob type of organisation the less they see it being able to work. I do think there should be shared parental leave, but the world of work would have to see men going on maternity leave as normal as women going on maternity leave, as for men or woman answering emails or keeping the work blackberry on then you not really on maternity leave and you are putting pressure on other to do the same.

Making out that men are incapable of finding baby food or nappies or or unable to concentrate on minding their child without distraction is extraordinarily patronising. It's pretty shocking if that's your view of men.

mariaalice

kunst nugget wrote: »

Making out that men are incapable of finding baby food or nappies or or unable to concentrate on minding their child without distraction is extraordinarily patronising. It's pretty shocking if that's your view of men.

Thats not what I am saying, women often adopt a gate keeping role with child care and often that is done by taking on most of the tasks associated with looking after the baby that why you here women saying their husband is baby siting if he minding the children if she is on a night our, women do this unconsciously.

What a women who is returning from maternity leave would need to do to counteracts that sort of thinking is just go out the door to work fully understanding that her partner is capable of looking after their child without any help or with out any baby requirements having to be left out for them, in other words the care of the baby should be seen as interchangeable between them with no difference no matter which is providing the care.

Seriously?

mariaalice wrote: »

What a women who is returning from maternity leave would need to do to counteracts that sort of thinking is just go out the door to work fully understanding that her partner is capable of looking after their child without any help or with out any baby requirements having to be left out for them, in other words the care of the baby should be seen as interchangeable between them with no difference no matter which is providing the care.

I'm confused, what exactly is preventing women right now from returning from maternity leave? Other than the financial consideration of one parent staying at home or the cost of hiring a third-party to mind the child/children?

How does paternity leave come into this ?

mariaalice

Seriously? wrote: »

I'm confused, what exactly is preventing women right now from returning from maternity leave? Other than the financial consideration of one parent staying at home or the cost of hiring a third-party to mind the child/children?

How does paternity leave come into this ?

I am talking about shared paternity leave... when it is shared with a partner and at some stage as the paternity leave is shared she will be going out to work while her partner will be at home using the rest of the paternity leave to look after their baby.

Seriously?

mariaalice wrote: »

I am talking about shared paternity leave... when it is shared with a partner and at some stage as the paternity leave is shared she will be going out to work while her partner will be at home using the rest of the paternity leave to look after their baby.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but how is that an issue ?

mariaalice

To put it simply its not as easy as passing legislation saying half of all paternity leave must be taken by the male partner, it would need a complete change in the culture around the issue of childcare.

newport2

kunst nugget wrote: »

Quotas don't work by saying there are 10,000 men in the workforce. They next 5,000 hired must be women. They say that 30% of your company must be made up of women, just like you saying 30% of parental leave must be taken by men.

Yes, and if your company has 10,000 places, 7,000 of which are currently filled by men, then the next 3000 must be filled by women in order to meet a 30% quota.

kunst nugget wrote: »

In essence you're saying that I, as a father would have to take time off even if I wanted to give the time to my partner to extend her leave? Your forcing us as a couple to adopt an approach to childcare whether we find it suitable or not. How is that different to imposing quotas on a company whether they are suitable for the business model or not?

No I'm not. I'm suggesting that as a father you have x months parental leave available to you in additional time to existing parental leave. Take it or leave it, but you can't give it away, ie be pressured into letting your partner take it. Nothing changes for maternity leave, ie I'm not imposing a quota saying that x% of parental leave must now go to men

With quotas there are a limited number of places in an area of the workforce and a certain percentage must be taken by a certain gender. In what I proposed for parental leave I'm effectively creating additional jobs for the gender that has lost out on the original ones.

mariaalice

newport2 wrote: »

Yes, and if your company has 10,000 places, 7,000 of which are currently filled by men, then the next 3000 must be filled by women in order to meet a 30% quota.



No I'm not. I'm suggesting that as a father you have x months parental leave available to you in additional time to existing parental leave. Take it or leave it, but you can't give it away, ie be pressured into letting your partner take it. Nothing changes for maternity leave, ie I'm not imposing a quota saying that x% of parental leave must now go to men

With quotas there are a limited number of places in an area of the workforce and a certain percentage must be taken by a certain gender. In what I proposed for parental leave I'm effectively creating additional jobs for the gender that has lost out on the original ones.

It would be interesting to see what % of men take the paternal leave available to them if your proposal came about. Then you would have to look closely at what industry they worked in, for example say it turned out to be mostly men in the middle to lower ranks of the public and civil services who were availing of the parental leave and very few men from senior roles or from small business taking the leave.

Pawwed Rig

mariaalice wrote: »

What a women who is returning from maternity leave would need to do to counteracts that sort of thinking is just go out the door to work fully understanding that her partner is capable of looking after their child without any help or with out any baby requirements having to be left out for them, in other words the care of the baby should be seen as interchangeable between them with no difference no matter which is providing the care.

Why would that not be the case? Looking after a baby is not rocket science.

Pawwed Rig

mariaalice wrote: »

It would be interesting to see what % of men take the paternal leave available to them if your proposal came about. Then you would have to look closely at what industry they worked in, for example say it turned out to be mostly men in the middle to lower ranks of the public and civil services who were availing of the parental leave and very few men from senior roles or from small business taking the leave.

I would suspect there would be huge professional pressure for men not to take it and those that did would not progress as fast as those that didn't. That is why I believe it should be obligatory.

mariaalice

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Why would that not be the case? Looking after a baby is not rocket science.

Its not, but for some women they see it as being more there responsibility a lot of the time this is purely unconscious and is often a product of culture. This will change as children grownup and see both their parents working and both careers as being equally important and it wont change if children see their father as the one with the career and their mother as the one with a job that she is trying to fit in around childcare.

indigo twist

mariaalice wrote: »

Thats not what I am saying, women often adopt a gate keeping role with child care and often that is done by taking on most of the tasks associated with looking after the baby that why you here women saying their husband is baby siting if he minding the children if she is on a night our, women do this unconsciously.

What a women who is returning from maternity leave would need to do to counteracts that sort of thinking is just go out the door to work fully understanding that her partner is capable of looking after their child without any help or with out any baby requirements having to be left out for them, in other words the care of the baby should be seen as interchangeable between them with no difference no matter which is providing the care.

I think you're perhaps of an older generation than the majority of posters? I don't hear any mothers my age talking about the father "babysitting" ... If I go out and my boyfriend is home minding the baby, he's just being a father! Not babysitting. And I certainly don't leave out bottles and nappies for him, it's his house too, why wouldn't he know where those things were kept?! If we're both at home, we share all of the "baby stuff" i.e. sterilising, bottle prep, nappies, feeding, bedtime, etc, equally between us. I can't see why it should be any other way. I think you're really underestimating the typical Irish father with your generalisations!

mariaalice

indigo twist wrote: »

I think you're perhaps of an older generation than the majority of posters? I don't hear any mothers my age talking about the father "babysitting" ... If I go out and my boyfriend is home minding the baby, he's just being a father! Not babysitting. And I certainly don't leave out bottles and nappies for him, it's his house too, why wouldn't he know where those things were kept?! If we're both at home, we share all of the "baby stuff" i.e. sterilising, bottle prep, nappies, feeding, bedtime, etc, equally between us. I can't see why it should be any other way. I think you're really underestimating the typical Irish father with your generalisations!

Perhaps but I still hear if from younger women and why are do you see and here of more woman that men trying to fit work around childcare.

Look at the Ad for follow on milk the one with the song ..my love has no end... its completely filled with mother their is one father who is playing with his baby, why is filled with mothers and not equally filled with mothers and fathers, because they are trying to sell a product and they know in 90% of cases its mothers who make the decisions around what baby formula to buy. Its a reflection of the culture of the mother being the prime career and decisions makers around babies and childcare.

kunst nugget

mariaalice wrote: »

Look at the Ad for follow on milk the one with the song ..my love has no end... its completely filled with mother their is one father who is playing with his baby, why is filled with mothers and not equally filled with mothers and fathers, because they are trying to sell a product and they know in 90% of cases its mothers who make the decisions around what baby formula to buy. Its a reflection of the culture of the mother being the prime career and decisions makers around babies and childcare.

The reason is that formula can't be advertised as a substitute for breast milk according to the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes from the World Health Organisation. That's why it is always advertised only as a follow on from breastmilk. In that instance, women would be deciding when to stop breastfeeding as, has been pointed out, men can't lactate - marketing for formula has to be very specific.

Tbh, if I was to believe how ads represent life, I'd think that women were constantly either constipated or have the runs and men have impeccable bowel movements because you never see a man in those ads

Also, I'm sure you'll find a lot of people would probably take exception to the lack of male representation in that ad but I can see why the advertisers were doing in terms of trying to skirt around the code.

http://www.breastfeeding.ie/uploads/files/factsheet09.pdf

mariaalice

Or for example during the summer at a family gathering at which the mothers there were a solicitors, a teachers, an sna .. how come they were discussing reducing hours in work or doing a 3 day week or arranging work around children, none of their husbands or partners were discussing reducing their working week to fit in with child care, now these were young fathers in their thirties and forties who would be very involved with their children.

I am not saying some father don't reduce their hours to fit in with their responsibility around child care but its not the norm and when it happens there then to be other issues involved such as them being the lesser earner in the partnership.

kunst nugget

mariaalice wrote: »

I am not saying some father don't reduce their hours to fit in with their responsibility around child care but its not the norm and when it happens there then to be other issues involved such as them being the lesser earner in the partnership.

Is that not what couples should have the freedom to do - to work childcare to what suits them best financially? If I earned less than my wife, I would have given up my job or reduced my hours to look after our kids. Is there an issue with a man earning less than a woman?

mariaalice

kunst nugget wrote: »

Is that not what couples should have the freedom to do - to work childcare to what suits them best financially? If I earned less than my wife, I would have given up my job or reduced my hours to look after our kids. Is there an issue with a man earning less than a woman?

Every one should be free to do as they please as long as it complies with the law.

You haven't answered the question if as you say there is complete equality around the issue of childcare between parents both culturally and in practice, how come in the vast majority of arraignments between parents, it is the mother who is discussing changing her working arrangements to fit in with childcare, why are not equal amount of men and woman changing their work arrangement to fit in with child care

Its well know that the media reflect culture that is why ads about babies feature women and ad about cars feature man for the most part( there are some exceptions )

Lemming

mariaalice wrote: »

Its well know that the media reflect culture that is why ads about babies feature women and ad about cars feature man for the most part( there are some exceptions )

Are you joking? I struggle to think of the last car advert that featured either a man, or a competent man (i.e. not being portrayed as a bumbling fool being led by the nose by the sassy, street-smart, superior woman who knows what's best for him).

Advertising in general is predominantly aimed at women.

As for your unanswered questions of "how come? how come? how come?" well why don't you ask the next anecdotal woman (or man for that matter) you see discussing working their hours around childcare why it's them doing it and not their partner.

kunst nugget

mariaalice wrote: »

Every one should be free to do as they please as long as it complies with the law.

You haven't answered the question if as you say there is complete equality around the issue of childcare between parents both culturally and in practice, how come in the vast majority of arraignments between parents, it is the mother who is discussing changing her working arrangements to fit in with childcare, why are not equal amount of men and woman changing their work arrangement to fit in with child care

I never said there was complete equality - there definitely is not - but that couples should have the freedom to make arrangements that suit them best - so if a man earns less, he should be able to give up work to reduce his hours to mind his children or that if a couple decides that it's in their interest - that they give all available parental leave to either the mother or father. That's all I've ever espoused. The fact of the matter is that men would be discriminated against in this instance. Most companies wouldn't entertain a man changing his hours based on childcare the way they would with women.

mariaalice wrote: »

Its well know that the media reflect culture that is why ads about babies feature women and ad about cars feature man for the most part( there are some exceptions )

So is it only women that get constipated and do only men drink beer?

Dravokivich

mariaalice wrote: »

Or for example during the summer at a family gathering at which the mothers there were a solicitors, a teachers, an sna .. how come they were discussing reducing hours in work or doing a 3 day week or arranging work around children, none of their husbands or partners were discussing reducing their working week to fit in with child care, now these were young fathers in their thirties and forties who would be very involved with their children.

I am not saying some father don't reduce their hours to fit in with their responsibility around child care but its not the norm and when it happens there then to be other issues involved such as them being the lesser earner in the partnership.

Well for someone who can live off half a weeks wages. But what's that got to do with either parent being more responsible towards their child than the other?

Because that's how a couple of your posts here are coming out.

mariaalice

kunst nugget wrote: »

I never said there was complete equality - there definitely is not - but that couples should have the freedom to make arrangements that suit them best - so if a man earns less, he should be able to give up work to reduce his hours to mind his children or that if a couple decides that it's in their interest - that they give all available parental leave to either the mother or father. That's all I've ever espoused. The fact of the matter is that men would be discriminated against in this instance. Most companies wouldn't entertain a man changing his hours based on childcare the way they would with women.



So is it only women that get constipated and do only men drink beer?

I am all for equal parental leave, however if it is left to the parents to choose who get the parental leave, in the vast majority of cases it will be the woman who takes the parental leave even if they both earn the same salaries.

It depends on what society whats to achieve with shared parental leave if it is to have men get parental leave the same way women do then it would have to be compulsory that it is taken by the father, it would have to be like that to counteract the professional pressure men would be under not to take parental leave if it was optional or if they could transfer it to the mother.

Ads are not the literal truth they are a reflection of the culture they are produced in, like an eco or dim reflection in a mirror.

mariaalice

Dravokivich wrote: »

Well for someone who can live off half a weeks wages. But what's that got to do with either parent being more responsible towards their child than the other?

Because that's how a couple of your posts here are coming out.

Some of their partners would be earning the same as their wives so it would not be a matter of less money if the father reduced their hours and the mother worked full time.

My main point is there their are huge cultural issue around this not just practical issues.

keane2097

mariaalice wrote: »

I am all for equal parental leave, however if it is left to the parents to choose who get the parental leave, in the vast majority of cases it will be the woman who takes the parental leave even if they both earn the same salaries.

I think this, and most of your posts in this thread, can be answered with a simple "citation needed".

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about what everyone thinks and how everyone behaves without a whole lot to back it up.

mariaalice

kunst nugget wrote: »

I never said there was complete equality - there definitely is not - but that couples should have the freedom to make arrangements that suit them best - so if a man earns less, he should be able to give up work to reduce his hours to mind his children or that if a couple decides that it's in their interest - that they give all available parental leave to either the mother or father. That's all I've ever espoused. The fact of the matter is that men would be discriminated against in this instance. Most companies wouldn't entertain a man changing his hours based on childcare the way they would with women.



So is it only women that get constipated and do only men drink beer?

Surely that's the issue why should an employer treat men and women differently as regards child care?

I am being devils advocate here.

Its too simple to say change the law, make parental leave an equal right and ta da! the issue is solved there is a lot more to it that that... Its a huge area socially, culturally, legally and in the area of employment law.

That does not mean we should not have equality though, how to achieve is the issue.

pwurple

Mariaalice, I don't know what to fook you are talking about. I just spent the past week trying to work mental hours to match west coast US. My husband was well able to pick up the children (including 6 month old) from childcare, feed them, bath them, play with them and put them to bed. All on his own, without me putting out stuff, or writing him instructions. They are his own children we are talking about after all! And when he has to do late nights with work, I'll be doing the opposite.


If we had a choice I would have been back at work months ago (because I don't get paid mat leave) and he would have been doing the leave. Unfortunetly after inquiring about maternity transfer to spouse... There is a mechanism there to enable it to happen, but only on my death. Step too far for us!

mariaalice

Why do you think I am saying men cant look after their own children I haven't said that,... what I have said is their can often gatekeeping behaviour by women and cultural beliefs about childcare which women often internalise( not all women ).


All things being equal parental leave should be shard by both parents, however its not as simple as changing the law and that will solve everything.

iptba

mariaalice wrote: »

Or for example during the summer at a family gathering at which the mothers there were a solicitors, a teachers, an sna .. how come they were discussing reducing hours in work or doing a 3 day week or arranging work around children, none of their husbands or partners were discussing reducing their working week to fit in with child care, now these were young fathers in their thirties and forties who would be very involved with their children.

I think a lot of women would prefer they did a 3-day week and their partners did the 5-day week (/whatever) rather than vice versa.

fits

iptba wrote: »

I think a lot of women would prefer they did a 3-day week and their partners did the 5-day week (/whatever) rather than vice versa.

I do think the issue has to be forced a little at the start at least. Its just not going to be fully accepted by employers until the stick is applied imho. Like I said in Finland, there wasn't good uptake of paternity leave until the two month condition was introduced.

JRant

mariaalice wrote: »

Why do you think I am saying men cant look after their own children I haven't said that,... what I have said is their can often gatekeeping behaviour by women and cultural beliefs about childcare which women often internalise( not all women ).


All things being equal parental leave should be shard by both parents, however its not as simple as changing the law and that will solve everything.

Legislating for paternal leave is exactly how we should start about it.

We are expecting our 1st child any day now and the company I work for announced with great fanfare that I will receive 3 days paternity leave and made a point of how they didn't have to give me any. I've not taken a single days holiday since we found out (Jan) in order to be able to spend an extremely modest amount of time with my child when its born. Yet my partner can take up to 10 month off.

Until this changes then its pointless asking why the majority of women arrange their jobs around childcare as the answer is straight in front of you. Women are allowed to do it while men are not (for the most part).

Gael23

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/minister-wants-two-weeks-paternity-leave-by-years-end-664175.html

Looks like its on the cards.

ancapailldorcha

Gael23 wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/minister-wants-two-weeks-paternity-leave-by-years-end-664175.html

Looks like its on the cards.

They've had years to do this.

Sleepy

2 weeks, while a step in the right direction is miles off what is necessary if they ever want to take gender out of hiring decisions.

Shelflife

No Mention in any of the articles as to who is going to pay the paternity leave , what effect it will have on small businesses when staff are effectively given another two weeks holidays.

Its fine in a big business where one or two people wont be missed but in a small enterprise it will have a big impact.

_Kaiser_

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They've had years to do this.

It's the same as always.. when an election rolls around every party starts promising everything to buy votes.
As you say, they've had years to do it, but only now that it looks like LAB will be effectively wiped out, and FG are worried about SF and the Independents, are they talking about things like this.

Still, while nowhere near what's needed, it's a welcome move - but I echo the sentiments made on the last page... it might be allowed in law, but how many companies will buy into it without "repercussions" being held over the guy who wants to take it?