Paid maternity leave

[Footy Chick]

A good idea

I know my argument is age old, but why should a business owner be forced to fork out for others life choices? Absolutely crazy IMHO.

its not the business that pays, the taxpayer does....so therefore the businesses that currently pay maternity leave (some already pay up to 14 weeks) would love this as its a money saver for them

its a good idea IMO, but they are still going to pay the unemployed the lump sum baby bonus, I cant understand that if anything they should be paying that over 26 weeks on a drip feed....

OK then, I wasn't aware of that ... Still don't think it's fair to force people to pay for what is essentially a decision others make.

So you'll be saying thanks but no thanks when the 13 weeks pay is offered to her? or to the $5000 thats handed to her when CP Jnr pops out? Didn't think so..

When you look at the cost of forking out 13 weeks pay for someone that will go back and work for the company, compared to the cost of hiring an a new person and the cost of training etc... there's really not much difference, in fact it would probably cost more to hire the new person..

but then what would I know, Im an unedumacated idiot

[bulldogproud]

We pay each day for life decisions that people make. After all, who pays the bills for people in our State Hospitals suffering from illnesses?

[Punk Rooster]

but then what would I know, Im an unedumacated idiot

hooray, we all agree on something!

[Wedgie]

but then what would I know, Im an unedumacated idiot

hooray, we all agree on something!

Amen to that!

[bulldogproud]

Didn't you go to Saint Ignatius, FC?
Now I finally understand why you are unedumacted

[JK]

So you'll be saying thanks but no thanks when the 13 weeks pay is offered to her? or to the $5000 thats handed to her when CP Jnr pops out? Didn't think so..

When you look at the cost of forking out 13 weeks pay for someone that will go back and work for the company, compared to the cost of hiring an a new person and the cost of training etc... there's really not much difference, in fact it would probably cost more to hire the new person..

but then what would I know, Im an unedumacated idiot

If both myself and Mrs CP have been paying to assist families all our working lives, why would (or should) we decline a government payment?

[Dutchy]

When you look at the cost of forking out 13 weeks pay for someone that will go back and work for the company, compared to the cost of hiring an a new person and the cost of training etc... there's really not much difference, in fact it would probably cost more to hire the new person..

spot on FC....people underestimate the costs of recruiting and training staff...

just recently my employer has given access to our systems at staff's homes allowing us to work from home when required, in particular Mum's are using this to give them flexibility to work and be a Mum and others a good work/life balance

[Footy Chick]

So you'll be saying thanks but no thanks when the 13 weeks pay is offered to her? or to the $5000 thats handed to her when CP Jnr pops out? Didn't think so..

When you look at the cost of forking out 13 weeks pay for someone that will go back and work for the company, compared to the cost of hiring an a new person and the cost of training etc... there's really not much difference, in fact it would probably cost more to hire the new person..

but then what would I know, Im an unedumacated idiot

If both myself and Mrs CP have been paying to assist families all our working lives, why would (or should) we decline a government payment?

Sorry CP, so you 'don't agree with it but you'll take it... I dont get it.

The last 4 posters have 30 seconds to erase their posts...

[bulldogproud]

My only complaint with the proposal is that males are only offered two weeks paternity leave. Surely it should be even?

[heater31]

My only complaint with the proposal is that males are only offered two weeks paternity leave. Surely it should be even?

Think equal would be ridiculous IMHO as a bloke can only do so much at home with a newborn before getting bored brainless. Perhaps a set time period per couple to be negotiated with respective employers

[bulldogproud]

Now that would make sense, Heater.
Btw, good luck to the Buffaloes

[A Mum]

My only complaint with the proposal is that males are only offered two weeks paternity leave. Surely it should be even?

It should probably be one or the other.... as in Dad chooses to stay home for 18 weeks or mum... so perhaps per family.

To choose between the lump sum bonus and the 18 week pay... I think spread out that the money would come in more handy for every day expenses, nappies, washing, etc, etc, etc... whereas I have heard of people who go out and buy lounge suites, TV's etc with the lump sum bonus.

It's just 18 years too late for me.... I had to return to work ASAP with my kids.... no money, no work.

[luvcricket]

Well this topic stopped in a heap.....

[Pseudo]

Not a good idea.

You would need to restrict it to women who had been in gainful employment for the last N years in order to discourage the welfare-bludging underclasses from squeezing out crotchfruit as a means of earning money.

However, anyone who had been gainfully employed for N years would likely not need the money in the first place.

Bottom line: if you can't afford kids then don't have em.

[Tassie Blues]

A good idea

I know my argument is age old, but why should a business owner be forced to fork out for others life choices? Absolutely crazy IMHO.

your right chould also cut holiday pay and leave loading for those that make a life chose to have 4 weeks off each year

[devilsadvocate]

A good idea

I know my argument is age old, but why should a business owner be forced to fork out for others life choices? Absolutely crazy IMHO.

your right chould also cut holiday pay and leave loading for those that make a life chose to have 4 weeks off each year

Not the sharpest tool in the shed there?

An employees wage includes time off - it's like a mandatory salary sacrifice.

[mypaddock]

The vast majority of women that would apply for paid maternity leave would have their other half in full-time employment. Wanting paid leave just because your having a child is just plain greedy.
If you can't survive on one income you may need to reassess what is really important to you- material things or actually having a family/children???

[Psyber]

... I know my argument is age old, but why should a business owner be forced to fork out for others life choices? Absolutely crazy IMHO.

Very, very well put.

It's not ignorance from the male species, it's a sensible, rational economic and social viewpoint.

Take any small business. With the risk of having to pay a mother for 18 weeks, while also having to cover their absence with a temp who are ridiculously expensive and hard to source, why would they employ a young woman who is potentially going to cost the owner their business.

And contrary to what was said above, nothing I've seen from the government has suggested they are going to compensate business for the full cost of paid maternity leave. If they are going to scrap the $5k baby bonus for a paid maternity leave scheme, how will they cover the varying wage awards between say a Lawyer or Doctor and a waitress for example?

Finally, obviously you can't discriminate based on gender, but this is the most efficient way to FORCE gender discrimination.

Absolutely DA, If I had not already extracted myself from my 2 businesses earlier this year, and had employed women of child-bearing age, I would be now calculating whether they were still viable under this scheme, and whether I needed to replace the relevant staff with older women or men as soon as I could. In fact I saw the writing on the wall in 1987 and stopped employing younger women then - I had expected this to happen sooner - under the last Labor government.

Not only are businesses going to be hit for the superannuation component under this scheme, but they are going to have to stump up the specified $544 per week, then pay someone to do the paperwork to reclaim that component from the government, and then wait who knows how long to get it, as well as pay casual rates for fill in staff for the 18 weeks as DA said above.

My view is that these days you get to choose whether to have children. You make the choice don't expect anybody else to pay for it..

[Psyber]

There are a number of women who elect not to work not because they are feral but because they believe that a mother should spend time with their baby/child during their formative years. These women forego an income so as to provide more time and love for their children. I would be against paid maternity leave except for the fact that non-working mothers will be compensated for through the payment of the baby bonus.
I must admit that I find the comment made above that people should not have kids very worrying. Based on that thinking, the whole human race would be wiped out in one generation!

A 60% reduction in the human population may seriously help with global warming though, if you are convinced it is attributable dominantly to human activity.
Of course the economic system would have to be rejigged as we have been depending on a growing population to pay for the care of the older generation due to the fact that the system does not encourage people to plan and provide for themselves, nor the government to put away provisions to fund future costs instead of buliding up "deficits" [i.e. debts].

My conscience is clear - I am now a self-funded retiree, and have not even applied for a Seniors Card, let alone a publicly funded pension.

[silicone skyline]

This is a good idea because those in FULL TIME work who can SUPPORT their child are given the means to do so.

Much better than the baby bonus, which unemployed gits get for just pumping out a child and they just go and buy a plasma TV.

Full time work indicates much more responsibility as a parent.
The government has been encouraging everyone to have kids, which has the bogans pumping them out and collecting their $5000 or whatever it is.
This idea will encourage children to be born in the right economic climate, with a higher percentage of responsible parenting.