Tony Blair has announced a range of new rights for working parents by promising to extend maternity leave from six to nine months and allowing fathers to take up to seven and a half months off in place of the mother. He also proposes to extend the right to request flexible working to all parents with children under 17.

Is this what workers want I wonder ? Personally I can see an increasing burden being imposed on employees without parental responsibilities which could easily lead to friction and resentment in the workplace.

Joyce - (climbing down off soapbox :) )

That sounds good to me!

Im the main bread winner in my household because my partner works part time and looks after the dogs.

I would love to have a baby but at the moment we could just not afford it, If I could have more flexible hours at work ie work 4 days a week or have my partner able to take paternity work that would be great!!!

If it goes through I'll be hopping straight into bed!

I feel I can comment on this, working full time and going on maternity leave in June.

My colleagues - all male - have absolutely no problem with covering for me when I am off. They see it as my rights to have a baby and have enough time off with that baby after the birth. The fact is that if THEY were physically able to have children they would and their colleagues would pick up the reins that way too.

Ultimately, a mother should be able to have a career and have children and take enough time off to be with the baby as he or she grows. Its a basic human right to have children and some of us cannot afford to rely on partners/husbands and give up work. Its down to the EMPLOYERS to ensure the extra workload is manageable, or to take on someone else to cover.

Chloe - we are clearly poles apart on this one :)

I have never subscribed to the view that women are entitled to 'have it all'.
If having a baby is a human right what can be done to compensate those who cannot reproduce ?  No, having a baby is not a right at all. It's a gift that some are blessed with and others not.

Those who say they cannot afford to give up full time work should refrain from having babies imo.

Joyce.

I have 2 very healthy, well adjusted children. We live in a lovely farmhouse where the children have fresh air, get to play outside in safety and enjoy themselves. Luckily, I work from home 90% of the time so they do not miss out on me. I employ my mum to pick them up from school so they come home early and mum does the cleaning and the ironing so the kids get all weekend with us to do things :)

Are you suggesting I should not bring children into this lifestyle that I have worked hard to create? Perhaps I should give up work and live in a council house, on the state, just so I can have children?

I find your attitude incredibly old-fashioned TBH. Luckily, I am surrounded by a people who are supportive of my choices, and I work for a company that understands that 6 months off for someone who works as hard as I do is a small sacrifice to make.

C.

Ditto Chloe again ....:-)

>Those who say they cannot afford to give up full time work should refrain from having babies imo.

So child-bearing should be limited to the wealthy? Interesting point of view.

I'd also be interested in joyce's opinion on mums having the babies then dads staying at home.

ChloeH

Thats what will probably happen in my home, I earn more that my OH, so if and when we do eventually have kids it means that I will carry on working hopefully on a flexible basis and he will look after the child when Im at work.

So does that mean I shouldnt have a child because I can't afford to give up full time work?????

That RIDICULOUS!!!!!!!

Thats abit hardline!!!!

I don't know about you but I don't know ANYONE!! who can afford to give up work to have a baby!!!

Its like this, if people aren't helped out more by the employers i.e given flexiable working hours and maternity and paternity leave then people will go on the dole!!!

Would you prefer that?

does that mean i shouldnt have children then joyce, i'm 6 months pregnant with my first child and down on paper we can not afford for me not to go back to work, but in reality i will sacrifice on other things to make sure my boy has everything he needs including a mother that will be there for him 24 hours aday, its each to their own whether they do go back to work, but for me i will not be doing this, i have the upmost respect for people like chloeh who are going back to work, and from reading her posts she is a 21st century women, i respect her for being able to manage children and a job!! but to say that women who say they cannot afford to give up full time work should refrain from having babys is wrong imo, how many women who actually work do it cos they have nothing better to do, i mean we work to survive and give our children/familys the best upbringing we can, i'd like to be able to "afford" to give up work and still have every luxury i have whilst working but in the real working world, imo thats just not possible.

ok, here goes - time to jump on the bloke lol.

i do agree that PARENTS (note the use of the word parents NOT mother) have a right to be able to have children and spend time with them but surely, rather than expecting more and more from the government and their employer they should try to acheive a happy medium between work and family life.

I'm very aware that bringing up children is an expensive passtime and finances are always am issue but where does this attitude of "im a woman - i want everything" come from.

Andy...

Where does the perception that "we are women we want everything" come from? Just because Tony Blair has talked of increasing maternity leave by 3 months?? 3 months!!! Most folk have worked every day from the age of 16 and will do till I'm 70 and you begrudge an extra 3 months off!!?

Andy - if you were my husband and you could have a baby, I'd be more than happy to let you - after all, babies are usually wanted by BOTH sides of the relationship. But physically, I am the only one capable in my relationship, so why should I have to sacrifice either when I can have both with no-one suffering?

And as for the govt/employee - I will be taking 6 months off which has nothing to do with the Govt!

nooo, you've missed my point a little i think - parents should be allowed time off work - again that word - PARENTS...

if im completely honest, that opinion comes from my experience working in an office with 9 women who spend a lot of their time discussing what they can get as if its a god given right and stuff everyone else..

Men get really short shifted when it comes to this kind of thing - yeah i agree that it is impossible for the man to actually perform the physical act of childbirth but surely you dont think that is the be all and end all of having a child.

I work with men (as one of few women in a very male industry) and they spend a lot of time moaning about workloads and god given rights too :D

No, its not the be all and end all... thats not what I am saying. But if men could also carry and deliver a baby and would therefore need maternity leave this debate wouldn't occur because the whole thing would be equal. And those who choose not to have children - well, thats their choice in the same was as mine is to have them!

AND (am well and truly on my soapbox now LOL) with the average first house price being well over 120K in my area and 175K for a 3 bed semi - yet the average wage is about 25K - how the heck is anyone supposed to manage on ONE WAGE?! Bring house prices down and then it might be a more reasonable argument.

Or perhaps we shouldn't have children because the housing market is boyant. Or perhaps we shouldn't have children because salaries are too low. Or perhaps we shouldn't have children so as not to upset those who don't have them. Or perhaps we should just get a council house and go on the dole.

:)

<--- runs to get his binoculars so he can actually see chloe (that's one big box your on there) :-)

so if men are incapable of carrying children then they are not allowed to have as much time away from work to be with them?

hmmm

Can you see me yet? I'm that speck in the distance :D :D

I didn't say they weren't :) My argument is with those who think that women want extra maternity leave as some kind of holiday and those who cannot afford to give up work shouldn't have children :)

LOL I am not replying anymore you are saying everything for me :-)))) but a bit quicker LOL

And who do you think will be paying ro the pensions of those who do not choose to have children, the children of those who do :D

Pension - I'm contributing to my own. I have no children, have worked hard all my life and I've contributed to my own pension plan since the age of 19 and will continue to do so until I retire !!

I don't know about anyone else, but I would rather be at home brining up my children than at WORK!!!
Unfortunately I can't afford this and seeing as my partner will never earn as much as me I will have to go to work, as I do at the moment to pay the bills etc...

I don't want everything! I just don't have a choice......

My views may be old fashioned but that doesn't mean they're not honestly held.

I work with lots of women who have children and the majority have husbands/partners who also work.  It means that they enjoy quite an enviable lifestyle - two cars, two good holidays a year, latest gadgets for the children etc.  It seems to me that they're working not to put food on the table but so they can continue to enjoy the luxuries that two incomes bring.  The 'have it all' philosophy.

I also know several women who gave up work as soon as they had their first child.  Their income was halved but they were prepared to make sacrifices. Some of them returned to work when their children grew up, others didn't.

Sounds abit like the green eyed monster to me!!!

If women choose to work then its up to them and why shouldnt people have nice things if they work hard and can afford them!!

Can I also add that I don't know where you live but in Central London that is a luxury that many of us don't have!! The majority of us are hand to mouth!!

Thats why your view, whilst honestly held, are too generic for my liking. You really shouldn't tar all working mothers with the same brush.

It's OK Chloe I don't expect you to like my views.  And I'm not in the business of tarring anyone. 
If the cap doesn't fit, no need to wear it.

Your cap fits all though Joyce. In your opinion.

The office in which has a workforce of 17.  It is a diverse workforce, ranging from me (age 60+) down to youngsters just out of university, and includes 2 working mothers (1 with a a 2 year old, 1 with  7 & 10 year olds), 2 working fathers (1 with 5 & 7 year old, 1 with 5 year old).    The corporation that we work for is pretty fair about parental leave - one father had to have time off last year because his wife had a back operation - and there were no problems.  I would also add that we all have to add commuting time of up to 1 and a half hours, each way to the working day.    Both mums have responsible jobs, both have to travel from time to time, but take it in their stride.

I would say that the highest absentee rate in the office is with the youngsters who have very hectic social lives ;)
- and me (my 9 weeks chest infection last year has pushed my absentee rate right up into the *** watch this one category!)

Yes, life can be hectic - but with mortgages these days, just how many people can afford to live on 1 person's salary?   Not many.

Margot

Joyce why should people make sacrifices..???? Do you know how many woman are overtaking in their careers by people saying these statements.   Woman are the ones who have to have the children so because of this THEY should sacrifice their careers?

If you had kids I can bet my last £10 you would feel differently. :-)

I remember about 11 years ago when my daughter was at nursery, I missed her first Xmas party it did upset me badly but I never liked to take advantage or appear to take advantage. At that time holidays were priceless, to take a day off and had been difficult for me . I had pictures etc that my mum had taken and had them at work.

The following year my boss said to me on the 1st December, "Hail or shine go to the party this year, you work your butt off in here". You know he was so right. 

What is even more funny is that same boss who 11 year ago was very senior to me, I still work with him at a different company, I am now equal to him in position .  I believe apart from the fact I worked my way up and am certainly qualified for the job , he ( my old boss) was not discriminant of me being a working mother but I had to prove myself that much more that some others.

I work in an area where it is mostly men and have had 15 years of proving myself.  I don't have to now but when I look back it really stunk that I did have to.   

I honestly feel I am one of the working mums who got the raw deal.  I don't think I would be doing my job I have now had I not made sacrifices which I wished I hadn't had to.  I divorced quite early so had to work anyway but even if I could have given up work I wouldn't have.  I remarried but because of my job etc I never felt the time was right to have another child although I would have loved one. Had these rights been around 10 years ago I most certainly would have had another child. Not 5 or 6 just one.  These rights were not as good 10 years ago and you would have to go broke almost to have another child and certainly would have had to put your career on hold.

Being a successful working mum is still regarded as an achievement by some and viewed as heartless and selfish by others , it shouldn't be either !!!

:-)

Blue - yes I do think women should make sacrifices for their children.  I don't think it's at all unusual to expect a mother to put her child's needs before her own. 

Joyce so you are saying that by working a mother is automatically putting her needs before a child. There is a father TO !!! :-) I don't think I have ever put my own needs first BUT I have worked and I don't think most mothers put their own needs first  either . I have made it work by balancing things.  

Do you actually know how much stability is given by grandparents being involved with children? Far more than I think you may think.

What about the poor kids that fall into the poor bracket at school, the parents can't afford much for the kids.  Kids that can't afford to go on the school trips etc etc  WORSE what about the kids who's parents have said " We are better off on the dole"..

Life does cost money and not matter how much you love a kid they will want, need more that a motherly hug can give.

Sadly Joyce and it is hard not to be blunt the problem you have here is you do not have kids so you have a one sided opinion. You may say you are not but when you can't have kids I would imagine it is easy to be critical of others parenting because they do have them. You may argue your views would be the same regardless I IMHO I doubt it.   Sorry :-))

>Sadly Joyce and it is hard not to be blunt the problem you have here is you do not have kids so you have a one sided opinion.

and the views from some with children can be equally one sided ;)

I don't have children, partly my choice and I understand where Joyce is coming from in her first post.
As a non children female I have found over the years it can be difficult at work. Christmas working, late working for urgent deadlines - "You can work over Christmas, let me take the time off to be with my kids coz you don't have any - it's only fair" as just one example that has been said to me by working mothers and fathers and said more than once

I'm not of the opinion that mothers should have to give up work when they have children but I do not feel I should be classed as second class because I'm female and have no kids either :)
I know that many here would not view it like that but believe me it is an opinion held by many ....

I have, over time ,had to put extra hours in to cover for mothers on maternity leave, for fathers attending carol concerts, looking after sick children, and the like - yes I shouldn't have to and yes it should have been my employers responsibility to ensure that wasn't the case but in some companies the financial burden of paying another wage to cover these times is too great so the work is spread over the remaining staff.

I worked on a good salary for one company (min 40 hours per week) with a mother who worked under me working 25 hours a week hourly paid on a much lower rate to me (about 50%) and yet with tax credits etc she used to take home more than me monthly....

There are 2 sides to every story :) It would be good for us all to try to understand them both :)

>I'm not of the opinion that mothers should have to give up work when

they have children but I do not feel I should be classed as second class
because I'm female and have no kids either :)
I know that many here would not view it like that but believe me it is
an opinion held by many ....<

Sara I do know where you are coming from :-)  really although I got on my high horse as I felt prevoked as a working mother  who DOES NOT EVER ask for extra perks to defend my corner I do so much agree in fairness for ALL both men , woman, families etc :-). I think people should be able to have families but I do agree that people shouldn't have endless amount of kids and want it all their own way.. I think there is a balance. I only had one child , for me that was my balance.  I have never taken advantage of any of my working collegues ever, nor my work or employer.

I maybe never worded all my posts the best as emotion can take over but I think it is so unfair for woman always the ones who appear to have to make sacrifices.. whether it be to give up time with their kids or careers. Tarring everyone with the same brush is equally wrong :-)). I did know where Joyce was coming from to a point. It bugs me when people want want want.. Believe me it drove me crackers in my early mothering years when I went to work and a few people I knoe of didn't not because of the "good family morals"  but because of their perky benefits.

What is wrong is society really.   You get people for all groups taking advantage. There is more than just 2 sides. I personally wouldn't fit myself exactly into either as I am for a fair balance to all parties nor families or single people BUT ALL.   It is finding a happy medium.. :-))

Some companies get a good balance and others are so strict they cause trouble for themselves.

your arguments have been clear and logical Pam :)

I just replied there as it seemed the right place and wasn't inferring you held the view of "2nd class" :)

I admire mothers who juggle so many roles, in most cases, very succesfully :D

It's just it gets my goat occasionally over christmas cover etc ......... and a harder last week at work because of a male colleague taking his share of childcare cover while his working wife is away on a course :) ......... we're a two man team in the office where I work right now so for one of us to be absent for any reason puts a big burden on the other ........ neither of our faults though but due to my circumstances it is very rare I take time out other than holiday :)

As you so rightly say Balance is the key and it is achievable

It's been a good discussion :)

:-)) Sara. 

I have just had the " worst mother in the world"  story because she is grounded till I can eat of her bedroom floor LOL ;-)

Who would have the little sods anyway..

( opps sorry Chloe) :-)

You know all these years on I forget some of the things I did when my daugther was just a baby. This conversation has really made me think how hard I tried to be a good mum and juggle everything. I know I used to worry about working etc but I can honestly say I know I did the right thing and I can honestly say I never put myself first.   I did night shift so that it was less days. I went to work at 9pm and in at 6 am 4 nights.   Got a few hours sleep then had my baby all day. When she napped I napped. I did that for a good 18 months. It meant I was with her most of her waking hours but boy was I shattered. I caught up a bit at the weekend. Friday nights I would be in my bed at 7pm with my daughter.  After that she went to toddlers my mum gave up her job and I paid her to help me part time.  I forgot about some of this till today. :-)))   It also made me think about my graduation from Uni both my mum and Daughter were there cheering the loudest. Funny the things that make us think..

You know at the end of the day we are people make our own lifes, those who are enthusiast will be that whatever they do :-)  those who are lazy sods will always be and given the chance will abuse anything. Probably every person in this thread are the ones who don't abuse the system and work hard :-))

Congrats on the bump :D

Lucy
xx

Hi Joyce, :-))

Having been a manager for 15 years has shown me many things that have suprised me. Although my comments are not really about the extra benefits to working mothers they are about working people in general.

Quite often I find that the ones carrying the load are ones with families. Their jobs quite often seem so much more important to them whether it is because it is their life outside their family life or the need the money. In my experience people with families seem to take less time off that those who don't. I cannot pinpoint 100% why but in my working experince this is the case.

Without seeming discriminant the best workers I have come across are working mums.

It bugs me the stigma that comes with working mums. I have never ever abused my work or collegues and been a working mum for 15 years.

Rules are abused more often but those objecting to them ;-))   

Hi Blue - my experience has shown quite the opposite I'm afraid.
Many's the time a mum has phoned in to say she can't make it to work because her child's gone down with something. Resulting in someone else having to cover her work.
And, in my company many full time posts have been lost due to returning mothers asking for their jobs to be reduced to part-time. Again leaving someone else to plug the gap.

So the mum takes time off because the child is ill - she is less likely to phone in sick with a bit of a sniffle later on.

And returning mothers going part time is up to the employer to fill - not the work staff.

Where I work, its the young, single folk who do the phoning in sick - usually because they are out partying every five minutes.

Here here!

Snap Chloe.. :-)

I was a production Manager for 10 years and I can assure everyone that is was always the youngsters that never showed up on a monday or a friday, never showed up for the overtime they had said the would etc.

Joyce if a job is changed to part time then there should be some others filling the rest of the post.. nothing to do with the part timer..  if someone is having to plug the gap that is a company issue not the mothers.

What is funny and something you probably don't know you have said and how it is so commonly said off the cuff !!!!

>Many's the time a mum has phoned in to say she can't make it to work because her child's gone down with something. Resulting in someone else having to cover her work.<

The society we live in expects the mothers to take the time off... which is wrong !!!

The problem we always have had is the inflexibility of work.. A lot of jobs don't have to be done 9-5 the time could easily be made up etc. 

Interestingly, a male worker at my company was given 3 months off to support his wife throughout a dificult period she went through personally. We all picked up the reins and ran with it to support him. Folk don't need time off just for children.

Sorry Blue I can't see what's funny or off the cuff about my remark.  I was just telling it as it is.

Sadly Joyce , Woman for years have had to be the child rearers " looker afters" just because the gave birth to them. Giving birth seems to make to responsibility 20 times much more. So when a child is sick the mother is expected to look after the child.  That to me is wrong. 

If the burden of care was shared by both parents , these instances you seem to see so often would be HALFED.   If the parent was only off a couple times in the working years this would be reduced to 1-2 times.

Even companies sometimes have this " where's your wife attitude"..


You are telling it as you see it in your world but that doesn't mean it happens all over. Not in my world anyway :-)))

A secretary at my old firm took her 6 months maternity leave. My boss had no choice but to take on a temporary replacement. As time went by the replacement got to like her job. My boss contacted his old secretary to find out if she was coming back so he could give some sort of guidance to the new girl about whether she had a job or should start looking around.

It was not until the day the old secretary was due to return that she finally informed my boss that she had decided to give up work! That is not fair on anyone! Firms have a duty to their employees but the employees also have responsibilities to both the firm and to the people who are covering their work.

A friend, at the time that his wife was having a baby, went to personnel and asked about maternity leave. He was told his job was too important to allow for him to be absent. It would appear that people working in factories are more important than people in parliament!! Pity we are not paid accordingly!

Regards, John

well i know i am gonna get shot down here but when i had my kids i chose not to work before they were all at school as i wanted to raise them and see all their firsts i could never have sat at work while somebody else however nice was watching one of mine take first steps or first words. we went without a lot while they were little and my husband worked 3 jobs at one point to keep us ticking over. he wanted his children to have their mother at home so he was happy to work. now mine are all at school i do work but am self employed so i fit it round school times and i realise i am fortunate in that respect. i just dont see the point in having a baby and then dropping it off to be cared for by somebody else from when it is 6 weeks old or whatever. now my kids are at school its so different i will never get that time back with them when they were cute and funny and we jumped in puddles and made cakes and painted our hands and feet all day and i am so glad i didnt miss out on it all and will treasure the memories of that time forever.there is a lot of mums at my school who are never there . their kids have come from being in a private nursery from 8am till 6pm from the age of 3 months to now being dropped off and picked up from school by a child minder. it seems such a shame and i feel sorry for these mums. i am not saying anyone on here is like that and maybe some of these mums do not have supportive partners and they have my sympathy but again i do not see the point in having a child you just see occasionally and play hardly any part in their life except from funding a carer

very well said katyb :)

What about people who have no choice but to work???

Should I stay at home and go on benefits?