Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

How to stop "maternity discrimination" watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Give men the same amount of legal rights with regards to having time of work to look after new born babies. Then both men and women will be seen as equally likely to have time off to raise a child making discriminating against women of child bearing age pointless?

    Thoughts?

    Eidt: Just found this http://www.theguardian.com/money/201...others-fathers

    That seems like a step in the right direction.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The concept of Maternity leave is flawed if you ask me.

    The cause of disatisfaction and victimisation is (in my opinion) that Mat Leave is skewed too far in favour of the mother - causing the employer and non-parental employees to resent it.

    The problem is in the concept that a returner comes back, not at the point at which they left - but at the point they would be had they never left - which is an absurdity. Not only is the subject paid for not working, but is also rewarded for it at the same rate as those who have worked.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Do you have any reason to believe that women are still discriminated against on this basis?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birkenhead)
    Do you have any reason to believe that women are still discriminated against on this basis?
    I've not looked into it no. But then you think smoking is ion the whole a positive health choice. So I will take anything you see with a pinch of salt I'm afraid.


    But if they are this would be a solution. Lets use it as a thought experiment. Men can not get the same amount time off when they have a baby with someone. Which they should imo.

    Also having thought about it that shared leave isn't good enough. It essentially "allows mothers to hand some of their leave over to fathers". Which is inherently sexist. This is not an increase in the rights of fathers but an increase in the rights of women over men who get to decide what happens with "their" child. Why can't they both have time off together at the same time? Why is the fathers time off determined as by what the mother wants? If the mother decides she wants to spend the maximum time with her child (which is reasonable) the father can not have the time off. If feminism is about gender equality feminists should be raising these kind of issues. (if they are please show me I'm always happy to be proven wrong).
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I think all this may help gender equality, but will not actually improve the lot for women currently. All its going to do is bring balance by dragging men into the same set of problems. On paper you'll have no issue but you'll just end up with a gap between parents and non parents. Women, and then men, will still have the issue of knowing if they have a child it will damage their career. Just as now, if you want to make it to the top, don't have kids.

    I would also question whether shared leave even makes sense in that case. Slight damage to both careers, instead of damage to a single career? Especially if the man is the highest earner which is the norm, mathematically based, you may well still see couples not splitting the leave.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    I've not looked into it no.

    But if they are this would be a solution. Men can not get the same amount time off when they have a baby with someone. Which they should imo.
    Since this proposal would routinely remove a significant number of people from the workforce for up to a year, I would suggest working out whether the problem actually exists before trying to fix it in ways that would damage the economy.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birkenhead)
    Since this proposal would routinely remove a significant number of people from the workforce for up to a year, I would suggest working out whether the problem actually exists before trying to fix it in ways that would damage the economy.
    Sod the economy. What is then point of civilization and all this tech that is supposed to make our lives easier if you can't then have the time to do the basic human thing of having children.

    Why is it ok for women to fight for rights in the face of the "economy" in this regard but not men?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clip)
    The concept of Maternity leave is flawed if you ask me.

    The cause of disatisfaction and victimisation is (in my opinion) that Mat Leave is skewed too far in favour of the mother - causing the employer and non-parental employees to resent it.

    The problem is in the concept that a returner comes back, not at the point at which they left - but at the point they would be had they never left - which is an absurdity. Not only is the subject paid for not working, but is also rewarded for it at the same rate as those who have worked.
    It will never change, the same group who supports the above are confused when they see that mens economic output surpasses that of women. The injustice they say.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Yeh, that should do the trick.

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Sod the economy. What is then point of civilization and all this tech that is supposed to make our lives easier if you can't then have the time to do the basic human thing of having children.

    Why is it ok for women to fight for rights in the face of the "economy" in this regard but not men?
    It hasn't harmed the Scandinavian economy.


    Just giving men the option to take time PFF isn't enough - the gender norms are there and very few would take the opportunity. We need to take the scandinavian model where the man has to take a period of time off or it is lost, so they get, say, 30 weeks or whatever, but each partner can only take 20 maximum.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    It hasn't harmed the Scandinavian economy.


    Just giving men the option to take time PFF isn't enough - the gender norms are there and very few would take the opportunity. We need to take the scandinavian model where the man has to take a period of time off or it is lost, so they get, say, 30 weeks or whatever, but each partner can only take 20 maximum.
    I'm always very skeptical of naysayers who use the economy as a justification to stop progressive changes being made. The response to a Scandinavian comparison is usually along the lines of the"The UK is not Norway" yada yada yada
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 22, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.