Maternity, Paternity pay etc.

messyleo said:
Why should the state pay full pay for maternity leave?
Click to expand...
Demographics are destiny. One of the foundations of our economic success has been our favorable demographic. Structural problems relted to the declining demographic in Japan have been well documented.

And various other social benefits such as gender equality, equalisation of the public sector gender imbalance and other occupational segregation, economic benefits of increased female labour market participation and productivity, reduced financial dependency on the state in the long term, health benefits of early childhood care/development including the intellectual and emotional development/well being of child and parents - a more involved father leads to happier and healthy families.

messyleo said:
Having kids is a lifestyle choice and (edit) NOT the same as being ill or unemployed
Click to expand...
messyleo said:
Again one is a lifestyle choice, and you can choose not to have children - the other (aging) isn't!!
Click to expand...
messyleo said:
If it is a priority for you make sure you are employed somewhere that offers it as a benefit - simple.
Click to expand...

No, no. You cant have it both ways. Just because your have a job or your health today, does not mean you are entitled to it tomorrow. @ClubMan says you should plan and budget accordingly.

You are saying that if you cant afford the financial penury of having children due to the hand you are dealt in life or the skills that you have then tough. Same for healthcare and unemployment. If you want healthcare, get a job with that as a benefit. If you are employed by a company that can't give you the job security you need, that's tough. That's your lifestyle choice.

(What a mal-adjusted society that would be)
 

So emigrate and stop moaning (the latter being optional; if you wish to continue moaning then it's a free country).

Incidentally, if you had told us what gender your baby is, then I wouldn't have dreamed of calling it "it"!
 

Has to be seen in the wider context of how our society is structured to economically skew in favour of older generations. Specifically, the taxation of capital vs. labour. From my own experience and for reasons not unrelated to @JuzAAM post, social structures are not designed with women in mind.

 
Benefits paid by reference to income would necessitate much higher taxes/PRSI.

Nobody will vote for that.

The answer is pretty simple, take personal responsibility and budget for having children, or alternatively get another job.
 
Bear in mind that in addition to maternity pay, the OP is also going to get an additional €35 per week in Child benefit. it is a shock for those whose companies do not provide maternity benefit.

To be honest, as a working father of 2, I'm struggling to think what else we got from the state bar some free medical costs (vacinations etc) at the time. That has changed since the naughties with the move to free GP care but there was very little else. The child minding/creche benefits won' t work for a lot of people who use family/grandparents to provide that facility and the cost of child care often makes return to work for one of the parents as pointless

Love my smallies to pieces but they cost a fortune but I need to be nice to them as they will decide what nursing home I end up in and also are the people who's taxes will be funding all of our future care and pensions
 
Gordon Gekko said:
Benefits paid by reference to income would necessitate much higher taxes/PRSI.

Nobody will vote for that.

The answer is pretty simple, take personal responsibility and budget for having children, or alternatively get another job.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense.

During Covid there was an rough implementation of benefits aligning with previous salary and it seemed popular. I don't think the idea of increased tax for improved benefits particularly when targeted at short term unemployment or mat / pat leave would be unpopular.

It's a pretty common method of paying benefits across Europe and as I posted Canada.

Also we don't vote on individual tax changes. There have been many improvements over the last decades that have costed more.

Increased payments from government decrease the amount companies need to top up. There may be a way of collecting this money by a small tax increase via employer prsi.
 
This is a comparison of maternity leave in the EU

Maternity and Paternity leave

It does not cover paternal leave. I would think a lot of countries will be renaming this parents leave and allowing each parent equal rights in future.

And on the free GP care it is so great to have it - I recall shelling out €150 over 3 visits to the GP when one child was small over one week and it sure puts pressure on the finances.
 
thedaddyman said:
Love my smallies to pieces but they cost a fortune but I need to be nice to them as they will decide what nursing home I end up in and also are the people who's taxes will be funding all of our future care and pensions
Click to expand...
I will have paid 43 years of social insurance contributions by the time I retire so I firmly believe I have fully funded my own contributory pension. Not my problem that our inept governments pay pensions out of current expenditure rather than investing a fund longer term.
 
Eh, no there wasn’t. There were flat benefits of around €350 a week.

Implementing such increases in benefits to bring them in line with the person’s salary, which is what they do in Switzerland, would cost a massive amount. It simply could not be funded by ‘a small increase via employer prsi’.

Maternity Benefit is around €280 a week. State employees and people in sectors such as the large multinationals, financial services, professional practices, or larger indigenous companies get paid their full salary for the six month period. That’s €7,280 versus potentially anything (e.g. €50,000 for someone on €100,000).

I think it’s clear what’s ‘nonsense’.
 
Last edited:
Sorry can't figure out how to remove.


Perhaps I can clarify.

The benefit you received has some very rough relationships to what you are earning. That's not common for social benefits in Ireland.

I also don't think that the state should cover the full pay but one option would be percentage with a cap.

Currently maternity benefit is 260 a week. That's a 60% for someone on min. wage.

A not way out there option would be covering 60% of salary up to say 50k. So thats max of €15k over 6 months as opposed to €6,800. I wouldn't expect this to be a day 1 either. More a target over a longer period of time.

Companies can still top it up obv. It will cost them less. It would reduce the need for women planning to have kids to need / want to work in a large company / public sector and many other benefits that @Itchy has mentioned.

Is you approach to all social support to get another job?
 

Think the above would be sexual discrimination unless the same payment was made available as paternity benefit to the father ?
 
The ‘benefit you received’ had no ‘very rough relationship’ to what anyone earned. It was a flat €350, just like the current maternity benefit.

My approach is for people to plan accordingly, and that includes planning for kids.
 

The situation at one moment in time. It changed a lot.

if you earned between €200 and €299.99 per week and were on the €203 rate of payment up to 9 November, you moved to standard jobseeker’s terms.
if you earned between €300 and €399.99 per week - the rate of payment was €203 per week
if you earned €400 or more - the rate of payment was €250 per week

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/0b0fc-covid-19-pandemic-unemployment-payment-rates/
 
None of which bears any relation whatsoever to linking social welfare benefits such as marernity leave with people salaries. PRSI rates would need to go up by many multiples. It’s pie in the sky stuff.
 
This is one of those systematic things that impacts for a few years. Like creche fees. You have a small window in which it impacts you and you make the best of what you can in your circumstances, maximising your family income and balancing the needs of your babies to your best ability. Whatever that looks like for your family.
 

It would very much be your problem if there were not enough workers to meet your pensions out of current government expenditure.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
None of which bears any relation whatsoever to linking social welfare benefits such as marernity leave with people salaries. PRSI rates would need to go up by many multiples. It’s pie in the sky stuff.
Click to expand...

The words you are looking for are "I was wrong".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register