AmerLisa

You actually think (we're not talking health care here) that stepping away from one's career is going to be able to walk back into that same career three years later? And factor in the very high cost of childcare in the UK....hmmmm. I'd be worried.

My BIL and his wife had a baby less then a year ago, they waited till they were in their late 30's and she could comfortably leave her career behind. Thankfully she'll not have to worry about stepping back into the work profession, unless of course he leaves her and then like any other single mother - off to work she'll go. Knowing her I doubt very much she'd consider council estates or living off the dole a good substitute for working and supporting her child.

Tracym

Another interesting thought re. the alimony situation - many states have no-fault divorce.

So what if the wife gives up her career for the kids... and then has an affair and leaves the husband. Should he still have to pay alimony then?

Again, I can see arguments on either side.

AmerLisa

Alimony is really a thing of the past when the "little woman" stayed at home and raised the kids. Things are greatly different (in good and bad ways, obviously) now because most women work. Not always out of necessity to further their careers, but to make ends meet. You have to work hard to make sure your children have the latest techno gadgets they don't really need.....

snowbunny

You'll be glad to know that Puritanism is alive and well in Texas. There is no alimony, as I have stated, but *asset division* can be affected by infidelity so long as that infidelity is admitted or proven.

The purpose of alimony, child support, and asset division is PRIMARILY to allow each parent to run a separate residence for their children, because the days of sole custody are also long past. Having a mother in poverty is NOT in the benefit of the children, even if their father is doing fine and provides for them. I very strongly agree that women should have a career and not depend upon *anybody* for their livelihoods. However, you pay a price for this as I am reminded now that school has started again. The mothers who volunteer at school at the elementary level -- they see their kids and are connected in so many ways to each other and the school. I can't even begin to compete because I work, and whether or not it's fair, the politically well connected moms make sure their children get the best teachers and are better able to follow assignments and homework than a mother who's working, commuting, and sharing custody. Too many people, especially men, think that a woman's inability or reluctance to work is based upon laziness, but that is rarely the case.

snowbunny

And to add: IF we American workers were given reasonable amounts of holiday time to cover school holidays and allow us a few days up at school, it would help tremendously.

This is why I've never bought the conservative bullshit about caring for families. If conservatives TRULY cared, they'd ensure decent teacher pay, health insurance for kids and reasonable working hours for parents.

AmerLisa

Not if your work dictates how you can spend that time.....

snowbunny

Well, that's true. I dunno, maybe I should go back to farming. I'm only one generation removed on each side from the farm. I kinda like the work, you pick your own hours, and you buy crop insurance. I'd have to wear some kind of UV hazmat suit with my complexion, but I'm sure John Deere has something.

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

I know, for a fact, its going to be a lot easier and faster to step back onto the career ladder in a company which has granted you a three year break in which you have a history and record of achievement than trying to get a break back into the workplace with a random employer, yes, without doubt.

By the time a child is pushing three, pre-school placement money kicks in paying an extremely useful chunk of day care costs and what wth working tax credits and childcare tax credits (which can cover up to 80%) of chilcare costs its a very, very reasonable proposition for kickstarting the career you left. Certainly a darn sight more than the sweet FA you get stateside.

EDIT: What has benefit payments got to do with any of this, we are talking about working provisions? I'm not saying getting back into work cant be done, Im saying its incredibly more difficult if you have to start from scratch and at least no women has to worry about poor health insurance and employment benefits if she has to take 5 steps back down the ladder. It is all part of the big picture. The point was how much more vulnerable a split leaves a women if she has taken a break, through choice or not, now that alimony seems to be becoming a thing of the past.

The one arguable benefit of the US work culture for women returning to work is seemingly less ageism, I dont know how that permeates through all industries and employment levels though.

Childcare costs vary wildly in the US anyway, I've seen numbers banded around on here that look very comparable, I've also seen numbers that look less than half the cost. And that's at the 2:1 xrate.

AmerLisa

How many companies are going to look favorably at a worker taking a break for 3 years and walking back into their jobs? You've got to be kidding.....

Not many can take 3 years off from employment. While the maternity pay is good, quite good - it can't always compensate for a higher wage. Sorry I disagree. And preschool placement money kicks in yes, but its only for a few hours a day - so what do you do the rest of the day?

As far as this country is concerned, it still boggles the mind that people can somehow live, be happy and make a living here. And yet they don't get handouts from the government.

snowbunny

But that's the problem. Why do we look down upon women who leave a job to raise kids? Someone's got to do it! It does NOT mean that the woman is not a hard worker, or doesn't like her job, or whatever. Personally I think a woman whose kids are older is going to be a more productive worker than one who's forced back to work six weeks after birth.

In countries with a falling birth rate and without a high immigration rate (eg Italy, Scandinavia) babies are *welcome* as new members of society, they are treasured. With the way the US seems to treat its children maybe it's best not to have ANY. American children are seen as a warpable consumer segment, not as the newest and cutest members of a society.

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

The multitude of organisations that offer career breaks would disagree with you it seems. Different work cultures view experience and loyalty differently. Most of the US doesn't buy into the classic unwritten employee/employer contract and employers gain and lose from that. Employees, mostly lose from it though.

Maternity rights are not really about the pay - although its very nice - the key is the right to return to your previous job if you wish to. Now it certainly is true that even if you return to the same job after having had a child, your chance of promotion drops considerably for quite some time, it is also known that you will never stay on the same salary curve as someone without children and that is true the world over. But most people dont want to take on more until kids go back to school anyway.

It's not hand outs ffs, its the provision of pre school education. The government allow you to spend the money where you choose to rather than forcing all kids to go to a particular pre school or any school for that matter, not everyone chooses to put their kids in pre-schools.

Steerpike

I sympathize with the concept, but - take the company I work for ... 40 employees and growing fast, a classic startup. We don't know where we will be tomorrow, let alone next year, let alone 3 years from now. We could not possibly give a commitment to someone that they could re-enter the workforce (OUR workforce) in 3 years. IF a position is available, and IF you are still interested, THEN we may be able to re-employ you in 3 years - but a solid contractual commitment - not feasible. Obviously, the concept works better if you are bigger.

Also - and I hate to say this but it has been my experience, sadly - almost every woman I've worked with and who has had a baby has taken full advantage of the various (not so good) benefits, and then quit either the day before or the week after they return. Any system where the company extends a benefit for such a long time requires some kind of two-way commitment and two-way penalty. Right now, a company MUST hold a position open, but the employee does NOT have to return.

Just giving what I see as a practical aspect to this discussion!

Michael

I'm not sure which companies in which countries offer 3 year leave of absence and will guarantee the job after an extended absence. Most companies in the US that I worked for offered a possible 1 year leave of absence but the company wouldn't guarantee that the position would be available at the end of the leave but would make attempts to find that person a similar position. One of my previous bosses took advantage of the leave but when she returned after the leave, her group had been phased out and the company was having financial difficulties so she wasn't offered a job.

If the person taking the leave is in a management or critical position, what should the company do during that time? If the company hires someone to fill the position, then the company may need to fire someone after the person returns. If the position is left open, how can any work be accomplished for possibly many people that are working under that position?

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

Quite a considerable number of large organisations offer career break options. Statutory maternity leave logistics are handled using interim employment and is why a huge number of contract positions are offered and filled in europe to cover maternity leave. Unless the job role legitimately becomes redundant during that period the company has to keep the job open, simple as, it's the law here.

It does take some working out yes, and some employers will do their utmost to get themsevles out of awkward positions they don't want to be in with women who's job roles create unusual difficulties. It is illegal however, and has to be approached very, very carefully. Tribunal payouts for wrongful dismissal of pregnant/maternity leave employees can be very high.

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

Small companies do not have to adhere to all parts of the maternity rights legislation, pay sections mostly. Another system kicks in if you work for an exempt company or are self employed. Career breaks are offered by the biggies, financial sector, pharma etc etc.

You do also have to return for minimum time limits or pay quite a lot of your maternity pay back btw, there is a limited two way commitment in the law.