Duncan Fisher

I was busy writing my second blog on shared parenting when the debate about maternity and paternity leave took off.  Here is what I said to the journalists and policy people who have phoned me in the last two days.

The two changes - transferability of maternity leave to fathers and extension of paid maternity leave from 9 to 12 months - were firm commitments five years ago when nine months of paid maternity leave were put in place for mothers and two weeks for fathers.  The actual news is that one of the commitments has been dropped and the other has been kicked forward to be dealt with by the next Government.  The desk has been cleared.

Good, I am pleased.

The extension of leave for mothers, without an extension of leave for fathers, immediately precedes the increase in the pay gap starting in 2007, after years of progress towards equality.  This was predicted beforehand and I believe the connection is causal.  The currrent leave system has legitimised the idea that men have an entitlement to unblemished work and career prospects when they become a father and has legitimised the idea that the sole responsibility for nurturing children rests with the mother.  This is one of the biggest differences in paid leave entitlements between women and men in the world.  So I am happy that further extension of paid maternity leave has been stopped.  I do not think that stopping this extension will reverse the damage to women from this legislation, but at least we have stopped digging deeper.  We can start introducing more leave for mothers only when we have adequate leave for fathers; then, quite apart from the benefits that accrue from fathers being more active in caring for children, women will avoid the penalties of being the only parent expected to take time off work.

As for transferability, I am, frankly, rather bored by the debate.  It is a debate about empty gestures.  Government knows the system is not going to work anyway; it published its analysis of why not in 2004 (see paragraph 28).  Only 4-8% of families where the mother is eligible for maternity leave, are predicted to use transferability.  Partners of women who are not eligible for maternity leave will have no entitlement, whatever their employment status.

It is obvious why it won’t work.  What mother and father, after six months, want complete role reversal?  Very, very few.  But if the leave were flexible, then you would see something very different.  Take one conservative possibility of the millions that flexibility would make possible - perhaps mum on 2 days/week of work with 3 days maternity leave, and dad on 4 days/week of work and 1 day of leave.    In that arrangement, baby is only out of parental care 1 day a week, and the smallest amount of work flexibility could remove even that.  We need the leave system to be amenable to the boxing and coxing that is the stuff of life for parents of babies.

And why the transferability?  This is a nightmare to administer - someone has to track what both parents are doing.  Just let each parent have a period of leave, and then each can negotiate individually with their employer.

Then there is the problem of pay.  The leave is not well enough paid to be affordable by many families.  The unpaid component of the maternity leave is purely hypothetical - there is already three months of unpaid parental leave for each parent, but hardly anyone knows it exists because it is not affordable and not worth knowing about.  In the example above, the family might even decide that one day off a week for the father is not affordable, given all the other penalties he is likely to face by declaring to his employer that he is prepared to compromise work for something else.  I would rather see, for a specified sum of public money, less leave and more pay.

I also question the six month rule - that any mother wishing to return to work, even part-time, before the child is six months, is not allowed to use her leave to let her partner take care of the baby.  Human beings are distinct in the degree to which the care of infants is shared with kin; six months alone at home all day is a pretty tough call for mothers, going against how we humans are hard-wired to share this work.  Breastfeeding is often used to justify six months, but going back to work for short periods does not stop breastfeeding, and a father who has been well prepared to support breastfeeding can be the best person to look after the baby while the mother is at work.  I am not presenting this as the way to do things; I am just asking how it helps mothers to withhold this choice? (And, of course, there is the problem that most fathers are not well prepared to support breastfeeding, even though, in terms of bang for buck, this would be the cheapest way to increase the UK’s amazingly low breastfeeding rates.)

The shelving of changes to the leave system till the new Government means there is the opportunity for a real re-think.  If we introduce the currently proposed changes in 2011, it will take about five years to ascertain they do not work, then three years to introduce a change.  So by 2020, we will be starting to introduce a workable system.  Let’s save ourselves a decade and start the incremental process of building a rational system, starting with a sound foundation, based on what real families really need.

Fatherhood breastfeeding, gender equality, paternity leave, work