The government recently introduced the new Work and Families Act to provide more maternity and paternity flexibility. On the one hand, this is great news for parents who want to spend more time out of the office to nurture their children, but on the other, how will businesses cope with the new legislation?
Steve Miller:
I recently read the DTI guidelines with respect to the Work and Families Act 2006 and couldn't help myself feeling that the guidelines were 'employee friendly' and the so-called balance for business was complete and utter waffle. Quite frankly, the thinking around work-life balance, maternity and paternity has gone completely bonkers.
When are we going to put ourselves in the shoes of the business? Do you honestly think that business can cope with more red tape that requires it to offer greater flexibility, provide additional maternity leave and provide fathers with up to 26 weeks paternity leave? Have the people in the ivory towers who design these regulations ever run a business? Don't get me wrong, having children is a wonderful thing to do, but we can't expect other people to pay for them and the world of work to accommodate never-ending parental demands.
Personally, I'm fed up to the back teeth of listening to the family friendly lobby talk about how these regulations are good for business. Give me the proof I shout rather than the rhetoric. Isn't it time we shouted out for 'business friendly' policies?
Ros Taylor:
As an owner of a small business myself I sympathise with Steve's point of view. If I had to continue to pay someone who is not there and also hire someone else to do their job my profits would tumble and put my enterprise in jeopardy.
However as a woman I also feel for young mothers who quite naturally want to spend the first year of their baby's life with them but also want to return to work. I am so torn on this one. And I do fear a backlash against young women. Why employ them when a man or older woman would provide less hassle and financial pain?
Malcolm Mackay:
Steve, you're right about balance being the issue. And of course the balance between the interests of the employee and the employer differs depending on the size of the employer.
Small business is finding it increasingly difficult to keep track of changes such as these, never mind implement them. There is the danger too that the likelihood of someone benefiting from particular rights can discourage the employer from making an offer of employment in the first place.
Personally I am not of the view that the thinking has gone bonkers. These rights are invoked on a small number of occasions during the course of what may be lengthy employment and have to be seen in proportion.
There is no doubt also that the way the employer deals with these matters can have a positive impact on employment relations. However, it is getting very costly and we mustn't forget that in this global marketplace jobs can quickly find their way elsewhere if overheads are too high, irrespective of the reason for the increased cost.
New rights are pointless if they backfire on those they are designed to protect by making employers think twice about employing them or by driving business elsewhere.
For more information:
Transferring maternity leave to fathers
Proposals for new paternity leave rights
DTI issues guidance on new maternity regulations
Pregnancy and maternity rights, frequently asked questions
BLOGATHON CHALLENGE QUESTIONS
1. Do you think you should be allowed to work more frequently home and at the times that suit you?
2. Do you think employees would abuse this freedom or would they be more productive and motivated if they had better work/life balance?
Write your comment and if you wish, please state your profession and nationality, then press publish.
