Looking at it from a bosses point of view, if you had choice of employing someone who, if you look after them will work continuosly for the next five years and add value to the company, or someone who may work for two years, have months off and the come back and demand time of at inconvienient times without notice, who would you choose?

Demands for guaranteed time off to have children has worked against the working woman, it is wrong but it seems to be a sad fact.  I wonder how many young women are just not getting a start because of this concern by empoloyers.

As a self confessed socialist, even I would think twice about employing a young woman if continuiuty of service was essential to the success of my business and the welfare of the other workers that I employed.

I will now stand back and wait for the wave of moral indignation.

Yes - it's bloody ridiculous don't you think 

everybody should get that benefit men included 

no problem with what you say Hayley

As long as they performance is not impacted, then there should be no issue.

But why can't men take the maternity leave and not get penalized as well

Because you dont feel the pain of childbirth.

What a stupid question.

Aaaah - so the leave is to alleviate the pain?

Thanks somebody - youre certainly nobody's fool

you gonna part the seas or walk on water and come thump me ?

Where's Brocky???

Don't tell me he's leaving you to do all the work :(

Hayis, it is not about having a guarantee that a person will work for your company for five years, it is about the employer having at least some control.  If an employee is good enough to apply for and get a better job elseware that employee is worth sitting down with and renegotiating their salary package, maybe they are not, in which case wish them luck and send them on their way.

If an employee decides to take maternity leave, then that is it, the employer is required to let them go and keep a job for them when they are ready to return, two very different scenerios.  I did make it quite clear that I was talking about positions where continuity of service was essential to the success of the business, maybe you missed that bit.

 The point is not about what is right or wrong, I believe the question was, "Is maternity discrimination pushing women out of work?" It is quite simple, we have a very competative job market, I regard labour as a commodity, you agree to sell your time to an employer for a certain dollar value based on hours worked and a certain set of conditions.  If you impose a set of conditions on the employer that makes you more expensive or harder to manage than someone else with similar skills and potential, why would the employer choose you?  In any case the choice should be in the hands of the person whose risking capital in the business and possibly the workers who will be told that they can't have holidays at Christmas because so and so has children and should be allowed to spend it with them, or the one who has relieved in a position for someone on maternity leave did a better job and is told so and so is back now move to the back of the bus, or even the employee who is constantly required to take up the slack because so and so has a child related emergency.  It seems to me that a lot of people are inconvenienced for a few.  I would not like to imagine what it would be like to have to manage a business with half of its employees at child bearing age not knowing when one or all may decide to start a family.

Every pancake has two sides. 

Because it would not alter or solve the problem Raphael.  I think that the idea of women being able to take leave to look after their babies is good, but it impacts on those around them, and that is a problem.

The question was not do you agree with maternity leave, it was do do you think it is working against young women workers.  The evidence seems to show that it does. 

Women do have the heavier load in society vis-à-vis, they are the child bearers, they work outside of the home and carry most of the work at home. For these reasons society must make allowances.

Get the violins out

What century are you living in ?

Why did you have to say that to the lady.

You are very rude person with little manners.

What century are you living in?

With a name like Raphael I think that you are a male who spends a lot of time on here instead of helping his wife.

Wasnt being rude. Just telling Kiah that he has old fashioned ideas steeped in ealy 20th century 

Why do you think Kiah is a lady

Its a unisex name . I assumed it was a he

FYI - I do all everything at home, some of which I outsource for a fee 

Thank you Somebody. I didn't want to waste my time answering his rudeness and I appreciate your comments.

For your information Raphael, Kiah is an Aboriginal name meaning "The Beautiful Place." I have never heard of it being unisex.

I will add, I intend to contribute to this forum and already, I have made a number of reports about you and Brocky. I shall continue to do so if you try to insult me in any way.

Hi there Kiah

You may report me that;s your chioce. But do it for a valid reason and be consistent. Report Reagen and Ben too for harassing me 

Kiah - Boy's name meaning, origin, and popularity

I stand by my original post that your views on the role of women is antiquated and steeped in the last century 

Kiah, ignore the little person. Surprising his littler mate hasn't come in to back him up.

If you have a problem with me Ravvy, you are very welcome to report me. 

dont have a problem at all with an inconsequential like you Reekan