+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 52 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 516
  1. #171
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,366
    Thanks
    2,566
    Thanked
    3,783
    Reviews
    7
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by CMF View Post
    I wonder what people did before this PPL was introduced, and before CCR and CCB, and before many employers even had paid maternity leave....

    This thread screams of self-entitlement.

    There, I said it.
    If we didn't have paid parental leave, I imagine either our population growth would slow (we're already running out of people to look after our ageing population) and / or many more people would be living in poverty.

    I shouldn't be financially penalised for being born with a vagina instead of a penis. PPL attempts to even things up between men and women. It still has a way to go but until men can give birth and breastfeed, I feel like I am entitled to PPL.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JR03 For This Useful Post:

    Falkor  (11-05-2015),MINIRoo  (11-05-2015),ScubaGal  (11-05-2015)

  3. #172
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,321
    Thanks
    1,552
    Thanked
    2,537
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by TeaM View Post
    All of this just makes me think that Australia should really do what Canada did several decades ago.

    In Canada, parental leave is part of a mandatory Employment Insurance scheme. Everybody pays a small levy from their income (it's a small percentage but I can't remember what that is now), and EI covers everything from being made redundant, being on extended sick leave, take leave to care for a sick child, spouse, or parents... and having a baby. Women in Canada get 12 months at 55% of their salary. It is capped, but I can't remember what the cap is now. Yes, it means that women who earn more, get more, but equally, they pay more because their levy is higher in real terms than someone on a lower income. Technically, parents are able to share the last 9 months, but in reality the vast majority is taken up by the mother. This actually is cost neutral for the government now because the levy covers all the entitlements that are paid out under the Insurance scheme. This is in contrast to our system which pays crap and actually costs the government money...

    It has become the norm for mothers to take 12 months off work, but it has also become the norm for mothers to return to work full time after that. Of my friends back in Canada who have children, only one stays home, and that is because she had twins and her husband travels a lot. The rest of them have all returned full time. They think it's very strange that women here will go back only 2 or maybe 3 days per week for a long period of time. In comparison, of my friends who have had children here, none intend to return full time.

    From my observations, what has happened is this:

    Before a couple have children, usually they are both working (we are using working parents here as an example since these are the target recipients of PPL), and have a standard of living commensurate to their income. When they have a child, and the mother is given a decent replacement wage while she is off work, they are able, mostly, to maintain that standard of living. Of course, there are some small adjustments made since it's not 100% of her wage, but it's usually enough that they don't have to make huge chances. Fast forward 12 months, and now the woman has a much stronger financial incentive to return to work because otherwise they lose that income which they have been counting on to continue to live the way they have been living.

    By contrast, when there is no PPL in place, that same couple will usually make the necessary sacrifices for the mother to stay home for some period of time. In some cases, that can only be temporary, but in many cases what happens is once the couple have dropped their standard of living and are now making due with one income, the drive to return to work for the mother decreases. Now, her income is seen as "extra". Those 2 or 3 days she may work are a great top up to the family income but have no longer become necessary - the mentality shifts to a primary and secondary income situation, rather than a dual income situation. And so we perpetuate this gender bias that we have in Australia where women earn less than men, they tend to work part time once they have children, their careers go backwards etc etc etc.

    Yes, part of the equation is childcare for sure, but Canada does not have a perfect childcare system - I hear the same complaint about costs and availability from my friends back in Canada. Yet Canada has a higher workplace participation for women after having children. And I genuinely believe a lot of that is due to their PPL system.

    Now none of this is to say that I don't support women who chose to stay home. I am one of those. But I'm just saying in terms of the budget and our economy, we would do better with this type of system.
    This is the system in France too, coupled with high quality childcare (it's actually a school) that you pay according to your family income but it is cheap if not free.
    All my friends are back in their FT job, especially after a first kid. After the 2d or 3d they usually take more time off or go back to work PT until their last one is 3yo.

    We have a very high percentage of women in the workforce.
    From an economical POV yes it is a waste of resources to have your highly qualified female population SAH.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ExcuseMyFrench For This Useful Post:

    MINIRoo  (11-05-2015),TeaM  (11-05-2015),VicPark  (11-05-2015)

  5. #173
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    3,196
    Thanks
    312
    Thanked
    960
    Reviews
    13
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by CMF View Post
    I wonder what people did before this PPL was introduced, and before CCR and CCB, and before many employers even had paid maternity leave....

    This thread screams of self-entitlement.

    There, I said it.
    I get told of the glory days when a 4 bedroom house in my suburb was only 200k max ( now at least 650k), rent was $200 a week ( now $500-$600) and childcare was only $20 -$50 a day.
    This was less than 15 years ago and incomes haven't increased in the same%. So if one parent had to take time out then they could afford to live on one wage.

  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to maternidade For This Useful Post:

    BH-KatiesMum  (11-05-2015),Falkor  (11-05-2015),heplusme  (11-05-2015),Preshy2008  (11-05-2015),ScubaGal  (11-05-2015),Star Light  (12-05-2015)

  7. #174
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Inner West
    Posts
    3,267
    Thanks
    1,892
    Thanked
    1,916
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the WeekBusiest Member of the Week - week ended 19/9/2014Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/7/2014200 Posts in a week100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    I used to work in this sector. The pay for the years at uni and the sh*t we put up with was appalling, the only thing that made it slightly competitive was salary sacrifice. Way to go libs, let's drive hard working professionals who want to make the world a better place away from the sector. makes my blood boil!!!



    Surely that can't be right? That's ridiculous



    I'm trying to choose my words selectively as I don't want to offend. But if you are earning such a large income, surely you have saved for kids? My husband is the income earner and we earn around 60k a year yet have money stashed away. There is a large gap between child 2 and 3 so we had to buy everything again. We had that bought months before he was even born.

    PPL should be there to help you stay home with your child for a sizeable time. As a SAHM I know all the benefits that's why I'm home. But I'm not sure it's fair to expect you get a large income matched for months and months every baby. Children are a choice for both you and me. Surely you agree the child is also your financial responsibility? If it's that much of a 'penalty' that you can't live than maybe the next child should be rethought, just as I've had to.
    It's an interesting point about saving up.

    I've certainly saved - I haven't had any rec leave in several years, that's been great for my mental health while we went through IVF and miscarriage.

    I've paid money into the mortgage and saved and we will now spend all that to avoid defaulting sending us back a few years financially. Oh well.

    What I haven't done is saved for long enough.

    If I was to give advice to younger women today I'd let them know that they are going to have a huge financial penalty across their working lives because they are female and I'd advise them to start stashing away 5-10% of their annual income to pay for the time they need for their uterine , childrearing and breastfeeding functions should they decide to/be able to reproduce. While they're at it, may as well put some aside in case of IVF.

    I'd tell them to start a serious superannuation top up every payday to counter the loss of super that will occur if they want to spend anytime raising their own kids.

    I'd suggest they not worry too much about smashing glass ceilings because on an average career trajectory that puts you in senior management right when you might want to take a year off and it's not hard to be pushed out of the workforce when trying to return.

    I'd suggest they choose their industry very wisely because some have much better conditions for women than others. Certainly don't go into any bleeding heart not-for-profits.

    And I'd tell them that the only other way to avoid these 'woman problems' would be to find a nice wealthy partner who could make up the gap for them, and be sure never to leave them for any reason.

  8. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to ScubaGal For This Useful Post:

    ExcuseMyFrench  (11-05-2015),Falkor  (11-05-2015),JR03  (11-05-2015),MINIRoo  (11-05-2015),MrsChino  (11-05-2015),Preshy2008  (11-05-2015),Rose&Aurelia&Hannah  (11-05-2015),smallpotatoes  (12-05-2015),Star Light  (12-05-2015),VicPark  (11-05-2015)

  9. #175
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    265
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked
    126
    Reviews
    0
    I see a lot of people saying working mums will suffer if their work entitlement is less than govt PPL - I understood the new proposal to mean that you could CHOOSE one or the other ie. if your work pays you 4 weeks and that equates to less than govt PPL you'd choose govt PPL..?

  10. #176
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,321
    Thanks
    1,552
    Thanked
    2,537
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by ChelleBH View Post
    Kind of besides the point. We would be paying $700 per week for our kids to be in daycare, I earn $730. While DF would contribute to daycare costs, it still evens out that we would be $30 better off each week - that is nothing when you are away from your kids all week despite DF contributing too? Our income is joint, everything is in the same pool, so no, it's not worth it.

    ETA - we fall into the income bracket of $185k+ when I work. The increase of the rebate limit to $10k helps but still does not cover the full financial year. I'd bring home $5,520 pa ($106 per week).
    $700 a week after rebate? How many kids do you have in childcare?
    I'm inner city Melbourne and will be out of pocket $430 for 2 kids per week FT childcare. So $215 on my salary.

    I agree that $30 a week is nothing and would not do it. I would work part time though, just to keep my skills up to date and get some super contribution (and not go mental at home).

  11. #177
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked
    68
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ScubaGal View Post
    Well I think you'll find women a decade ago were less likely to rejoin the workforce.

    Hence the introduction of the policy.
    Exactly.

    Some interesting articles

    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politi...10-ggy8xq.html




    I get so sick of the "in my day" argument. We are talking now, what was perhaps relevant 10-20 years ago doesn't apply now. We had progress being made for working women, now it is in danger of a major backward step.

    In 2004, the baby bonus was introduced & has now been phased out. I can vouch for the fact housing was more affordable 10 years ago...20 years ago, an average mortgage was probably doable on one one wage. No doubt child care was more affordable.

    As pointed out in the links above, the PPL introduced in 2011 was designed to complement any existing employer leave . It was not designed as an "either/or" so the proposed change is putting a lot of families at a disadvantage. I can't fathom why 6 months ago this Govt was pushing for all working mothers to get 26 weeks, now it's backflipped to "oh, you get a few weeks with your employer, that will have to do". For a lot of employers, being family friendly was a drawcard to attract employees and part of their terms of employment.

    Oh & well said @ScubaGal - do they think none of us save & budget? I saved as much as possible before baby #1 to make up the income shortfall we'd have, even with PPL and my employer leave. Same again with this baby due in Sept (although it is much harder to save when on a part time wage and with a child in care). It looks like I'll be fortunate to receive both again...which is great for me, not so much for those planning bubs in 12 months. TBH, the real difficult time I forsee financially is when I go back to work even less hours, with 2 young children in care. I'm trying to save for that eventuality now.
    Last edited by Falkor; 11-05-2015 at 08:44.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Falkor For This Useful Post:

    ExcuseMyFrench  (11-05-2015)

  13. #178
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    7,836
    Thanks
    5,052
    Thanked
    4,437
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/4/15100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by ScubaGal View Post
    In much simpler terms, under the budget package our family will supposedly be $1500 better off, but that's little compensation when at the same time I'll be $11,500 worse off because I was silly enough to earn a greater proportion of the household income.

    Silly me.
    I think many of your points in your last post were very valid, but I guess you're expecting 'it all' to be all of these things:

    The higher income warner in your house
    Breastfeed for 6 months
    Stay home for a year
    Get employer paid maternity leave
    get government paid parental leave
    Return to work and get a 50% childcare rebate

    Is this too much to expect? I'm not sure. I'm really not. Part of me says no - part of me says yes.

    The part of me that says no is that as women we should be able to bear children and not be penalised for it in any way.

    The part of me that says yes is that having children does take sacrifices. From the day they are born they become number 1 and effect out lives in so many ways, sometimes we just need to take a hit somewhere.

    It's like looking to buy a house for a certain budget, people want to pay as little as possible and get all the rooms they want, have fully done, in an area they want. Chances are this doesn't happen! Something has to give somewhere and I see having children to be the same. Something has to give somewhere and I'm not sure it's the governments responsibility to assist everyone have that perfect fairytail family without any sacrifices.

    Some people say it shows inequality to females, but we can't help that we are the ones who have to bear and feed (if we are lucky enough to be able to breastfeed) our children and us missing out on income effects the entire family, not just ourselves, we all make sacrifices on less if a wage.

    As I say, I'm really not sure where I sit.

    But what I do know is in my situation, I got 26 full weeks pay from work at full time wage (2nd child and I had been back at work only 3 days) plus the 18 weeks pay. I was lucky enough to have it all (though going back to work at 10 months not 12 - again this
    is my choice to not be without income - I could stay home longer and forgo more income). But I purposefully sought employment where I am for the very reason that I would get those maternity leave benefits.

    Im a fence sitter

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to A-Squared For This Useful Post:

    CMF  (11-05-2015)

  15. #179
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,321
    Thanks
    1,552
    Thanked
    2,537
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by CMF View Post
    I wonder what people did before this PPL was introduced, and before CCR and CCB, and before many employers even had paid maternity leave....

    This thread screams of self-entitlement.

    There, I said it.
    Of the more than 30 countries in the OECD offering a paid parental leave scheme, Australia is one of only two nations that fail to pay parental leave based on a replacement wage.

    So many self entitled stupid countries out there!

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ExcuseMyFrench For This Useful Post:

    Lillac  (13-05-2015),MINIRoo  (11-05-2015),Preshy2008  (11-05-2015),ScubaGal  (11-05-2015)

  17. #180
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,846
    Thanks
    6,200
    Thanked
    16,890
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by ScubaGal View Post
    It's an interesting point about saving up.

    I've certainly saved - I haven't had any rec leave in several years, that's been great for my mental health while we went through IVF and miscarriage.

    I've paid money into the mortgage and saved and we will now spend all that to avoid defaulting sending us back a few years financially. Oh well.

    What I haven't done is saved for long enough.

    If I was to give advice to younger women today I'd let them know that they are going to have a huge financial penalty across their working lives because they are female and I'd advise them to start stashing away 5-10% of their annual income to pay for the time they need for their uterine , childrearing and breastfeeding functions should they decide to/be able to reproduce. While they're at it, may as well put some aside in case of IVF.

    I'd tell them to start a serious superannuation top up every payday to counter the loss of super that will occur if they want to spend anytime raising their own kids.

    I'd suggest they not worry too much about smashing glass ceilings because on an average career trajectory that puts you in senior management right when you might want to take a year off and it's not hard to be pushed out of the workforce when trying to return.

    I'd suggest they choose their industry very wisely because some have much better conditions for women than others. Certainly don't go into any bleeding heart not-for-profits.

    And I'd tell them that the only other way to avoid these 'woman problems' would be to find a nice wealthy partner who could make up the gap for them, and be sure never to leave them for any reason.
    Oh yes, agree with everything you've said. My DD wants to do the same industry as I did. I told her not to. The pay is shocking. I worked for an NGO and I had no mat leave when DD was born, we didn't even get leave loading bc of contracts!

    I don't think we need to save for every cent for a child. Working women should certainly be entitled to PPL. But I do think everyone (working and at home) needs to help fund their child. My heart so badly wanted a 4th child but we had to be realistic. Financially it would have drained us too much and I need to get back to work.


 

Similar Threads

  1. The Budget!! #2
    By beebs in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 278
    Last Post: 07-07-2014, 13:12
  2. What does the budget mean for you
    By loislane2010 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 24-05-2014, 14:49
  3. The Budget?
    By Ellewood in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 18-05-2014, 19:44

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Mother and Baby Shop
Save $$$ during our Christmas Sale Mother and Baby Shop
Great prices on Schoenhut kids pianos, toys, baby clothing as well as big brands like Pigeon, NUK, Cherub Baby and many more. Sale starts on 1 November 2016 and ends on the 27 December 2016. Hurry! Place your order today!
sales & new stuffsee all
Pea Pods
Buy 2 Award Winning Pea Pods Reusable One Size Nappies for only $38 (in your choice of colours) and receive a FREE roll of Bamboo Liners. Don't miss out, we don't usually have discounts on the nappies, so grab this special offer!
Special Offer! Save $12
featured supporter
The Health Hub & Glowing Expectations
Glowing Expectations is conveniently located at The Health Hub in Darlinghurst. We offer pre & post natal personal training, small group pregnancy exercise classes, flexible mums & bubs sessions, massage, & naturopathy in our air-conditioned studio.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!