Fathers will be able to take up to six months off on paternity leave while their baby’s mother returns to work, the Government will announce today.
They will have a legal right to take the place of the mother at home for the last three months of her nine-month maternity break.
Fathers would be eligible during that three-month paternity leave to statutory government pay of £123 a week.
There are a number of obvious reasons why this is a bad idea. First it is a stupid imposition on businesses given our economic situation.
Second it is wrong to force people to subsidise other people's children. Given that contraception now makes childbirth a real choice why should Peter be made to pay for Paul's baby?
But less obvious is the negative impact it will have on young men. Any man between the ages of 25 and 35 is now going to come under extra scrutiny when applying for jobs.
Because what right minded business is going to employ someone who may cost them 6 months paternity leave? Not many I bet.
So as a young aspiring man in this age bracket all I can say is, "Thanks Harriet, thanks a bundle. Cos this is exactly what I need right now..."
6 comments:
Where does Harman get her demented ideas from? Is she being put up to this by others, or is she actually a demonic entity in her own right?
And when will she and her cohorts be made to pay for what they have done/ are doing to us?
Having babies was always a choice
Social engineering on the grandest of scales - what f***ing stupid arrogance!
Clearly it wasn't Harman's turn to borrow the group supply of braincells when she came up with this one.
What sort of common sense determines that I have to be financially or otherwise responsible for other people's kids when I didn't even get the fun of making them?
Ah, yes. Sorry. I forgot. That fine and harmless chap "Common Sense" is being held without trial under the prevention of terrorism act.
Harman is a collectivist, so to her addled mind it is perfectly sensible.
It strengthens the role and force of the state, wedging itself between employee and employer. I suspect we will eventually be subjected to internal work permits, or should I say employment permits whereby a company will only be able to emply certain sorts of people to "ensure balance". Do not think that Mad Hattie would stop short of that.
Its more "divide and rule". That's the stock-in-trade for mainstream politicians.
It's not only the cost of 6 month's paternity leave that's the problem. The real problem is having to pay for a contractor (at a much higher rate) to replace the employee who has gone on paternity leave.
Post a Comment