CPSU mothers have their say at paid maternity leave inquiry
7 May 2008, 2:15pm
Belinda Harrison, Maya Stuart-Fox, Melanie Harwood and CPSU's Nadine Flood at the Productivity Commission.
CPSU women were front and centre at the Productivity Commission's inquiry into paid maternity leave which began in Canberra on 7 May 2008.
Four CPSU members representing a range of ages, levels and backgrounds shared their experiences to the inquiry which has started hearing submissions concerning the feasibility of introducing a statutory minimum requirement for paid maternity leave.
CPSU position: While there have been massive changes in society and work over the last 35 years, paid maternity leave entitlements in the public sector have remained virtually unchanged. Put simply, 12 weeks paid support is just not enough time.
It is now time to take a stand for what is really needed to support new parents. We are calling on the Rudd Government to act as a model employer and set the standard for the Australian community. As all parents know, the first six months of a new baby’s life are critical and the government must play a key role in supporting mothers and newborn babies.
Women should have access to paid maternity leave, on full pay plus superannuation, for six months after the birth of their child.
Shifting the focus: The public sector is in a battle for talent, but is losing the war. A recent ANAO Report concluded that "recruitment remains an ongoing challenge for APS agencies. …The current tight labour market conditions make it difficult to attract sufficient skilled staff, and …many positions remain unfilled. …Direct APS recruitment costs were estimated to total around $370 million in 2006–07."
Put simply, over the last 30 years the APS has lost its edge as an employer of choice and its competitors are luring the best and brightest staff by providing better pay and more support for women who have babies. For example many universities provide up to twelve months paid leave. Since 2005, the Australian Catholic University has provided its women staff 12 weeks leave on full pay and a further 40 weeks on 0.6 pay. To remain in the race of talent the APS must again take the lead in the provision of truly flexible working arrangements, including 6 month paid maternity leave.
Measuring up internationally: The World Health Organisation recommends infants should be exclusively breastfed on demand from birth for at least 4 and, if possible, 6 months of age. ‘Breastfeeding has been shown to provide significant health benefits for both mother and child. For babies, breastfeeding increases resistance to infection and disease, reduces the likelihood of allergic diseases such as asthma and eczema, and is also associated with higher IQ scores .
More information
Recent media: Watch video or read a transcript from the 7.30 Report here.
Campaign page: All related news, views, resources on this issue in the one place. Click here.
Productivity commission: More on the inquiry, including the terms of reference, here.
Member's view: Read the views of other CPSU members on paid maternity leave here.
Have your say: Complete our survey by following this link - closes 11 May 2008.
Comments(4)
Posted by:Greg - 3 Jun 2008, 11:22am
The debate about maternity leave is quite revealing, but there's an important issue that's being ignored by the union movement. It's brought up here:
SIMON LAUDER: It's the proposal for employer top-ups that worries Joshua Gans from the Melbourne Business School.
The professor of economics says if maternity leave comes at the expense of employers, some may be more reluctant to hire women.
JOSHUA GANS: It's all very well to recognise gender discrimination but we also have to recognise that sometimes policy interventions in the interests of parents and women in particular, may well have unintended consequences that could be more damaging.
Professor Gans is saying that employers who have to give women maternity leave would engage in sex discrimination. Now, I thought that behaviour like that is actually illegal. The unions (including CPSU) should be coming out and saying loud and clear that such employer threats to act illegally are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
Back in the 1960s, Aborigines won equal wages for work on pastoral stations. Once the decision came down, the bosses sacked them all. It was the same racism in action both times - first in denying Aborigines equal wages and then, once it became compulsory, in sacking them rather than pay up. Unfortunately, this wasn't illegal, as there was no Racial Discrimination Act.
In this case, we have employers displaying their sexism by refusing to allow women to have maternity leave on a living wage, while threatening to discriminate against them if it becomes compulsory. This time round, sex discrimination is illegal (or so we're led to believe), so we should be able to take pre-emptive action.
Posted by:Sally - 3 Jun 2008, 11:20am
Great news that the campaign for paid maternity leave is gathering momentum and that you are getting lots of data from CPSU members.
Having until recently been the (volunteer) national manager for the Australian Breastfeeding Association's Breastfeeding Friendly Workplae Accreditation program (BFWA), I have written and spoken quite a bit in the last few years about the importance of paid maternity leave for women as a time when breastfeeding can be established. It is therefore incredibly pleasing to see references to this issue in your summary of the campaign.
However, could I please ask that you correct some information relating to the World Health Organization recommendation on exclusive breastfeeding.
You have stated in your summary
Measuring up internationally: The World Health Organisation recommends infants should be exclusively breastfed on demand from birth for at least 4 and, if possible, 6 months of age. ?Breastfeeding has been shown to provide significant health benefits for both mother and child. For babies, breastfeeding increases resistance to infection and disease, reduces the likelihood of allergic diseases such as asthma and eczema, and is also associated with higher IQ scores .
This reference to at least 4 and if possible 6 months of age is no longer current. The WHO reviewed its recommendations on breastfeeding in 2001 and since then has recommended exclusive breatfeeding for 6 months, because of the improved health of babies breastfed for this duration over babies breastfed for less than this duration.
You can refer to the WHO website for their recommendation, and the second reference is the study that made the comparison on health benefits and duration of breastfeeding that led to the WHO change:
I think the paid maternity leave should be upgraded to paid Maternity/Paternity leave...There are many fathers out there that would also love to take the time to care for their children while the loving mother wishes to get back into the workforce. Times are changing so why don't we start to catch up...!
Posted by:Reg - 9 May 2008, 11:05am
This is nice in theory, but remember that this was tried some years ago as a strategy to pay working mums for 3 months across the board. Once welfare rights etc became involved it was deemed necessary to give something to all mums so it was not discriminatory. Hence we were lumbered with FTB Part A+B and the various forms of baby bonus....I don't know if this is the time to try this again pending next weeks budget outcomes.
The debate about maternity leave is quite revealing, but there's an important issue that's being ignored by the union movement. It's brought up here:
SIMON LAUDER: It's the proposal for employer top-ups that worries Joshua Gans from the Melbourne Business School.
The professor of economics says if maternity leave comes at the expense of employers, some may be more reluctant to hire women.
JOSHUA GANS: It's all very well to recognise gender discrimination but we also have to recognise that sometimes policy interventions in the interests of parents and women in particular, may well have unintended consequences that could be more damaging.
Professor Gans is saying that employers who have to give women maternity leave would engage in sex discrimination. Now, I thought that behaviour like that is actually illegal. The unions (including CPSU) should be coming out and saying loud and clear that such employer threats to act illegally are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
Back in the 1960s, Aborigines won equal wages for work on pastoral stations. Once the decision came down, the bosses sacked them all. It was the same racism in action both times - first in denying Aborigines equal wages and then, once it became compulsory, in sacking them rather than pay up. Unfortunately, this wasn't illegal, as there was no Racial Discrimination Act.
In this case, we have employers displaying their sexism by refusing to allow women to have maternity leave on a living wage, while threatening to discriminate against them if it becomes compulsory. This time round, sex discrimination is illegal (or so we're led to believe), so we should be able to take pre-emptive action.
Great news that the campaign for paid maternity leave is gathering momentum and that you are getting lots of data from CPSU members.
Having until recently been the (volunteer) national manager for the Australian Breastfeeding Association's Breastfeeding Friendly Workplae Accreditation program (BFWA), I have written and spoken quite a bit in the last few years about the importance of paid maternity leave for women as a time when breastfeeding can be established. It is therefore incredibly pleasing to see references to this issue in your summary of the campaign.
However, could I please ask that you correct some information relating to the World Health Organization recommendation on exclusive breastfeeding.
You have stated in your summary
Measuring up internationally: The World Health Organisation recommends
infants should be exclusively breastfed on demand from birth for at least
4 and, if possible, 6 months of age. ?Breastfeeding has been shown to
provide significant health benefits for both mother and child. For babies,
breastfeeding increases resistance to infection and disease, reduces the
likelihood of allergic diseases such as asthma and eczema, and is also
associated with higher IQ scores .
This reference to at least 4 and if possible 6 months of age is no longer current. The WHO reviewed its recommendations on breastfeeding in 2001 and since then has recommended exclusive breatfeeding for 6 months, because of the improved health of babies breastfed for this duration over babies breastfed for less than this duration.
You can refer to the WHO website for their recommendation, and the second reference is the study that made the comparison on health benefits and duration of breastfeeding that led to the WHO change:
http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/infantfeeding_recommendation/en/index.html
http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/optimal_duration_of_exc_bfeeding_review_eng.pdf?bcsi_scan_80CA22F9AD71C623=0&bcsi_scan_filename=optimal_duration_of_exc_bfeeding_review_eng.pdf
I think the paid maternity leave should be upgraded to paid Maternity/Paternity leave...There are many fathers out there that would also love to take the time to care for their children while the loving mother wishes to get back into the workforce. Times are changing so why don't we start to catch up...!
This is nice in theory, but remember that this was tried some years ago as a strategy to pay working mums for 3 months across the board. Once welfare rights etc became involved it was deemed necessary to give something to all mums so it was not discriminatory. Hence we were lumbered with FTB Part A+B and the various forms of baby bonus....I don't know if this is the time to try this again pending next weeks budget outcomes.