Human Capital forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

80,000 mothers to lose government funded paid parental leave

Notify me of new replies via email
HC Online | 11 May 2015, 10:25 AM Agree 0
Joe Hockey announced yesterday that the government is planning to overhaul the current paid parental leave system, putting pressure on employers to up their offerings.
  • | 11 May 2015, 11:51 AM Agree 0
    How do you expect young parents to survive in Sydney given the current housing prices?
    • | 11 May 2015, 12:52 PM Agree 0
      It isn't up to tax payers to support young parents in Sydney or any other city. I support a stop to so called 'double dipping' - Don't get me wrong, I would love to receive it, but it has to come from somewhere and there are more important areas to spend.
      Women/families need to stop expecting money. Save, have children when you are prepared for the responsibility and importantly, realise children (in most cases) require you to make sacrifices to your 'pre-kids' spending habits!
  • | 11 May 2015, 02:07 PM Agree 0
    It's not really 'double-dipping'... double-dipping would be receiving the money twice from the one source illegitimately. If you're fortunate enough to work for an employer who offers company paid parental leave - lucky you! It's part of your overall benefit package, and probably a strategy the company use to differentiate themselves.
  • Tax-paying parent | 11 May 2015, 02:49 PM Agree 0
    Give them a break. They wanted to introduce a Rolls Royce PPL scheme and no-one would back them.

    Bear in mind also, that employers would've found ways to cut their own schemes once this came in - to avoid... 'double-dipping'!

    In fairness, all the data said, diverting spending into childcare initiatives was more needed. That's what they're now doing (to some degree), yet people still complain.

    Either way, someone has to pay for Gov't spending or in this case, miss out.

    You shouldn't expect anyone else to pay for you to have children anyway (or buy a house, etc). If you do happen to get PPL from your employer, congratulations - you're doing better than most other people!
  • | 11 May 2015, 07:30 PM Agree 0
    Its not double dipping! Its accessing entitlements according to the relevant employment instrument, just like every body else does, and accessing government entitlements according to the relevant legislation and policy, just like everyone else does!

  • js | 12 May 2015, 10:09 PM Agree 0
    If your baby is due before july 2016 are you entitled to paid parental leave even when you get paid maternity leave from your employer?
  • | 13 May 2015, 02:08 PM Agree 0
    More importantly, there is a large group and a growing trend of businesses under declaring their earnings ( by indulging only in cash transaction ) and availing govt benefits - how do you address that ?
  • No more double dipping | 13 May 2015, 03:52 PM Agree 0
    I totally support this initiative - in fact I'm amazed double dipping has actually been occurring. It seems logical to assume that Centrelink should have all along been asking both the employee and the employer whether there was company provided PPL when assessment of the family for the government provided PPL was carried out. Ah ah I hear, where is the logic when it comes to this government! As a HR practitioner, my view of the government funded PPL at minimum wage was that it was only ever supposed to be for those who had no claim to anything from their employer. So about time this has finally been confirmed.
  • | 20 May 2015, 12:20 PM Agree 0
    I don't think it is fair that those who are entitled to some payment from their employer should be doubly penalized for that... Not only will they not be entitled to the government paid parental leave, they will still be paying tax on the money from their employer funded maternity leave, which will then fund government funded maternity leave for someone else. Our remuneration packages are effectively also loosing value, which is a disadvantage to employers who offer paid maternity leave, it no longer offers them the competitive advantage that it used to!
  • SH | 01 Aug 2015, 07:08 AM Agree 0
    All this really does in encourage companies to NOT pay maternity leave (justifying it by saying that that way a woman can get the government leave). How is that helping any one?
  • newmom | 27 Jun 2016, 08:50 PM Agree 0
    So basically a woman with a full time job could end up getting paid pretty similar to what a woman who never worked? Not a great way to incentivize women to work. Working mothers should be rewarded for their effort and contribution, while professional baby shooters shouldn't.
Post a reply