The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Unions maternity leave Productivity Commission

Unions maternity leave Productivity Commission

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. 16
  13. ...
  14. 26
  15. 27
  16. 28
  17. All
Col Rouge
The question is not what is the role of fathers and mothers today BUT IF THIS ROLE IS FAIR ENOUGH FOR MEN AND WOMEN.
I SAY THAT WHAT HAPPENED UNTIL NOW IS AGAINST THE WOMEN, IT MAKES THEM TO DEPEND ON THEIR HUSBANDS, IT MAKES THEM WEAK, VOICELESS. I want the women independent financially and equal with the men. I want them to do what they want to do, because they choice it, because they like it, because they agree with it.
If they are not financially independent they have not other choice than to agree with their husbands.
Do you want the women proud, independent who live with the man they respect and love or do you want them to depend from the men, and pretend that they love and respect them when in really they afraid or even hate them?
Happiness and love can not flourish under financial dependency and lack of choices.
Let's give the women the tools they need to develop their abilities and create their financial independence, let's create the conditions for equality between men and women. The paid maternity, paternity and parental leave create better conditions for women to find their way.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 1:12:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col Rouge
You 200-300 years before women was as in Muslim Countries today.
Father for work, mothers for children and kitchen. Slowly, slowly women started to claim their rights, progressive men have recognized their rights and have supported in the fight for equality between men and women. Most men at begin less and less later did not like to listen anything about women rights, "STAY AT HOME TO CARE THE KITS!", In our days the mass majority of men recognize women rights in words but do not do many things to undertake their responsibilities as fathers and in the work at home, (women's second sift). But still there are men like you who prefer women at home for the kits and the kitchen, but slowly, slowly they will disappeared. I do not expect after 3-4 generations any man in developed world to believe what you believe about women's role. In Muslim world it could take much more time except if they make a religious revolution.

Bellow I give some statistics of women and men unemployment, from United Nations, statistics division. (always first row women second men)

Egypt 2001 22.6 5.6
Canada 2003 7.2 8.0
Dominican Republic 2001 26.0 9.4
United States of America 2003 5.7 6.3
Colombia 2003 18.5 11.0
Suriname 1999 20.0 10.0
Saudi Arabia 2002 11.5 4.2
Japan 2003 4.9 5.5
Pakistan 2002 16.5 6.7
Syrian Arab Republic 2002 24.1 8.3
Austria 2003 4.2 4.3
Germany 2003 9.5 10.4
Greece 2002 14.6 6.2 (in my country there are many like you!)
Iceland 2002 2.9 3.6
Norway 2003 4.0 4.9
Sweden 2003 4.4 5.3
United Kingdom 2003 4.1 5.5
Armenia 2003 14.2 5.9
What do you want to tell you Col Rouge? The roles between men and women change rapidly and we (progressive people)press for even deeper faster changes!
regards
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 10:28:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Antonios and Col
I realise that I’m popping up very late into the debate but I noticed this topic late and find it an important issue.

I agree, Antonios, that Australia should catch up with the rest of the world regarding paid maternity leave (preferably parental leave).
Getting rid of the baby bonus and directing this money towards paid maternity leave would be a good start.
I am so fed-up with our govt and governments generally atm that my political view is in dire need for a makeover so I’ll be working on that.

Within a marriage or relationship, most couples who start a family made that decision jointly, but for obvious biological reasons it is only the woman who needs to take time out to have the child, to recover and to breastfeed; she is the one who will end up without pay, superannuation, while her partner’s career and superannuation doesn’t need to be put on hold.
I don’t view paid maternity (or parental) leave as a sole ‘women’s issue’; it’s a pregnancy and child issue- the child needs to be cared for by its loving parents.

As far as I know, most countries offer paid leave through welfare; some offer it through businesses and a small number through health insurance.
Antonios, do you know how Greece finances paid maternity leave? I’m interested at looking at different country’s systems, just to find out what works best.
Col, do you know how does the UK does it?
Antonios, I’m from the Netherlands where there used to be 14 weeks paid maternity leave through the welfare system but there has been (and still going on) a reform because they think the residual socialist system is now outdated and becoming too expensive for the taxpayer. They already have 19% GST and quite high income taxes and not everyone benefits equally.
To reduce costs, since 2006, there have been some changes and one of them is that they got rid of paid maternity leave through welfare and instead organised, what they call, a “life course regulation.”
It’s not compulsory, but adviced.

Continued
Posted by Celivia, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 12:05:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is some kind of savings plan with a very high earning interest rate and one is allowed to pay up to 12% of one’s earnings into it without paying tax over that amount or over the interest earned. It’s also not added to your asset base.

The savings plan can be used for any life changing events you choose, e.g. taking up to 3 years off (depending on your savings) to care for a baby, ill person/child, elderly family member, to take time out for work-related study.
If you don’t use it, it will automatically be paid out to you at your retirement date or you can use it to retire earlier since it's payment in addition to your general superannuation or pension.

So, both parents can take some ‘paid time’ out to care for a child if they have made use of the savings options.
I think it is not a bad system because it does save taxpayers' money and both partners can take responsibility to contribute to this fund and benefit from their investment and generous tax incentives to buy time to be available to their child.
Whether it works or not, we have to wait and see.

It is not yet very popular because people are also making use of another savings plan the govt has been promoting in the past and many haven’t changed to the life course savings plan.
Posted by Celivia, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 12:10:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello Antonios

You are very welcome. When I said I did not agree with you, I probably did not make my position clear. I guess I do not see a link between productivity, and providing extended maternal/paternal leave, and I do not think that these should be at the expense of employers (or we would be back in the days when women of child-bearing age were deliberately not chosen for jobs).

I also do not think the "baby bonus" in the form in which it was paid was acceptable, having had in my many and varied careers dealings with young women who deliberately (and openly stated that this was why they) got themselves pregnant. I was dealing with girls with children to multiple fathers and young fathers with children to several girls.

Having said that, I would prefer my tax dollars to go in support of young families than to prop up the export trade in live animals!

Regards
Nicky
Posted by Nicky, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 7:01:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“I SAY THAT WHAT HAPPENED UNTIL NOW IS AGAINST THE WOMEN, IT MAKES THEM TO DEPEND ON THEIR HUSBANDS, IT MAKES THEM WEAK, VOICELESS.”

Lower your voice, your shouting is childish

husbands and wives, almost all of them are men or women. Your point is pointless.

Especially when a lady became a leader of one of the western democracies and said “I owe nothing to Women's Lib. “

As for women, I prefer the strong independent ones who do not seek co-dependent relationships. They make the best lovers and mothers. Your experience might have meant you could only attract a door-mat but that says more about you than women.

“I want them to do what they want to do, because they choice it,”

The ones I know do so already, not sure what emotional cripples you are involved with, maybe socialist gals, with inadequacies about everything and looking to blame men for their pitiful lives.

“we (progressive people)press for even deeper faster changes”

We conservatives make sure the changes represent improvement and not just change for the sake of pointless change.

Cevelia always pleased to see you, even if we do not necessarily agree : - )

“Col, do you know how does the UK does it?”

My first daughter was born in UK, usual child tax relief and in UK tax was payable to joint assessment of husband and wife and small familyt allowance payment but no cash bonus. But I am talking 1980, things may well have changed.

My point remains, bringing a child into the world is a personal choice. How that child is brought up must be a parental personal choice. A child is not a community responsibility, it is a pair of individuals (parents) responsibility. Baby bonuses and paid maternity or paternity leave transfers some of the financial responsibility onto the general community, without transferring any right of input into the childs upbringing.

“no taxation without representation” applies here,

people should only bear the cost of children where they have an input into that childs upbringing

Can't afford kids, don't have them. Parental choice.
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 27 May 2008 7:55:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. 16
  13. ...
  14. 26
  15. 27
  16. 28
  17. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy