Pregnant pause

In October 2008, the European Commission published a proposal to amend Directive 92/85/EEC, more commonly known as the Pregnant Workers Directive. The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (DBERR) is therefore consulting on the proposals.

For the UK it is a largely irrelevant document. Our maternity leave entitlements are already well above the EU minimum in key areas – with leave of up to 52 weeks compared to the current EU minimum of 14 weeks, which is proposed to be increased to 18 (although the European Parliament is lobbying to extend that to 24 weeks). Maternity leave currently varies from 14 weeks in Germany to 18 months in Sweden.

Likewise the UK already also meets the minimum safeguards of the proposals in terms of the rights to: reasons for dismissal during pregnancy or maternity leave; return to work in the same or equivalent post; and to request flexible working.

Nevertheless, both the British Chamber of Commerce (BCC) and Institute of Directors (IoD) are apoplectic. In their draft response, the BCC states the need to "avoid increasing the administrative burden for employers in managing maternity leave". The pain of pregnancy for employers is often forgotten as we recklessly focus on mother and child.

But why this outrage? Because the proposal states that mothers may be entitled to additional leave in cases where the child is born late, so there is no reduction in the post-natal leave entitlement. The IoD also states that this proposal is "problematic".

Other proposals that meet with business ire include that to increase maternity pay to full pay (subject to a national ceiling). Currently the UK provision is 90% of salary, but 100% with a ceiling could be better for lower paid women, as long as the ceiling was set in pounds earned rather than as a proportion of wage. "This would have major cost implications" barks the IoD, while the BCC responds, "as the UK government says itself, 'the principle of full pay is a significant spending risk'". Business Minister Pat McFadden told Parliament, "we want legal clarity that we are not being directed to pay full pay".

Yes sadly even at a time when the poorest and most vulnerable workers – often women – are being squeezed most and when the Government is failing to bring down child poverty, it still resists even moderate improvements for working people.

The TUC said in November 2008, "The Government should not use the recession as a reason . . . increasing maternity pay would not be a huge extra cost to business and would help companies recruit and retain highly skilled female employees".

The consultation document can be downloaded from the DBERR website. The closing date for responses is 22nd June 2009.

ConsultationWatch is published fortnightly in the Morning Star