Mother labels Business NZ 'arrogant'

Email
Print

Mother labels Business NZ 'arrogant'

3News NZ

Ms Allan believes she returned to work as a better employee (file pic)

Ms Allan believes she returned to work as a better employee (file pic)

By 3 News online staff / RadioLIVE

A mother who returned to work after a year's parental leave is disputing claims that mums become "rusty" during time off.

Yesterday Paul Mackay from Business NZ gave evidence at the Government Administration Select Committee hearing submissions on a Bill which would effectively double the amount of paid parental leave.

He argued that people lose skills when they take extended time off work, and that employers don't want to hire people who might take time off to have a baby.

"Employers who have been forced to bear considerable replacement costs, or to find those amongst their other employees willing to provide cover, may well think hard before again employing a woman of child-bearing age."

The comments angered IT worker Rebecca Allan, who says she returned to work refreshed and had no trouble slotting back in.

"Part of life is to have babies and have a life outside of work, and the comment was very arrogant and probably not from a dad either, I wouldn't think."

Ms Allan believes she returned to work as a better employee, saying her view on life changed for the better after having a child.

The bill's sponsor, Labour MP Sue Moroney, says Business NZ's comments were "from a bygone era".

She suggested their submission could have been written by Alasdair Thompson, the former head of the Employers and Manufacturers Association who said women should be paid less than men because of their "monthly sick problem".

3 News / RadioLIVE

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

27/10/2012 12:43:54 p.m.

jan wrote:

Paul Mackay is actually right. Studys show a women when pregnant gets baby brain and then after having it, is then into sleep depravation. Some mothers once working are not fully there because they are thinking of their baby. Same with parents who have school age children. If they have to stay home when the child is sick who does there job? Its a disruption for all in the work place. Wether you do do all of your work allocated others will see you as slacking off and it creates ill will amongst your colleagues. Now some places all this baby stuff won't matter as they can be accomodated around, but don't expect to walk straight back into your job and be on the ball. If I took a holiday for 16 weeks, and expect to walk back in from where I left, I doubt that would occur. More than likely I would of been replaced, or edged out. WINZ treats all new clients as rusty. You could of had a job for say 10 years. The next day you are unemployed and WINZ and society will class you as lazy and that you need help to get back into a job. Unfair, but thats how it is. I for one do not want to pay for any parental leave and it certainly should not be extended. To be fair I don't like having to pay for a lot of other things so I am not picking on this issue. Also although this guys comment and that of Alistar Thompson upset and shocked alot of people, he is also a bit right. Some women do suffer with their periods and need time off. Others play on that time of the month to have a day off, which I think lends some credibility to hes statement. If staying at home leads to a better child, then all those unemployed mothers (the so called welfare bluddgers who use it as a lifestyle) out there should have really good kids.

27/10/2012 5:40:13 a.m.

Joan Foley wrote:

Wow, well done Sheryl. You are fantastic. I have obviously missed the boat with the select committee. Didn't hear back. Still on leave. Just glad you are there to do the job. Very articulate. Again, well done.

25/10/2012 6:45:10 p.m.

Vicki wrote:

I had time off after both my children and it didn't make me 'rusty', what rot! Men frankly have no right to comment and need to given woman a lot more credit, we are very capable beings, believe it or not and deserve a lot more respect than you give us. As for employers moaning, the govt pays for the leave so give it up, if you don't like woman having kids don't employ us, but you'll have to pay a man more anyway!!! So I guess you are moaning because in the year 2012 woman and children have less rights than men. Wow I thought the world had gotten past all that backward thinking rot.

25/10/2012 4:53:26 p.m.

Tallica1 wrote:

Hard truths can sometimes hurt. You think and employer wants to "fund" your childbearing times? Yes yes, it sounds mean and rude and sexist but that's the reality..businesses are not charitys.

25/10/2012 4:38:57 p.m.

Mike wrote:

The more skilled the job, the more rusty one gets from a break.

Take a top sports person who has a long break and they take a long time to regain form. Michael Schumacher took a break from F1 and was near the top of F1, and after a break was a has-been. Sometimes a job can be so tough that someone after a break can never regain the form they had prior to the break reguardless of effort. Michael Jordan took an extended break from basketball, and yet within weeks of returning was back near his forms best. Every person is different, and so is every job.

Its the 'break' duration not gender that generally is the decider.

If you have realatively unskilled jobs then a break for a year will mean less.

This is another reason why employers dont like employing long-term unemployed as they have poor work ethics starting from being 'rusty' and unemployed for so long. As some moaners have put it, they 'wouldn't even get out of bed in the morning to work for so little pay'!

We should have society look to have more men take parential leave, as this too would help balance the pay gap between genders.

25/10/2012 1:04:55 p.m.

Sue wrote:

If the country can afford it, we should have an even longer paid maternity leave - a year would be great! Unfortunately, we can't and no country in the world really can. I am still thankful for the paid parental leave, but I believe that we should have some resource behind us before starting a family. The 14 weeks payment should be regarded as a bonus, not something to count on. If you need to count on this, how are you going to be able to afford any expenses later on in your child's life? They are going to be more expensive.
I am not going to be bought by Labour to extend the extended parental leave - because the country as a whole cannot afford this - I prefer to have a job than losing it.
After a year maternity leave, I do admit it did take me while to re-orientate and refocus on my job, but I think all new mothers do - whether it is 14 weeks, 26 weeks or a year. As for the length of re-training, it all depend on the type of job.

25/10/2012 11:46:59 a.m.

sheree wrote:

I agree what Paul Mackay was very rude, disrespectful and even sexist. I have had 5 children with various ages. Now I would expect some such as myself to find it hard to get employment as my last fulltime employment job was 10 years ago. However I am a fulltime mum and have been for the past 10 years and have learnt far more SKILLS I would never have anticipated if I had no children. I am now studying for a degree to find a career I am passionate about, Teaching primary children, AS I HAVE CURRENTLY HAD 10 YEARS EXPERIENCE WITH CHILDREN AND NOT RUSTY! am a class asset for the future once I have my degree. For all the mums who go back to work within the 12month period good on them, DO NOT SHUNT THEM, it shows thier dedication to themselves, their family, and thier employers, place a greater economic furture for our country. I do however tend to agree that the maternity leave should not increase as it become unvaiable for that of a business economically and could be a potential employment opportunity for someone else.

25/10/2012 11:25:05 a.m.

Carlos wrote:

Business's are correct 'not' to pick women of child bearing age, especially when money, trade, is tight. Why should employers have to pay for, and be penalised for people stopping work to have babies ? It is the people/couples who should save and make provision for when their time comes to start a family.

25/10/2012 9:54:20 a.m.

Greg wrote:

NZ workers have to keep up with Chinese ones, has no one been listening to John Key. Families need to learn to survive on one income. NZ employers are stuck in victorian Britian mode.

25/10/2012 8:53:24 a.m.

John. wrote:

Business NZ are a wart on the face of NZ.