Stop cuts to working parents' time to care

UPDATE - GREAT NEWS: After two years of powerful campaigning by Fair Agenda members and other concerned community members, the cuts to paid parental leave have been taken out of the federal budget. It's a really important reprieve for the tens of thousands of working families who stood to lose precious time to care if these cuts had gone ahead.

But - the fight may not be over. If the Government have shown us anything over the past two years, it's that they don't give up on these cuts easily -- so Fair Agenda will keep a watching brief on this issue.

But right now, Fair Agenda's work to secure an election commitment from the Nick Xenophon Team - and to hold them to account for that promise - are the key factor that are stopping these cuts going ahead. So thank you to all those Fair Agenda members who made calls, sent emails, met with their Senators, helped secure election commitments, and funded research to help stop these cuts. You can read more about the impact of our campaigning together here.

---

The Turnbull Government have just announced their *fourth* attempt to cut our paid parental leave system. They're trying to sell this new proposal as a boost for parents; but in reality they're making a boost for some parents entirely contingent on cutting the time tens of thousands of other working parents can afford to spend caring for their newborns, and planning on stripping $750 million from the system overall.

It's a proposal that would pit working parents against each other, and drag our system backwards. It would also cap the total combined leave available to eligible parents at 20 weeks -- well below the 26 weeks postnatal leave experts recommend for health and welfare outcomes.

The fate of these cuts will be decided by the Senate crossbench, with The Nick Xenophon Team expected to have the critical casting votes. Community campaigning has stopped the Turnbull Government from getting their plans to cut paid parental leave through the previous parliament. 

It's critical we show the Senate crossbench that the community oppose these cuts; and want them to stop these cruel cuts to new families. Can you sign the petition to join the campaign?

Find out more about the new cuts

Experts say that 26 weeks post-natal leave is the minimum needed for health and welfare reasons.

Right now, any eligible parent can access 18 weeks of leave at the minimum wage, and then top that up with any leave they’ve negotiated into their employment contract, to cover costs while they care for their newborn.

The system was designed to be used in combination; to allow more women to access the recommended 26+ weeks leave. For many women, the leave negotiated into their employment agreement has been bargained in lieu of additional pay or other leave provisions. 

In their latest proposal the Government is once again trying to punish these women – by cutting their access to government leave if they want to access the employer leave they’ve negotiated. It means that instead of acting as a floor, the period of government provided leave would instead becomes a ceiling.

To be clear, there are some positive aspects of this latest proposal:

  • The amount of government provided leave would be increased from 18 to 20 weeks at the minimum wage (still well below the 26 weeks recommended by experts). This would be good news for working parents without access to employer leave.
  • A change in the ‘activity test’ that determines would also see an increase in the number of parents eligible to access parental leave. And if these increases were all that was on the table – it would be good news...
  • But both these changes would both be contingent on cutting the leave available for 72,000 other families.  

In short, the crux of this proposal is still a cut. One that’s estimated to tear $600-$750 million out of the parental leave system, and to slash the amount of time thousands of workers like nurses, retail workers and ambos can afford to spend caring for their newborn. In fact, it’s estimated that under this new proposal 68,000 families with a median income of $62,000 a year would lose an average of $5,600.[2]

 

-Find out more -

1. Is this the winning compromise on paid parental leave, Women’s Agenda, 21 November 2016.

2. Samantha Maiden: Breakthrough looms on parental leave pay, Daily Telegraph, 20 November 2016.

Paid parental leave: Nick Xenophon warned not to pit working mums against each other, Sydney Morning Herald, 20 November 2016. 

29,038 SIGNATURES

It's hard enough caring for a newborn without being forced back to work early. Please don't cut working parents' right to the existing 18 weeks government paid parental leave. 

Signed,

Fair Agenda will email petition signers from time to time with important updates

* required fields

Latest activity

Melanie , 5051  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:56:15 +1000
"I would have had to go back to work too early and wouldn’t have been able to breast feed my baby without both the employer ppl and the government ppl."
Nicole , 4510  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:56:02 +1000
"I would like another child eventually, but with a mortgage and already having a child I would have to go back to work when my new child would be 4 months old!! How is that fair! A child should be able to grow up with their mummy and not to mention day care is very high prices with 2 children! I don’t want my new child to think someone else is their mum! Wake up to yourself! Just because you earn a lot of money!!"
Maris , 2525  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:55:57 +1000
Jaclyn , 4017  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:55:56 +1000
Joanna , 2026  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:55:41 +1000
Jasmine , 5072  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:55:11 +1000
Stephanie , 2913  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:55:09 +1000
"I think it’s ridiculous. The workplace paid parental leave should have no bearing on a parents eligibility to claim. Conditions like paid parental leave are all part of workplace bargaining and usually take the place of percentage salary increases or other employee benefits. These conditions are what attracts good employees to workplaces and it’s unfair for the Government to class it as ‘double dipping’. My workplace is a good 7% behind the public service salary in Canberra, and it’s because of benefits like paid parental leave and subsidized parking that the university is able to retain staff without their salary offerings being particularly competitive."
Rebecca , 2071  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:55:05 +1000
"This policy sits at such odds with what the Coalition is supposed to be about – part of which is promoting an efficient economy – which should incentivise bright, productive, women to have children (and mat leave). It’s these women (who already contribute so much to the economy, not just financially) who will be most penalised by this new proposal."
Jessica , 4163  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:54:52 +1000
"While more companies are now offering some form of paid parental leave, in many cases this may only be for a short period, as little as four weeks. Instead of making these women ineligible for the 18 week government scheme which would be outrageously unfair, perhaps the treasurer should consider, as a minimum, offering the difference, to a total of 18 weeks of paid leave from both the employer and the government. This would avoid any accusations of “double dipping” whilst still ensuring all women have access to a minimum 18 weeks paid maternity leave."
caroline , 4215  /  signed 2015-05-11 09:54:46 +1000
← Previous  1  2  …  350  351  352  353  354  355  356  357  358  …  448  449  Next →