St Mary Constable John Le Bailly has lodged an amendment to proposals from the Social Security Minister, due to be debated later this month, which would extend family-friendly rights to include up to 52 weeks off work for both parents – with six weeks of that paid by employers for both – taken in up to four blocks over three months. New workplace breastfeeding rights have also been proposed along with an extension of the rights for adoptive and surrogate parents.
Concerns have been raised about the potential effects the proposals could have on businesses, particularly small ones.
However, Mr Le Bailly – who says he has the support of 50 local businesses – has gone further, describing the move as ‘totally unfair to the taxpaying public’ who he says would be paying many of the costs involved, either directly through increased service charges or indirectly through taxation.
And he adds: ‘It is not about equality; two people of whatever gender can essentially take time off from an employer and completely disrupt that business, whilst being subsidised by the employer and taxpayer, solely to have a child.
‘Having children is a life choice, and this proposal is biased against those who choose not to have a family.’
The Jersey Chamber of Commerce and Jersey Retail Association have both called for the States to consider measures to help ease the burden of the proposed legislation on employers, for example via social security breaks, schemes like that which operate in the UK where small businesses can claim back up to 103% of the cost of statutory maternity pay and tax incentives.
The JRA also raised concerns about having different rules for small businesses, saying they needed to stay competitive in order to find and retain staff.
But Mr Le Bailly wants businesses with five or fewer employees to be exempt from some parts of the proposed legislation and from existing rights already in place altogether.
In the report accompanying his proposition he says: ‘The current legislation causes difficulties for small businesses, which is why my amendment seeks to change not only the proposed legislation, but also the existing leave rights which came into force in 2018.
‘Many small businesses have struggled to meet the provisions of the existing legislation, which they regard as ill-conceived. This latest proposal to extend parental leave will place even more of a burden on them.
‘It would be completely impractical to apply the existing legislation to all employees regardless of the size of the business, and many small enterprises will not be able to afford to back-fill their “missing” staff, nor be able to find appropriately trained and experienced temporary replacements.
‘This amendment offers a vital lifeline to those small businesses which employ five or fewer people on a permanent, part-time or zero-hours contract.’
Under his amendment, which is due to be debated alongside the minister’s proposals on 30 April, the exemption clause would allow small businesses to ‘opt out’ of the legislation, providing it is clearly stated within employees’ contracts.
