Plus
|
|
|||
| BOON
OR BURDEN? According to the Maternity Benefits Ordinance, mothers were earlier allowed 84 days paid leave for the first two children and 42 days for the next.Then a Cabinet decision extended the 84-day leave, for all children. The budget proposal in itself should be applauded for paying attention to the vital first year of a child's life. Many a working woman bears testimony to the difficulty she has to go through when required to return to work even before the child is ready to be weaned. Sri Lanka has also ratified the ILO (International Labour Organization) convention on maternity benefits and is bound in "spirit" to give "enough time" for mothers to be with their newborns. Even though the Maternity Benefits Ordinance was adopted in principle by the private sector, certain incentives given to public servants were not implemented as the private sector was not legally bound to do so. Maternity leave was given but the two hours time off that a mother was entitled to once she got back to work, to nurse her baby was not granted in the private sector. So how would the new benefits impact on today's working woman? Aruni Goonetilleke, a former lecturer at the Law Faculty of the Colombo University and a Senior Manager of a leading bank feels that even though extended maternity leave is a good trend, the deeper issue of "recognising the joint duty of bringing up the child is not addressed, thus defeating the purpose". "The private sector can look at it in two ways-the loss of productivity of a woman and the high cost involved when paid leave is granted for an extended period. Yet at the same time women are good at what they do -qualified and competent. The new law is something very positive in the sense that it recognises a reality- a real need of women and provides a way of getting the best by giving them benefits. The chances of them returning to work-keeping their jobs and continuing are thus higher," she says. "If we could bring in paternity leave, that would be another step higher in the right direction," she added smiling. However she pointed out that nearly a year's leave with a quarter of it at no-pay might not be economically viable for public servants more so than for those in the private sector. Sacrificing their careers for the sake of motherhood, being employed at a much lower level than they deserve due to the "family friendly" hours of a job with less responsibility or on the other hand, giving up any hope of family life for the sake of their careers are just a tip of the iceberg of the very tough choices for women. Many employers state that experience has taught them that women are more likely to return to the workplace if they feel they have been valued and looked after during their working pregnancy and maternity leave and so the benefits can outweigh the costs. But the allotment of maternity leave per se does place employers in Sri Lanka in a somewhat complicated position. Despite the fact that women in Sri Lanka are relatively well-off in comparison to certain countries when it comes to employment and education opportunities, it has always been an open secret that many employers to this day discriminate in many subtle ways when choosing their employees-a woman has to be more "qualified" (in many ways) than a man to secure a position. Chandra Schafter, Managing Director of Janashakthi Insurance points out that even though women in higher positions in his company far outnumber the men, the situation has just tilted more in favour of men. "It makes things more difficult for women now - it's a disincentive for employers and no sensible employer would think of hiring a woman unless she is really good. If all things are equal I would prefer men since the burden of working late hours for example is not an issue with them. Women have the burden of balancing both family and work," he said. He also pointed out the very real problem of finding a long-term replacement when a woman goes on extended maternity leave. "When you have to struggle to get a job, simply hiring a replacement for 9 months and sending someone home at the end of that time is not fair. When it was just four months you could manage somehow," he added. A Human Resources Director of a leading conglomerate however felt differently. More time allowed for the mother to be with her newborn means "another investment for human resources development for the future", he said. "Because of my attitude towards the subject it will not affect me when recruiting women. I look at people as a resource. I believe child bearing and rearing is a career by itself. It's important in terms of time and energy spent in rearing a potential star for the future." He too, however, echoed concerns about the daily operations being taken care of- finding suitable replacements, whether skilled people are available and whether they have the necessary experience. What of women themselves- how do they see this "positive" change in maternity benefits. The need for nurturing a child with care and inculcating proper values for the future by giving every constructive stimulus is unquestionable. However, unlike in the past, when a woman could opt out of working once in the family way without much concern, financial situations place a heavier burden on today's mothers. Hashika, a 32- year-old-mother of two, who holds an executive post welcomed the new benefits. " "I came back to work because I had no other choice-our financial situation was such that my salary was important. If I had this option then, I would have definitely taken it. My bond with my child would have improved naturally. It was difficult the first few days after I returned to work especially during feeding times. I was emotional and it was terrible leaving my child at home and only seeing her in the evenings. Four months was not at all enough." Anjali 30, a secretary and mother of a six-month-old expressed mixed feelings however, pointing out that not all women would want to stop working for a whole year. " It's not possible to do anything of worth with just four months maternity leave. I hardly got time to spend with my child. That said, maternity leave of one year is not really to my liking. "Career wise a lot of things can happen in just one year. It will definitely affect a woman's career. May be a few more months extra would do. We really don't have a choice since if extra time off means no salary-we would have to come back to work," she said The female workforce makes a huge contribution to the nation's productivity - and so there needs to be a delicate balance struck in supporting women in their primary role as mothers and also helping them achieve their potential within the workforce. |
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
