UK unions say cutting maternity pay for striking pregnant workers ‘immoral’ | Maternity and paternity rights

Maternity and paternity rights

Exclusive: Unite and Unison join campaigners urging government to exempt strike days from maternity calculation

The UK’s two biggest unions have backed calls for a review of the “unethical” system under which pregnant workers lose part of their maternity pay if they go on strike.

Unite and Unison have joined campaigners in calling on the government to exempt strike days from the calculation of maternity pay so that new parents are not “penalized twice” for taking industrial action.

Statutory Maternity Benefit and some contractual Maternity Benefits are currently based on the person’s average earnings over the eight week period up to the 15th week preceding the date of confinement. Any days missed, such as for a strike, jury duty or illness, drive that average down and can leave parents with hundreds or even thousands of pounds lost during maternity leave.

Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham said: “It is totally unethical to penalize pregnant women who defend a living wage against greedy employers by cutting their maternity pay.

“The current rules on the matter are a disgrace and constitute a new attempt to undermine the right to strike. I can assure you that Unite will not allow our members to be attacked in this way.

Unison general secretary Christina McAnea said the strike was a last resort but represented “a basic human right”.

She said: “Pregnant workers and new mothers already face spiraling costs, workplace discrimination and threats to their jobs. They should not face any financial penalty for exercising their rights. This gap must be filled.

Maternity activists have warned that some people will feel inhibited from striking, while others have gone on strikes unaware that it could negatively impact their wages when they become mothers.

Joeli Brearley, founder and chief executive of maternity rights charity Pregnant Then Screwed, said it was “unfair and potentially discriminatory” that the right to strike had more serious consequences for pregnant workers.

She said: “The law must change to ensure that in exceptional circumstances pregnant workers still meet the threshold for eligibility for maternity benefit, statutory maternity pay and professional maternity allowance. despite a decline in income. Exceptional circumstances should include industrial action, jury service, company bankruptcy, layoffs, and vacation pay.

In 2021, Pregnant Then Screwed won a legal victory against the government over the calculation of the Self-Employed Income Support Scheme (SEISS), introduced to support people during the pandemic. The Court of Appeal ruled that this was indirect discrimination against new mothers.

Brearley added: “It seems to me that there are similarities between the two. »

A woman who works in university administration – in a job that has suffered more than a decade of real pay cuts – said that after voting for the strike only to find out it would cut her maternity pay , she then felt conflicted. and his union advised him to continue working.

“I decided not to [strike] because maternity pay is shitty enough without a strike bringing it down further,” she said.

“Obviously, it’s very frowned upon to cross the picket line to go to work when you’re unionized, especially because I too voted for the strike, which was very important to me. I said yes to something I believe in, I think it’s really important that we go on strike.

She worked from home during the strikes because she was not ready to explain to her colleagues why she could not go on strike.

“It’s hard because in the early stages of pregnancy not everyone wants to tell people they’re pregnant,” she said.

“A few weeks [after the strikes] someone asked me directly because he hadn’t seen me on the picket line and I had to say, “Oh yeah, I was on strike from home”, and then I felt terrible because I lied about it and I didn’t. it was not striking at all. It’s an uncomfortable position.

“At least if you retire you can be honest with people.”

In July, the deputy leader of Leeds City Council, Jonathan Pryor, wrote to the government asking for a change in the law.

In a letter seen by the Guardian, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Maternity Benefit, Lord Younger, said the government was not considering changing its position.

He wrote that the government recognized that maternity pay could be affected in several ways during the eight-week period.

“These include taking a temporary pay cut, missing work due to illness or going on strike.

“We believe, however, that the current calculation balances the need to achieve a representative reflection of a woman’s earnings in a way that is consistent for all, while ensuring a simple calculation for employers.”

He added: “It avoids having to adopt complicated rules around the use of income – which brings clarity for women and their employers and reduces the risk of disputes over rights.

“On this basis, we do not plan to change the method of calculating the duty and the rate thereof. [statutory maternity pay].”

Pryor said: “It is incredibly disappointing for the government to believe that a pregnant woman who is on strike should be financially hit twice, while anyone who is not pregnant will only take this financial hit once.

“The right to strike is fundamental in our society and just because the government doesn’t like it doesn’t mean they should be able to penalize such people.”

The Department for Work and Pensions has been contacted for comment.