If Lord Mandelson is overruled and the government’s proposed additional paternity leave and pay legislation does eventually come into force, what will it mean for businesses? Christiana Tollast spoke to the experts and found this is a subject of much-heated debate.

The law

In 2007, the government drew up a consultation document on its proposed additional paternity leave and pay (APL&P) law, which was intended to be introduced by the end of this parliament.

If put into force, the law would enable employed fathers to take up to 26 weeks’ APL, some of which could be paid if the mother returns to work during the second six months of the child’s life.

However, Lord Mandelson’s recent call for a moratorium on any measures that would add to the current financial pressure on businesses during the downturn, means a large question mark now hangs over the legislation’s viability. But, with the increasing move in Britain towards better work-life balance, is it not arguably only a matter of time before APL does come into force?

Nicola Brown, employment lawyer at law firm Thomas Eggar, thinks so: “I wouldn’t be surprised if this goes quiet for a while, but then does eventually rear its ugly head again. I don’t think it will be abandoned altogether.”

Brown’s use of the word ‘ugly’ speaks volumes about how this legislation has been received by certain parties and Lina Hogg, of HR consultancy Picasso, explains why: “We are seeing SMEs and larger organisations really struggling with the economic downturn. To have this [legislation] put on them when they are already getting their staff to work harder, especially when redundancies have been made, could be crippling if it means having a key individual from a team being away for up to six months.”

Teething problems

More specifically, Brown says there are many potentially complex issues surrounding the proposed legislation, one of which is that the APL will only kick in once the mother has returned to work: “What exactly that means and how the father’s employer is supposed to get confirmation of the fact that the mother has returned to work, is going to be potentially very difficult.”

Brown also raises concern over the potential problems for employers in getting cover for relatively short periods of time, compared to maternity leave, where people are more likely to be off for a longer time and employers can get fixed-term maternity cover contracts. “If someone is saying, ‘I might take three months’ paternity leave’, then actually getting someone in to cover could be very tricky.”

But, while Hogg predicts that the very large organisations and public sector will cope with the legislation far better than smaller businesses, Jeremy Thorne, HR consultant, thinks it will cause big problems for larger organisations too, especially where people do very specialist jobs. “No one is suggesting people don’t take paternity leave, but APL just adds to the weight of the problem. A specialist role could mean knowledge of the company is really important, so just having one person missing can be absolutely critical, and very often complete projects grind to a halt.”

First steps

The problem for businesses in preparing for this new legislation, says Brown, is that until the final version of the draft is available, it is difficult to know just what the other key issues will be for businesses to get to grips with.

Hogg advises that, in basic terms, the legislation would mean all the family-friendly documentation, particularly the policies concerned with paternity leave, would have to be changed. Although, she adds: “There isn’t enough guidance for employers to work out, for example, how they are going to track who is doing what, i.e. how much leave they have taken and how much leave their wife has taken in another organisation.”

Is Mandelson right?

Although there is a strong argument that businesses could do without further complications at this time, there is also a strong case that says the economic downturn is exactly the reason why the legislation should be brought about sooner rather than later, as Elizabeth Gardiner from Working Families explains: “In an economic downturn, we need to be keeping skilled women in the workforce. APL could start to challenge the gender stereotype, that only women take time out to care for children and therefore women are a burden. This was one of the main reasons why the government accepted the need for APL back in 2005. It would give families choices, based on their individual financial circumstances.”

The future for fathers

Gardiner concludes: “All the major political parties are committed to change in this area, so it will happen, it is just a question of how soon.

“It isn’t going to be a massive revolutionary measure causing huge amounts of cost and upheaval, but it is going to have the potential to make a really big difference to how people make decisions about organising their families and their work.”