Newshound
27-02-2008, 10:38 AM
A recent Age article (http://smallbusiness.theage.com.au/starting/workplace/more-leave-'no-good-thing'-914150352.html) reported some employers were warning that Government plans to mandate up to two years unpaid parental leave. Their view being that this would create further casualisation of the workforce, presumably because employers would not want to hold positions open for two years.
It's an interesting issue. On one hand many parents want to spend more time with their infant children, and for good reason, on the other hand it can be very hard for an employer to hold someone's position open for two years and replace them in the mean time. However, it could be argued that it may be easier to find good calibre replacement staff for two year contracts that it is to find someone for 9-12 months.
The ramifications of the Government plans may not be quite so clear cut as some employers and employer advocate groups are suggesting.
What are your views?
It's an interesting issue. On one hand many parents want to spend more time with their infant children, and for good reason, on the other hand it can be very hard for an employer to hold someone's position open for two years and replace them in the mean time. However, it could be argued that it may be easier to find good calibre replacement staff for two year contracts that it is to find someone for 9-12 months.
The ramifications of the Government plans may not be quite so clear cut as some employers and employer advocate groups are suggesting.
What are your views?