New Maternity Bill Passed At Sansad 24 Weeks Maternity Leaves Instead Of 12 Weeks Now - CiteHR
Cite.Co is a repository of information created by your industry peers and experienced seniors sharing their experience and insights.
Join Us and help by adding your inputs. Contributions From Other Members Follow Below...
I think the move is illogical.

Just because the central government gives 6 months right, does not mean that private companies have to give it. Central government does not need to make money, bother about efficiency or value for money. They give 2 years of child care paid leave to be used ANY TIME TILL CHILD IS 18 YEARS OLD. And there are many women who are planning to take a whole year off when the child is 17 because they didn't get to use it or didn't need it earlier. No we can't follow this in private sector.

If this is passed, private sector will simply stop employing women unless absolutely necessary. Which will be bad for the economy and potential development of women in general.

The western economies are short of persons in th work force and are forced to give these benefits. And the government finances it. Well,,then let all women be under ESIC irrespective of salary level. Let ESIC pay for th maternity leave. I will support 12 months instead of 12 weeks then.

1. Sir, it is reported that the said private members bill is still pending in the Parliament.
2. A majoirity of such bills, if not backed and supported by the government generally are treated as lapsed after certain period as per procedure adopted in legislative matters.
3. The then Government in the year 2012 had replied in the Lok Sabha that there was no proposal for any amendment in the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. Nothing has been heard in the newspapers about the policies of the present government on above subject. There appears to be no possibility that the present government will support the above private member's bill.

The question raised on increase in the number of entitled days of Maternity Leave from twelve weeks to twenty four weeks is matter of debate to be taken up in Parliament. But from the attached Private Bill of M.P. P. Karunakaran it may be seen that the Financial Memorandum appended to the Bill indicates that it will involve an expenditure of Rs.500 Crore from Consolidated Fund of India. Hence the Lok Sabha Secretariat (Legislative Branch-II) opined that the Bill cannot be considered and passed, and therefore advised to refer it to the President. However in my opinion the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 will not involve so much fund flow i.e. Rs.500 Crore from the Consolidated Fund of India as this Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 mainly applies to private sector establishments covered under Shop & Establishment Act of the concerned state. It is because the Central Government has already adopted the recommendations of VIth Central Pay Commission vide OM dated 11/09/2008 that CG women employees are entitled to 180 days Maternity Leave. This means that the GOI is already paying CG women employees from the Consolidated Fund of India. Since private establishments do not come under the purview of Consolidated Fund of India, hence from my point of view the Financial Memorandum appended to the Private Bill needs to be reviewed.

I further agree with the views of Mr Koregaonkar that there should not be any discrimination among women and women i.e. women employees of Central/State Governments and women employees working in private sector establishments. Government of India may therefore need to enforce equality of law to all citizens of India. Nonetheless women employees working on daily wages or as contract workers are deprived of Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, therefore they also need to be covered. The Government of India should make suitable amendment in the Act to ensure social welfare benefits to all.

I will further suggest that unemployed married women should also be considered to be paid Maternity Assistance equal to at least one month's salary of their husbands.

Hope and request my opinion and suggestion will be favorably supported and considered by all seniors and members/visitors of citehr.

With thanks and warm regards,
C.M. Lal Srivastava
srivastavacmlal@gmail.com
9818680671
3rd February 2015

24 weeks is very more leaves,,, Employer cant afford this things,,, Maximum leave must be 15 weeks, not more that.... this would be benifits for both employer & Ladies Employee......
Nikhil Konde
9860422727
Consultant and Practitioner of:
EPF, ESI, Factories Act, Industrial Disputes Act, Shops & Establishment Act,
Contract Labour (R&A) Act, MLWF, Payroll Processing, Other Labour &
Industrial Laws

In many instances, after availing the maternity leave, the women employees further extend the leave or resign from the services. It is very difficult to fill the gap in the leave period. Upon rejoining, the said women employee lose the grip on the job. I am not against 6 months leave but this move will put the employer into financial onus, in particular, the software companies where the women employees outnumber men employees. On this tough competition era, such companies may find it difficult to cope up with the addl. burden of paying for the proposed MB, thereby cut their margins.
Pon

I don't wish to say YES or NO to this bill. However we should approach this with some practicality point of view. Let us forget for the present the Govt. sector. What if when made applicable to pvt.sector, especially all women establishments such as, garment, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, banks, primary health centres, anganwadis, research projects, colleges, schools and other institutions, NGOs, police stations, some places trains, airlines, buses. Imagine at a time all such women employees apply for ML, these businesses, services will be temporarily closed/suspended ? I think most of the pvt. entrepreneurs, except trade unions, won't support this bill. May be via-media, leave without pay, limiting to 2 children norms could be possible. Madhu's views worth consideration. However there appears creation of more leave vacancies in those estts.
To take it further, place it on the perspective, now a days we have been hearing, rather it is on the increase, establishments asking pregnant employees to put down their papers before going on ML. Measures like this, as and when gets introduced shall create IR problems. There are indications that even in IT sector where we have not come across Union activities so far, efforts are on to register Trade Union sort of arrangement as a result of 'Hire n Fire' policies prevalent in IT sector. At a time when we are upbeat about industrial growth now a days, these developments should not send out unwanted flutters to the investors world wide. Hypothetically, long time ago I read a news item about a convict lady, I don't remember now which country, hummm...vaguely Italian ?) was found to be always (continuously) pregnant, it reported, she adopted this modus operandi many years to avoid serving in jail. It was immaterial whether she delivers or not !! Because as per the jail rules of that country, a pregnant lady cannot be jailed. It instantly appeared and I cannot stop comparing this news now. With due respect to our female employees (incidentally my wife and daughter are also only females) Pl.don't take it offensive just in lighter vain. Seriously, In India, more and more no.of women opting (rather opted by hospitals) for caesarian defying normal deliveries. This tendency results in poor health in mothers necessitating continuous complications, nursing and medication. For such of those conditions this bill would really help. Contrarily, my SIL who is O & G surgion and worked for many years in Gulf countries told me that caesarian in those places, especially semi urban and rural are negligible. Moreover pregnant ladies who are in labour pain goes to the nursing homes/hospitals on their own, unaccompanied get admitted, delivers under the supervision in a quick time and leaves the home hugging their new born quietly without anybody noticing such a thing really happened. (Sadly in our country similar to these happens only when a women delivers an illegitimate child, especially a girl child). It's relevant, a working mother really deserves more days at home as much as possible. This is one subject which could be viewed differently by either side. And if this bill is unlikely going to be taken up by the BJP govt. it may not see the light of the day in the near future. In which case no intensive debate would be necessary.
To take it further, place it on the perspective, now a days we have been hearing, rather it is on the increase, establishments asking pregnant employees to put down their papers before going on ML. Measures like this, as and when gets introduced shall create IR problems. There are indications that even in IT sector where we have not come across Union activities so far, efforts are on to register Trade Union sort of arrangement as a result of 'Hire n Fire' policies prevalent in IT sector. At a time when we are upbeat about industrial growth now a days, these developments should not send out unwanted flutters to the investors world wide. Incidentally, long time ago I read a news item about a convict lady, I don't remember now which country, hummm...vaguely Italian ?) was found to be always (continuously) pregnant, it reported, she adopted this modus operandi many years to avoid serving in jail. It was immaterial whether she delivered or not !! Because as per the jail rules of that country, a pregnant lady cannot be jailed. It instantly appeared and I cannot stop comparing this news now. With due respect to our female employees (incidentally my wife and daughter are also only females) Pl.don't take it offensive just in lighter vain. Seriously, In India, more and more no.of women opting (rather opted by hospitals) for caesarian defying normal deliveries. This tendency results in poor health in mothers necessitating continuous complications, nursing and medication. For such of those conditions this bill would really help. Contrarily, my SIL who is O & G surgeon and worked for many years in Gulf countries told me that caesarian in those places, especially semi urban and rural are negligible. Moreover pregnant ladies who in labour pain goes to the (govt. run) nursing homes/hospitals on their own, unaccompanied, get admitted, delivers under the supervision in a quick time and leaves for home, self hugging their new born quietly without anybody noticing such a thing really happened there. She said almost forgotten her surgical skills acquired in India. Back home, she carries out on an average 5 caesarian almost everyday. (Sadly in our country similar to these happens only when (girls) women delivers an illegitimate child, especially a girl child). It's relevant, a working mother really deserves more days at home as much as possible. This is one subject which could be viewed differently by either side. And if this bill is unlikely going to be taken up by the BJP govt. it may not see the light of the day in the near future. In which case no intensive debate may be necessary.
Dear All,
Thanks for your positive reactions !!!!!
If this bill passed then Industries would be in heavy losses and there would be discrimination against the man or father of a child.
This bill still pending!

Gm every1, Can anyone clear me that is this amendment also for private sector . Regard’s Meenakshi

This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.






About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™