Paternity leave

dl8860 said:
Suppose...

a)The dad to be has no signal where he job is, so doesn't see message that baby is coming for an hour

b)Instead of a 4 hour drive being 2.5 hours (literally impossible unless you have an empty motorway door to door and can drive 112mph down it) it takes 5.5 due to traffic

Could easily be 6.5 hours between water breaking (or start of contractions) and birth, I agree not the most likely, but easily plausible enough that it would make me not want to work this job in the guy's position.

Just because your wife had a long labour and you couldn't make yourself valuable for the first week of the baby's life doesn't mean the same applies for this guy.
Click to expand...



It can be less than 2-3hr between initial labour signs and birth. Both my kids were born within a a few hours.
 
NiCkNaMe said:
Your 50k pittance isn't worth a man/woman missing the birth of their child.
Click to expand...
Well, I dunno... that's a lot of money, round these parts... I could probably send my kid to a really good school, with that! :p
Where'd you get the £50k from, anyway? Just random number as an example?

Hades said:
Sorry if your kettle was on at the time
Click to expand...
Sod the kettle, I missed the season finale of Game of Thrones!!!!!
Who's in charge over there? I demand compensation, hand delivered by Peter Dinklage riding on a naked Khaleesi!!
 
Gosh, some people in this thread are all heart, pulling out the "this is the policy and the contract will state this and the law says that". Jeez, the employee is having a baby and has asked, on a human level, to not have to attend a job four hours away because if his wife goes into labour, he may miss one of the most important moments in his life. I cannot actually believe the responses of some people on here, the OP included. Figure it out for him and let him have the peace of mind to know that he'll not miss the moment due to, let's face it, a work commitment that's not of his doing and possibly means very little to him in the grand scheme of things.
 
CHokKA said:
Gosh, some people in this thread are all heart, pulling out the "this is the policy and the contract will state this and the law says that". Jeez, the employee is having a baby and has asked, on a human level, to not have to attend a job four hours away because if his wife goes into labour, he may miss one of the most important moments in his life. I cannot actually believe the responses of some people on here, the OP included. Figure it out for him and let him have the peace of mind to know that he'll not miss the moment due to, let's face it, a work commitment that's not of his doing and possibly means very little to him in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...

This. And he'll be a more loyal and useful employee as a result!!
 
flea.rider said:
I find this thread beyond belief ...op ..
tell him he's going on the job simples
Click to expand...

That is unlikely to help the OP.

If he is forced to go to the event and has to leave, then judging by the details of the scenario it would leave the situation untenable. It may be low probability, but not as low as you might expect. The sensible thing here is to (now try and) put a contingency in place to ensure the employee doesn't need to attend; do the utmost to put someone else in place, the event runs smoothly and the client doesn't end up screwed over. That's not including the possibility she may go into labour before the event even occurs....what then?
 
CHokKA said:
Jeez, the employee is having a baby and has asked, on a human level, to not have to attend a job four hours away because if his wife goes into labour, he may miss one of the most important moments in his life.
Click to expand...
For some people, that's not even a consideration. Soldiers on deployment, for one example. I doubt Terry Taliban would agree to postpone the RPG raid on the base until Tommy gets back from seeing his Mrs pop a sprog back in Blighty... !!

But jesting aside, there are some industries where that 'human' thing really isn't a consideration. I'm lately learning a lot about the luxury boat lifestyle, the people who crew them, and the ******* **** owners they sometimes have to work for... Imagine some poor, whining millionaire film director (might have been an actor?) having to put into port and delay his pleasure cruise, because one of his crew was killed in an accident and they needed to drop his body off. SUCH an "inconvenience"...
 
rhysduck said:
@flea.rider
1. You choose when you start your Paternity Leave, not your employer and not when labour starts. don't think they had that 28 yrs ago ...
2. Please show us all how you turn a 4 hour journey into 2.5hours. go faster
3. There's absolutely plenty to do in the first 4-5days. I pity your wife/girlfriend if that's the way you feel.
Click to expand...
she was in hospital for 4-5 days ..when she came out after i worked 8-12 hrs ..
I did the washing up .. cleaning,washing the dirty nappies .. ohh the 2am feed ..
 
Before changing jobs in July I was an employee for a company and I refused to travel any more than 2 hours away and completely refused to travel abroad within 4 weeks of the due.

Basically my company just got on by, I was the only UK employee and used the reps in Ireland to do the work.

Was it ideal for the company? No
As an employee did I care? No

In all honesty I think you need to make a decision now and assume he won't be there. Family absolutely comes first regardless, I would be pretty confident the guy will do whatever is best for him.
 
ttaskmaster said:
It's morbid, I know, but we have some seriously high risk programmes where a staffing failure could result in heavy fatalities... as in, an incident would kill a guaranteed minimum of 2,000 people. But even though these are low probability risks, they cannot be mitigated sufficiently to permit a failure to field enough staff, and so we have to have a minimum of five contingency teams available 24/7. It's obviously expensive, but far cheaper than the cost of failure.
Click to expand...

What job is this where 2000 people can be killed instantly with one slip of the finger?
 
ttaskmaster said:
[..]
It's morbid, I know, but we have some seriously high risk programmes where a staffing failure could result in heavy fatalities... as in, an incident would kill a guaranteed minimum of 2,000 people. But even though these are low probability risks, they cannot be mitigated sufficiently to permit a failure to field enough staff, and so we have to have a minimum of five contingency teams available 24/7. It's obviously expensive, but far cheaper than the cost of failure.
Click to expand...

That has piqued my curiousity - what work is it in which a staffing failure would kill a guaranteed minimum of 2,000 people?
 
"Quickly sweep the bodies out the way and get one of the contingency teams in ASAP!"

It sounds like going over the trenches during the war to almost certain death.
 
BinnsY said:
Have you also considered that when he gets back after the two weeks he will probably be a sleepless wreck and find doing his job considerably harder for the next few months? ;) Worth factoring that in as well if you haven't already!
Click to expand...

Read the above several times, he'll be utterly useless until his child is at least 12 weeks old and it would be unfair to send him away during that period (although he will probably be strangely happy to do so :p).

You've not got very long to sort this, can you sit down with him tomorrow and can he go through the role with you. As a former employer myself my advice would be for you to do it on Sunday. I assume the client knows you and would probably be quite impressed you were mucking in to help out your valuable employees, and would be accommodating once you tell them why.

Re-read that quote by the way.
 
Last edited:
You're going to have to cancel the holiday, if you "force" the guy to work and he misses the birth of his child (which he won't do, he'll just down tools a walk out) then what kind of employer are you, he won't stay with your company post the birth of his child.

As I think you said in a much earlier post with hindsight you should have never approved the holiday, exactly that. Babies get born when they want to usually +/- 4/6 weeks, you should have planned accordingly. Somebody missing 1 holiday can't be compared to somebody missing the birth of their child, especially as one of the people going on holiday is a business partner, at the end of the day this guy is just an "employee". It's your business so while tough I think you business partner might need to cancel his holiday.

With my first child I took my other half to the maternity unit 3 times for "false alarms", birthing a baby isn't an exact science, what does your Mum (or wife) think about the situation?
 
Last edited:
"Family first" is something that counts for a lot these days.

I've only been with my employer 2 months and they have been super cool about appointments and me taking paternity leave (which is unpaid and a bit of a joke but that's a separate topic and not my employers issue). I'm currently sat waiting to take my other half to the hospital to be induced this morning and all I need do it text my boss and my paternity leave starts now.

I'd understand if they were funny with me, some places are, but it would seriously dampen my attitude at work if this situation was more difficult. I work in a busy department meeting the needs to a high turn-ovef company that relies on my team for proactive deployment of fixes and features. We are understaffed and have a lot going on however my paternity situation despite my short time there has not been an issue at all. I'm free to make up time we've had for appointments even weeks after and they're flexible around family. So long as you don't take advantage and come in with the right attitude you're all good. I've not been as happy working anywhere as I am now, I can't wait to go back in and crack on with my projects as soon as possible however the birth of my first child won't be missed for anything.
 
I see it from both sides. Not being a parent, nor currently expecting a child, makes me thing “hmm 2 weeks before the due date is kind of a long time to get worried about missing a birth isn’t it?” - but I don’t know how much those dates shift.

On the other hand, if I was an expecting parent, not even the gods could stop me missing that birth!

If the two on holiday are about now, I’d contact them, say you are in a tough position and whilst you wouldn’t look unfavourably on them denying the request to work you would be incredibly grateful if they could help out.

If they aren’t about, is there scope on telling the client “don’t worry we are still on for the job but we are a person down due to someone expecting a baby, which was unforeseen at the time because there are now uncertainties with the due date - we can start earlier or otherwise let us know how we can best accommodate you”. I seriously doubt you’ll lose the client over such honesty, although I’m not sure what the nature of the work is.

^ there is arguably a lie in the above quote but really it’s a white lie and is in any case the truth of the OP’s situation.
 
Nothing worse than an employer who thinks their problem is somehow an employee's problem.

You should have planned this better, and the logistics of covering the job is all on you, that's your job not his. Why would he care one bit?

It's just a job, some things are a lot more important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom