I think the move is illogical.
Just because the central government gives 6 months' right, it does not mean that private companies have to provide it. The central government does not need to make money, worry about efficiency, or consider value for money. They offer 2 years of child care paid leave to be used at any time until the child is 18 years old. There are many women who plan 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 implement this in the private sector.
If this is passed, the private sector will simply stop employing women unless absolutely necessary. This would be detrimental to the economy and the potential development of women in general.
The western economies are facing a shortage of workers and are compelled to provide these benefits. The government finances it. Well, then let all women be under ESIC regardless of salary level. Let ESIC cover the cost of maternity leave. I would support 12 months instead of 12 weeks then.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
2635Just because the central government gives 6 months' right, it does not mean that private companies have to provide it. The central government does not need to make money, worry about efficiency, or consider value for money. They offer 2 years of child care paid leave to be used at any time until the child is 18 years old. There are many women who plan 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 implement this in the private sector.
If this is passed, the private sector will simply stop employing women unless absolutely necessary. This would be detrimental to the economy and the potential development of women in general.
The western economies are facing a shortage of workers and are compelled to provide these benefits. The government finances it. Well, then let all women be under ESIC regardless of salary level. Let ESIC cover the cost of maternity leave. I would support 12 months instead of 12 weeks then.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Sir, it is reported that the said private member's bill is still pending in the Parliament.
2. A majority of such bills, if not backed and supported by the government, generally are treated as lapsed after a certain period as per the 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 the above subject. There appears to be no possibility that the present government will support the above private member's bill.
From India, Noida
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
2. A majority of such bills, if not backed and supported by the government, generally are treated as lapsed after a certain period as per the 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 the above subject. There appears to be no possibility that the present government will support the above private member's bill.
From India, Noida
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The question raised on the increase in the number of entitled days of Maternity Leave from twelve weeks to twenty-four weeks is a matter of debate to be taken up in Parliament. However, 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 the 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.
In my opinion, the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 will not involve such a significant fund flow, i.e., Rs. 500 Crore from the Consolidated Fund of India, as this Act mainly applies to private sector establishments covered under the Shop & Establishment Act of the concerned state. This is because the Central Government has already adopted the recommendations of the VIth Central Pay Commission via OM dated 11/09/2008, stating that Central Government women employees are entitled to 180 days of Maternity Leave. This implies that the Government of India is already providing Maternity Leave benefits to Central Government women employees from the Consolidated Fund of India. Since private establishments do not fall under the purview of the Consolidated Fund of India, from my perspective, the Financial Memorandum attached to the Private Bill needs to be reviewed.
I also agree with the views of Mr. Koregaonkar that there should not be any discrimination among women, including women employees of Central/State Governments and women employees working in private sector establishments. Therefore, the Government of India may need to enforce equality of law for all Indian citizens. Additionally, women employees working on daily wages or as contract workers are currently deprived of the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, so they should also be included in the coverage. The Government of India should consider making suitable amendments to the Act to ensure social welfare benefits for all.
I further suggest that unemployed married women should also be considered for Maternity Assistance equal to at least one month's salary of their husbands.
I hope and request that my opinions and suggestions 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
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my opinion, the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 will not involve such a significant fund flow, i.e., Rs. 500 Crore from the Consolidated Fund of India, as this Act mainly applies to private sector establishments covered under the Shop & Establishment Act of the concerned state. This is because the Central Government has already adopted the recommendations of the VIth Central Pay Commission via OM dated 11/09/2008, stating that Central Government women employees are entitled to 180 days of Maternity Leave. This implies that the Government of India is already providing Maternity Leave benefits to Central Government women employees from the Consolidated Fund of India. Since private establishments do not fall under the purview of the Consolidated Fund of India, from my perspective, the Financial Memorandum attached to the Private Bill needs to be reviewed.
I also agree with the views of Mr. Koregaonkar that there should not be any discrimination among women, including women employees of Central/State Governments and women employees working in private sector establishments. Therefore, the Government of India may need to enforce equality of law for all Indian citizens. Additionally, women employees working on daily wages or as contract workers are currently deprived of the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, so they should also be included in the coverage. The Government of India should consider making suitable amendments to the Act to ensure social welfare benefits for all.
I further suggest that unemployed married women should also be considered for Maternity Assistance equal to at least one month's salary of their husbands.
I hope and request that my opinions and suggestions 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
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
24 weeks is too much leave. Employers can't afford this. The maximum leave should be 15 weeks, not more than that. This would benefit both the employer and female employees.
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
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In many instances, after availing maternity leave, women employees further extend the leave or resign from their positions. It is very difficult to fill the gap during the leave period. Upon rejoining, these women employees lose their grip on the job. I am not against 6 months of leave, but this move will put the employer into financial burden, especially in software companies where female employees outnumber male employees. In this era of tough competition, such companies may find it challenging to cope with the additional burden of paying for the proposed maternity benefits, thereby reducing their margins.
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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 it were made applicable to the private sector, especially all-women establishments such as garment, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, banks, primary health centers, anganwadis, research projects, colleges, schools, and other institutions, NGOs, police stations, some places trains, airlines, buses. Imagine a scenario where all such women employees apply for maternity leave; these businesses and services will be temporarily closed/suspended. I think most private entrepreneurs, except trade unions, won't support this bill. Maybe a middle ground, like leave without pay or limiting to 2 children, could be possible. Madhu's views are worth consideration. However, there seems to be a creation of more leave vacancies in those establishments.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To take it further, place it in perspective. Nowadays, we have been hearing that there is an increase in establishments asking pregnant employees to resign before going on maternity leave. Measures like this, when introduced, can create industrial relations problems. There are indications that even in the IT sector, where we have not encountered union activities thus far, efforts are being made to establish trade union-like arrangements due to the prevalence of 'hire and fire' policies in the IT sector. At a time when we are optimistic about industrial growth nowadays, these developments should not cause unwanted concerns for investors worldwide.
Hypothetically, a long time ago, I read a news item about a female convict, vaguely recalling she may have been Italian, who was continuously pregnant as a strategy to avoid serving time in jail. It was reported that she adopted this method for years, regardless of whether she actually delivered a baby or not. This news item now makes me think about similar situations. With all due respect to our female employees (incidentally, my wife and daughter are females), please do not take offense as I mention this in a lighthearted manner.
In India, an increasing number of women are opting for caesarian sections over natural deliveries, often recommended by hospitals. This trend leads to health issues for mothers, necessitating ongoing medical attention and care. This bill could be beneficial for addressing such conditions. Conversely, my sister-in-law, an obstetrician and gynecologist who has worked in Gulf countries for many years, mentioned that the rate of caesarian sections in those areas, particularly in semi-urban and rural regions, is minimal. Pregnant women in labor pain often go to nursing homes or hospitals alone, get admitted, deliver quickly under supervision, and quietly leave with their newborns without much notice. Unfortunately, in our country, similar discrete deliveries are mainly associated with unwed mothers, particularly those of baby girls.
It is relevant that working mothers receive as many days at home as possible. This is a topic that can be viewed differently from both sides. If this bill is unlikely to be taken up by the BJP government, it may not come to fruition in the near future, eliminating the need for extensive debate.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hypothetically, a long time ago, I read a news item about a female convict, vaguely recalling she may have been Italian, who was continuously pregnant as a strategy to avoid serving time in jail. It was reported that she adopted this method for years, regardless of whether she actually delivered a baby or not. This news item now makes me think about similar situations. With all due respect to our female employees (incidentally, my wife and daughter are females), please do not take offense as I mention this in a lighthearted manner.
In India, an increasing number of women are opting for caesarian sections over natural deliveries, often recommended by hospitals. This trend leads to health issues for mothers, necessitating ongoing medical attention and care. This bill could be beneficial for addressing such conditions. Conversely, my sister-in-law, an obstetrician and gynecologist who has worked in Gulf countries for many years, mentioned that the rate of caesarian sections in those areas, particularly in semi-urban and rural regions, is minimal. Pregnant women in labor pain often go to nursing homes or hospitals alone, get admitted, deliver quickly under supervision, and quietly leave with their newborns without much notice. Unfortunately, in our country, similar discrete deliveries are mainly associated with unwed mothers, particularly those of baby girls.
It is relevant that working mothers receive as many days at home as possible. This is a topic that can be viewed differently from both sides. If this bill is unlikely to be taken up by the BJP government, it may not come to fruition in the near future, eliminating the need for extensive debate.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To take it further, place it in perspective, nowadays we have been hearing that there is an increase in establishments asking pregnant employees to resign before going on maternity leave. Measures like this, when introduced, can create industrial relations problems. There are indications that even in the IT sector, where union activities have not been prevalent so far, efforts are being made to establish trade union arrangements due to the 'hire and fire' policies in the IT sector.
At a time when we are optimistic about industrial growth, these developments should not cause concerns for investors worldwide. Interestingly, some time ago, I read a news item about a woman, possibly from Italy, who was consistently pregnant as a strategy to avoid serving time in jail. It was reported that she continued this practice for many years, regardless of whether she actually gave birth or not, as the jail rules in her country exempted pregnant women from incarceration. This news immediately comes to mind now.
With all due respect to our female employees (incidentally, my wife and daughter are also female), please do not take offense, I am just speaking in a light-hearted manner. In India, an increasing number of women are opting for cesarean deliveries over natural births, often recommended by hospitals. However, this trend can lead to health issues for mothers, requiring ongoing medical attention and potential complications. This bill could be beneficial in addressing such situations.
On a different note, my sister-in-law, an obstetrics and gynecology surgeon who has worked extensively in Gulf countries, mentioned that cesarean rates in those regions, particularly in semi-urban and rural areas, are minimal. Pregnant women there, experiencing labor pains, go to government-run nursing homes or hospitals alone, deliver quickly under supervision, and quietly leave with their newborns, often unnoticed. She noted the stark contrast to her experiences in India, where she performs an average of five cesareans daily. Unfortunately, in our country, similar efficiency is only seen in cases of unmarried women giving birth, particularly to girls.
It is pertinent that working mothers are given as much time as possible at home. This topic can be seen from different perspectives, and if this bill is unlikely to be considered by the BJP government, it may not progress any further without extensive debate.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
At a time when we are optimistic about industrial growth, these developments should not cause concerns for investors worldwide. Interestingly, some time ago, I read a news item about a woman, possibly from Italy, who was consistently pregnant as a strategy to avoid serving time in jail. It was reported that she continued this practice for many years, regardless of whether she actually gave birth or not, as the jail rules in her country exempted pregnant women from incarceration. This news immediately comes to mind now.
With all due respect to our female employees (incidentally, my wife and daughter are also female), please do not take offense, I am just speaking in a light-hearted manner. In India, an increasing number of women are opting for cesarean deliveries over natural births, often recommended by hospitals. However, this trend can lead to health issues for mothers, requiring ongoing medical attention and potential complications. This bill could be beneficial in addressing such situations.
On a different note, my sister-in-law, an obstetrics and gynecology surgeon who has worked extensively in Gulf countries, mentioned that cesarean rates in those regions, particularly in semi-urban and rural areas, are minimal. Pregnant women there, experiencing labor pains, go to government-run nursing homes or hospitals alone, deliver quickly under supervision, and quietly leave with their newborns, often unnoticed. She noted the stark contrast to her experiences in India, where she performs an average of five cesareans daily. Unfortunately, in our country, similar efficiency is only seen in cases of unmarried women giving birth, particularly to girls.
It is pertinent that working mothers are given as much time as possible at home. This topic can be seen from different perspectives, and if this bill is unlikely to be considered by the BJP government, it may not progress any further without extensive debate.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
Thank you for your positive reactions!
If this bill is passed, industries would incur heavy losses, and there could be discrimination against men or fathers of children. This bill is still pending.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your positive reactions!
If this bill is passed, industries would incur heavy losses, and there could be discrimination against men or fathers of children. This bill is still pending.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Bill 2016.pdf