- FileWomen are seeking additional protection for themselves and children.
Patricia Watson, Staff Reporter
EFFECTIVE MATERNITY protection is an extremely important work right for women.
It gives women the confidence to conceive without fear that they will be fired from their jobs or that their jobs will be downgraded.
As it is now, only women who biologically bear children are given maternity protection. Neither are fathers allowed time off to bond with their children after birth, something which must be addressed if we expect our men to be more responsible.
It is against this background that the acceptance of a new maternity treaty by delegates at the recent International Labour Organisation (ILO) conference should be celebrated. Women's rights at the workplace received a significant boost when the votes at the conference were counted, and it will no doubt pave the way for improvements in national maternity laws.
If the Jamaican Government accepts the convention in its present form, it should make a large number of women happy. Not only would it mean that women would get to spend more time with their children, but also that returning to work would not necessarily mean a separation from the newborn child.
Any woman who has had a child can attest to the fact that it is extremely hard to leave her young ones to return to work after 12 weeks. What distresses many women is the long separations from the child each day and the fact that they are not able to breast-feed them. With the proposed convention, much of these fears would be addressed.
Article 4 of the convention states that "...a woman...shall be entitled to a period of maternity leave of not less than 14 weeks". Currently, Jamaicans are entitled to 12 weeks leave, eight of which are compulsory, meaning the woman has to be paid during this period. There are some employers, however, according to Jamaica Employers' Federation (JEF) President Dr. Neville Ying, who pay the women for the 12 weeks leave.
If the convention is ratified, employers would be forced to allow women employees time away from work to breastfeed and not lose payment. This means they would either have to provide a place for the women to breastfeed at work or allow them to go home to carry out the act. Lunch time would not count in this respect.
Double benefit
Allowing women to breastfeed while at work will benefit both mother and child. Research has shown that children who are breastfed exclusively are healthier than those who are formula-fed. The benefits of this to the society need not be spelt out.
The longer maternity leave would also mean that women would have a longer time to bond with their children. The longer the woman stays home with the child, the more secure and confident the child is, reports show. Nothing can be more heartrending to a woman when her child feels closer to the baby-sitter than to her.
Employers would also benefit from the changes as the woman would concentrate more on work knowing that her child is safe, close by. This is good business sense. Workers are investments. Good employers will train their workers, and it can prove extremely costly to replace them. If women are, therefore, given the opportunity to have their children close by at work after maternity leave, then they will be more interested in giving the maximum to their employers. It would also engender loyalties as the women would not likely have to give up one job for another.
Despite the advantages though of the proposed changes, it will be an uphill task to convince employers to agree to them. The cost of such a change, according to Dr. Ying, would be enormous and many companies would not be able to afford it.
"Facilities would have to be found for this," Dr. Ying said.
Lacking resources
He explained that not many employers would be able to provide areas where women can breastfeed. Dr. Ying noted that while the federation wholeheartedly supported maternity leave, in the long run the costs of the additional benefits must be carefully examined. He also explained that based on the importance of the issue of maternity protection, it is difficult to argue about.
The issue raised by Dr. Ying is one which is understood by the trade unions, the Government and women.
"We understand the implications, infrastructure is not in place and these will have to be addressed as well as insurance aspect," said Clive Dobson of the National Workers' Union.
But although there is understanding, some feel all aspects of the convention should be ratified by the Jamaican Government.
"Breastfeeding must be seen as a normal, healthy, natural way to feed our children and the workplace can accommodate breastfeeding if they want to," said Bureau of Women's Affairs Executive Director Dr. Glenda Simms said.
According to her, the problem is that the society has sexualised the breast to the extent that the society is ashamed of women's breasts.
"In other words, the woman must not expose her breast in public, she must cover up when she is feeding her baby. This is seen as a private thing, but why is it that we eat in restaurants in the public and we push a bottle in the baby's mouth in public and the baby cannot feed from her mother's breast in public," Dr. Simms noted.
There is no doubt that employers will have to come up with the money to put in the facilities demanded by the convention. However, in the long run, I believe it will only make for happier workers. A few weeks before the recent ILO conference, the Ministry of Health had proposed that employers provide facilities to encourage breastfeeding at the workplaces. On this basis, one cannot help but be optimistic that at least this aspect of the convention will be carried.
The discussions which will take place on the Convention will no doubt be quite lively and will serve as a test of the country's commitment to women and the family. But what would make it even better, is if in addition to the current proposals, paternity leave is also granted.
