![[Barbados] 12-month rule for family leave challenged](http://gpa.net/cdn/shop/articles/bigstock-Parliament-of-Barbados-Bridge-75498796_b6d27540-1fc6-4c9d-b9d5-51858ebaaf85_1200x.jpg?v=1755693022)
In Barbados, opposition leader Ralph Thorne has been highly critical of the government’s proposed Family Leave Bill, warning that its 12-month minimum employment requirement for maternity and paternity leave would “punish” women and men who change jobs or enter the workforce instead of protecting families, Barbados Today reports.
Mr Thorne is the MP for Christ Church South. He accused lawmakers of prioritising “commerce over biology” in parliamentary debate and demanded urgent changes to clauses he called outdated, unjust, and lacking compassion.
The MP reportedly focused his ire on Section 4(3) and Section 5(5), which stipulate that employees seeking leave must have worked for their current employer for at least 12 months. He stated this was, “biology meeting commerce, and commerce triumphs”, and insisted the law should approach pregnancy and parental leave with “dignity and respect”.
Mr Thorne cited examples such as a woman grappling with infertility, or someone newly hired and expecting a third child, who would be summarily disqualified from statutory leave “because the request is not between the employee and the government, but between the employee and her private employer”.
He urged Minister of Labour Colin Jordan to “revisit the draughtsman, revisit his advisers, revisit those who shape and formulate social policy”, branding the provision “a fairly unkind” one for women and for men.
In addition, Mr Thorne was reportedly critical of Section 11(2), which proposes criminal penalties - a fine of $10 000 or up to 24 months’ imprisonment, or both - if applicants provide false information regarding leave eligibility. He denounced the prospect of criminalising “the exchange of information by a hapless applicant for leave”, and challenged the principle of treating new parents seeking benefits as potential offenders.
“Where is the crime? Where is the criminal intent? Where is the mens rea [criminal intent] or the actus reus [criminal act]?” Mr Thorne asked, adding his call for the removal of the clause.
Source: Barbados Today
(Quotes via original reporting)
In Barbados, opposition leader Ralph Thorne has been highly critical of the government’s proposed Family Leave Bill, warning that its 12-month minimum employment requirement for maternity and paternity leave would “punish” women and men who change jobs or enter the workforce instead of protecting families, Barbados Today reports.
Mr Thorne is the MP for Christ Church South. He accused lawmakers of prioritising “commerce over biology” in parliamentary debate and demanded urgent changes to clauses he called outdated, unjust, and lacking compassion.
The MP reportedly focused his ire on Section 4(3) and Section 5(5), which stipulate that employees seeking leave must have worked for their current employer for at least 12 months. He stated this was, “biology meeting commerce, and commerce triumphs”, and insisted the law should approach pregnancy and parental leave with “dignity and respect”.
Mr Thorne cited examples such as a woman grappling with infertility, or someone newly hired and expecting a third child, who would be summarily disqualified from statutory leave “because the request is not between the employee and the government, but between the employee and her private employer”.
He urged Minister of Labour Colin Jordan to “revisit the draughtsman, revisit his advisers, revisit those who shape and formulate social policy”, branding the provision “a fairly unkind” one for women and for men.
In addition, Mr Thorne was reportedly critical of Section 11(2), which proposes criminal penalties - a fine of $10 000 or up to 24 months’ imprisonment, or both - if applicants provide false information regarding leave eligibility. He denounced the prospect of criminalising “the exchange of information by a hapless applicant for leave”, and challenged the principle of treating new parents seeking benefits as potential offenders.
“Where is the crime? Where is the criminal intent? Where is the mens rea [criminal intent] or the actus reus [criminal act]?” Mr Thorne asked, adding his call for the removal of the clause.
Source: Barbados Today
(Quotes via original reporting)