THE government has told teachers they can’t get improved maternity leave provisions this pay cycle, but the issue has triggered a national reaction which could result in a review of the 26-year-old Act.

Permanent secretary in the ministry of labour and social security, Alvin McIntosh, says that the issue will definitely be on the agenda of the next meeting of the tripartite Labour Advisory Committee (LAC) which comprises representatives of the government, employers and trade unions.

A date for the meeting is expected to be announced shortly by Minister of Labour and Social Security Derrick Kellier.

“This is a very delicate issue and really has to be discussed at the Labour Advisory Committee. Matters like these have to be discussed and settled in a tripartite forum like the LAC and, at the next meeting of the LAC, this item will definitely be down for discussion to get the various views,” McIntosh said.

Acting director of the Bureau of Women’s Affairs, Faith Webster, said that while the matter was not a priority of the bureau, now that it had been raised the bureau would have to look at it.

“We did a review of some legislation recently, including the Offences Against the Person Act, the Maintenance Act and the Property Rights of Spouses Act. It is not something that has been raised at the Bureau, say over the last year, but we are not averse to reviewing it if there is need to do so,” she said.

McIntosh and Webster’s comments followed sharp criticism of the government’s response to the proposal for better maternity leave provisions by JTA president Hopeton Henry.

“When we put this as part of our claim, we knew that it would have system-wide implications. But I think it was wrong for the government to reject it outright. We thought that at least they would have put it on hold pending discussions. People say that it is ‘woman time now’ and you figure that the time would be right to deal with it now,” Henry told the Observer.

Senator Dwight Nelson of the Jamaica Confederation of Trade Unions (JCTU) agreed, saying that the unions believed that the time was ripe for tripartite discussions on the issue, in light of recent recommendations on the issue from the International Labour Organisation (ILO).

“There is a case for a review of the current Maternity Leave Act in light of the fact that the ILO in 2000 adopted a position that maternity leave period should be at least 14 weeks,” Nelson pointed out.

This compares with the Jamaican mininum of 12 weeks of which at least eight weeks should be with pay.

The Jamaica Employers’ Federation(JEF), however, was more cautious about extending the period, while welcoming the tripartite approach.

According to its executive director, Jacqueline Coke-Lloyd, extending the maternity leave from 12 weeks would have implications for the wider Jamaica, “because usually government contracts set a precedent, so one should be looking at a call from other parties for an improvement in the law”.

“I think we need to do some research on it, what kind of impact it could have on the workplace and the lives of women and the lives of families; what are the positives, what are the negatives,” added Coke-Lloyd.

“There is the question of our culture and what obtains in our neighbouring islands. The Scandanavian countries do have very healthy maternity leave plans, but they have a different culture in that the number of children they have is far less than we do have. So culture is an issue: how are we going to manage that?” she said.

“Maybe this is an opportunity for the country and the government to have a look at what obtains… what are the possibilities and how an increase in maternity leave will affect family life, how it will be paid for,” Coke-Lloyd said.