Shared Parental Leave and Pay

[Nat020]

Has anyone considered taking advantage of the Shared Parental Leave? Is there anything that I need to consider here (e.g. taxes, law, etc.) other than the minimum 26 week employment and >£111 weekly salary to myself?

I've been contracting for over a year and am now expecting our first baby in 2 weeks. From what I understand, I am eligible for Statutory Maternity Pay (I paid myself £10k salary + divs) from my Ltd company. My husband's company has recently changed their Paternity Leave policy to comply with the recent Shared Parental Leave (SPL) law. His company are offering up to 4 months of leave for partners at full pay (they are going beyond the SPL law). My understanding is that I will need to give up my Maternity Leave pay, which will not be a problem for me as a contractor.

It would be absolutely amazing if we can both take care of the baby without sacrificing the salary. We don't have our families close by.

Appreciate anyone's thoughts/advice.

Many thanks

[malvolio]

Are you an employee? Directors aren't...

[Nat020]

I'm an employee and also a director...

[malvolio]

I'm an employee and also a director...

So you have a formal contract of employment with YourCo and are paying above NMW and adhering to the Working Time directive and pension scheme requirements then..?

It's a personal thing anyway, so YourCo doesn't really figure other than as a payment vehicle. I would get professional advice but if you can manage to get both free time and full income (allowing that contractors don't get paid for not working of course), then go for it.

[jamesbrown]

So you have a formal contract of employment with YourCo and are paying above NMW and adhering to the Working Time directive and pension scheme requirements then..?

While the OP probably doesn't have a formal contract of employment, it's worth noting that there is no requirement for a single director/employee to have a workplace pension and the WTD is also not applicable to someone that has full control over their working hours or does not have fixed hours (there's also an opt out); if that's what you mean by "adhering to", fair enough. Certainly, NMW is applicable if there's a formal contract of employment.

[malvolio]

While the OP probably doesn't have a formal contract of employment, it's worth noting that there is no requirement for a single director/employee to have a workplace pension and the WTD is also not applicable to someone that has full control over their working hours or does not have fixed hours (there's also an opt out); if that's what you mean by "adhering to", fair enough. Certainly, NMW is applicable if there's a formal contract of employment.

That's because they are officers of the company and not employees...

[jamesbrown]

That's because they are officers of the company and not employees...

Eh? There's no requirement for a workplace pension for one director that is also an employee, i.e. one director that also has a contract of employment. Likewise, the WTD isn't applicable, in practice. Of the three things you list, only the NMW is applicable, in practice.

[Jessica@WhiteFieldTax]

I'm not awre of any restrictions to the statutory range of benefits around whether someone has/not a contract, is/not an employee. In practical terms only NMW, redundancy and AE are impacted by this based on current practice.

As to whether it's worthwhile, I bear the scars of engaging on that one last time on this forum, re SMP, so I'm not going there again...