CMS overhauls UK parental leave policy to let lawyers and staff stay home for longer
Firm scraps claw back provision for non-returners as it bids to encourage women to come back after longer periods of maternity leave
September 29, 2017 at 04:17 AM
3 minute read
CMS has overhauled its parental leave package for UK staff and lawyers, potentially allowing new parents to stay at home with their child for several years before returning to the firm, rather than the standard 12-months.
The overhaul, which follows a move to more than double the paid maternity leave on offer to 26 weeks on full pay, unifies the different systems previously in place across legacy firms Nabarro, Olswang and CMS, which merged on 1 May this year.
It means new parents will be able to apply to take off longer than 12 months to raise their children, without harming their career prospects, with the extended leave on offer for same-sex and adoptive primary carers as well as new mothers.
The newly merged firm has also scrapped a 'claw back' provision that meant that those opting not to return to work after 12 months' leave had to repay some of their maternity pay to the firm.
CMS UK chair and senior partner Penelope Warne told Legal Week: "Most businesses and most law firms require people returning to work to come back after 12 months, and if you don't, your job can't be guaranteed. We have changed that bit. Although you're not being paid there's flexibility about welcoming you back after 15 months, 18 months or two years."
Warne stressed that there is no time limit to the extended period of unpaid leave. "Even at the extremes, even if you take the more extended period, we value our alumni and we would try to accommodate people."
She said that women will not damage their career prospects by applying for a longer period of maternity leave, and added that the new system applies equally to all new parents.
"If women take maternity leave it should not impact their career progression. I know from my experience at the firm that we have promoted female partners when they have been pregnant or early returners.
"There's no maximum time limit. What we are saying is we want to support our women in the business and I think that's a very important thing. We are very supportive of paternity leave as well. Whether male, female, straight, gay, your own child or adopted – all equally benefit."
Those taking parental leave will receive 26 weeks on full pay, followed by 13 weeks of statutory maternity leave. Until May this year the firm previously paid 10 weeks in full with 16 weeks on half pay, followed by 13 weeks' statutory maternity pay.
Earlier this month, US firm Morrison & Foerster (MoFo) also changed its maternity and paternity leave packages for employees and lawyers - with the exception of partners – in its London office.
Previously, the firm offered 13 weeks' maternity leave at full pay and 13 weeks at half pay. It has doubled its full-pay offering to 26 weeks, with statutory pay for the remaining 13 weeks of leave.
Meanwhile, it has extended paternity leave from two weeks at full pay to six weeks. The firm does not have clawback provisions in London for maternity and paternity packages.
A press spokesperson said the US firm would be "flexible" and "open to a conversation" with an employee who wanted to return to work at MoFo after 12 months.
The firm is currently reviewing its parental leave policy, with a view to paying more than the statutory minimum.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUK Black History Month: Four A&O Shearman Staffers Honour Their Unsung Heroes
6 minute read'But We Exist': The Stigma Around Disability and Neurodivergence in Law Firms Persists
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Commission Confirms Three of Newsom's Appellate Court Picks
- 2Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 3GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 4'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 5Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250