Paid Leave
Having a child is a choice. If you can't afford a child don't have a child. An employer shouldn't have to pay for paternity or maternity leave.
I don't care if other countries pay it. The other countries have it wrong.
Comments
-
You are so fucking wrong that it hurts.
-
Government telling businesses how to compensate their employees. Sounds like some communist bullshit right there.
-
Or you can attract good employees by offering quality benefits like this.
Maternity/paternity leave isn't about being able to afford a child, it's about spending time with them during critical stages of early childhood and family development. However, I imagine it would be difficult to afford a child if someone were to lose a job over it. That's the choice people without paid or even unpaid leave are forced to make.
Sounds like you don't have that option where you work, or are afraid of having to pay it to your employees. Which is unfortunate for you. But that's no reason to deny a scientifically proven benefit to our species to others.
This wasn't an issue back in the day because a man could easily support his family on a single income. Today, dual incomes are often a necessary reality to support a family (stagnant wage growth coming home to roost), which means the stay at home mom is fast becoming extinct. The flip side is many companies lose qualified and talented female employees that choose to stay home, and are forced to hire and train replacements. That costs money too.
I've retained talented employees by supporting them in this important time. I think you'll find that this course of action not only benefits them personally, but strengthens the loyalty and commitment they feel towards their place of employment. You get better performance and long term value by treating employees as people. Plus it's the right thing to do.
We hear a lot of lip service paid to family values by politicians, but things like this, women's health, and social safety net programs that protect needy families are constantly under attack and labeled as entitlements. Maybe those things actually make a huge difference.
This helps Trump IMHO.
There's my TL;DR dash of perspective for the day...brought to you by this #FreshBowl of #TeamSativa. -
Trump is a big government liberal which is why Race loves him.
-
Someone doesn't have a child.
Or he doesn't give a fuck the other dad is having to get up multiple times a night as his lazy ass sleeps. -
So you freely admit that it's in the company's best interest to provide paid leave, but want the taxpayer to foot the bill for the companies who don't?ThomasFremont said:Or you can attract good employees by offering quality benefits like this.
Maternity/paternity leave isn't about being able to afford a child, it's about spending time with them during critical stages of early childhood and family development. However, I imagine it would be difficult to afford a child if someone were to lose a job over it. That's the choice people without paid or even unpaid leave are forced to make.
Sounds like you don't have that option where you work, or are afraid of having to pay it to your employees. Which is unfortunate for you. But that's no reason to deny a scientifically proven benefit to our species to others.
This wasn't an issue back in the day because a man could easily support his family on a single income. Today, dual incomes are often a necessary reality to support a family (stagnant wage growth coming home to roost), which means the stay at home mom is fast becoming extinct. The flip side is many companies lose qualified and talented female employees that choose to stay home, and are forced to hire and train replacements. That costs money too.
I've retained talented employees by supporting them in this important time. I think you'll find that this course of action not only benefits them personally, but strengthens the loyalty and commitment they feel towards their place of employment. You get better performance and long term value by treating employees as people. Plus it's the right thing to do.
We hear a lot of lip service paid to family values by politicians, but things like this, women's health, and social safety net programs that protect needy families are constantly under attack and labeled as entitlements. Maybe those things actually make a huge difference.
This helps Trump IMHO.
There's my TL;DR dash of perspective for the day...brought to you by this #FreshBowl of #TeamSativa.
If the labor market demands paid leave and some companies won't provide it, those companies will suffer the consequences. Or you could force it with taxation and enjoy all the unintended consequences of government coercion. Barriers to entry for new businesses, increased tax burden, the possibility of firms discriminating against young women, etc.
-
If businesses want to offer it they can, but the government shouldn't make them. I think it's a good thing if a business offers it, but again it should be their choice. This is an issue the government has no business getting into. Maternity/Paternity leave is already offered, and paid depending on the business.doogsinparadise said:You are so fucking wrong that it hurts.
If your company doesn't offer it, then find a new job. But don't gripe about it being unfair. -
Such awesome J.PurpleJ said:
So you freely admit that it's in the company's best interest to provide paid leave, but want the taxpayer to foot the bill for the companies who don't?ThomasFremont said:Or you can attract good employees by offering quality benefits like this.
Maternity/paternity leave isn't about being able to afford a child, it's about spending time with them during critical stages of early childhood and family development. However, I imagine it would be difficult to afford a child if someone were to lose a job over it. That's the choice people without paid or even unpaid leave are forced to make.
Sounds like you don't have that option where you work, or are afraid of having to pay it to your employees. Which is unfortunate for you. But that's no reason to deny a scientifically proven benefit to our species to others.
This wasn't an issue back in the day because a man could easily support his family on a single income. Today, dual incomes are often a necessary reality to support a family (stagnant wage growth coming home to roost), which means the stay at home mom is fast becoming extinct. The flip side is many companies lose qualified and talented female employees that choose to stay home, and are forced to hire and train replacements. That costs money too.
I've retained talented employees by supporting them in this important time. I think you'll find that this course of action not only benefits them personally, but strengthens the loyalty and commitment they feel towards their place of employment. You get better performance and long term value by treating employees as people. Plus it's the right thing to do.
We hear a lot of lip service paid to family values by politicians, but things like this, women's health, and social safety net programs that protect needy families are constantly under attack and labeled as entitlements. Maybe those things actually make a huge difference.
This helps Trump IMHO.
There's my TL;DR dash of perspective for the day...brought to you by this #FreshBowl of #TeamSativa.
If the labor market demands paid leave and some companies won't provide it, those companies will suffer the consequences. Or you could force it with taxation and enjoy all the unintended consequences of government coercion. Barriers to entry for new businesses, increased tax burden, the possibility of firms discriminating against young women, etc. -
We think women are being discriminated against now, wait until this goes through. I don't want to see the job market for women between 21-35 when this initiative is approved. That's what's going to be unfair.
-
I think 6 weeks maternity/one week paternity leave should be mandatory, but I think paid or unpaid should be the company's choice.greenblood said:
If businesses want to offer it they can, but the government shouldn't make them. I think it's a good thing if a business offers it, but again it should be their choice. This is an issue the government has no business getting into. Maternity/Paternity leave is already offered, and paid depending on the business.doogsinparadise said:You are so fucking wrong that it hurts.
If your company doesn't offer it, then find a new job. But don't gripe about it being unfair.
I took two weeks vacation time for paternity leave with both of my kids. It was awesome, I wouldn't have traded it for anything. And I didn't resent my employer for not paying for it, we planned our vacation time for it. My wife took 6 weeks maternity for both of them, unpaid. Would have been awesome had it been paid, but we weren't in that position. I don't think it's anybody else's responsibility to pay for me to have kids. If they wouldn't have let her get the time off or would have let her go during her time off I would have been pissed though.
