• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Family Leave

 
 
 
lpetrich

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 27, 2000
Messages
26,852
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
AOC Slams U.S. Policy on Paid Family Leave, Says Dogs Get More Time With Their Puppies Than Mothers With Newborns
"The market has decided. Eighty percent of families don't have access to paid family leave," Ocasio-Cortez said. ...

[The average length of that leave is] usually around six to eight weeks.

"Six weeks. Do we know how long puppies are allowed to stay with their mothers after a dog has given birth?" Ocasio-Cortez asked. The congresswoman answered her own question, informing those in the hearing that it is professionally recommended that dogs be allowed to stay with their puppies for eight weeks before they're re-homed.

"So the market has decided that women and people who give birth deserve less time with their children than a dog," Ocasio-Cortez said. "I think that that, at its core, has shown that the market has failed to treat people with dignity and basic respect. So when that happens, I think it's our job as the public to redefine the rules of society and to treat people who give birth with the dignity they deserve."
Click to expand...
Congress also decided on a deal about paid parental leave for Federal employees, supporting it in exchange for the creation of a Space Force.
 
Newsweek on Twitter: ".@AOC slams U.S. policy on paid family leave, says dogs get more time with their puppies than mothers with newborn babies https://t.co/MMFZziKZHx" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Puppies aren’t separated from their moms until ~8 weeks. Less than that is thought of as harmful or abusive.
One of the most common lengths of US paid family leave is ~6 weeks.
So yes, when we “let the market decide”on parental leave, “the market” treats people worse than dogs. https://t.co/Pc14ypHHJF" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "At a bare minimum, we need to fight for 3 months paid family leave in the United States.
Ideally, I believe we should have 6-12 months of paid leave - just as many other industrial nations do." / Twitter

Alexis Ohanian Sr. 🚀 on Twitter: "💪 team #paidfamilyleave https://t.co/bYXelpgg2V" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Yes! And equal paternity/parental leave is just as critical.
Non-birthing parents are JUST as important.We have to end the stigma that only birthing parents should take time off.
It takes a village. Leave isn’t only about physical recovery; it’s about starting life as a family. https://t.co/QJik9yTOV4" / Twitter

Nice to see a good word for fatherhood.
 
 
Fuck, I’d take 4 weeks paid leave that didn’t eat into my vacation. When my daughter was born, I was able to get one week, thanks to Thanksgiving and then worked part time when I wanted to be off.

I wanted to take a month, flat out.
 
I have some mixed feelings about equating the need for leave of someone who gives birth and the parent who doesn’t give birth. Pregnancy and childbirth are huge physical events that take months to recover from fully. Both parents need time to bond and get to know the baby and face sleep deprivation and wild adjustments to their schedules. In an ideal world the non-birthing parent would get the same 3 months or 6 months or year or whatever and the nonbirthing parent would be supportive and provide care for the newborn as well as the mother and also look after other children and household chores, doctor appointments, etc. this would allow the woman to fully recover from childbirth and also support breastfeeding, etc. Most importantly, it would also be great for the newborn to spend its first months surrounded by loving family—and possibly not face quite so many challenges to its immune system.

I firmly believe that doing our best for the most vulnerable of our members: the very young and the very old and the sick and disabled creates the best society for all of us.

Children who get the healthiest and most loving and supportive upbringing in their early years are better able to grow and learn and to achieve their dreams. They are likely to be less expensive and need fewer interventions and are more likely to grow up able to fully participate and contribute to society.

I actually believe that parental leave for both parents should be mandatory. It’s the only way to stop penalizing women for getting pregnant.
 
Last edited:
The downside of this is that it will make employers less likely to hire reproductive-age women.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
The downside of this is that it will make employers less likely to hire reproductive-age women.
Click to expand...

Yup. That's why almost no women of reproductive age are employed in Europe or Australasia. :rolleyes:

Oddly enough, observation trumps theory every time. So every one of your theories that flies in the face of the reality in other parts of the world that have implemented the policies you theorise to be unworkable, is bunk.

No matter how much you feel like they are reasonable and logical.

The flaw this time is your missing the idea that both mother and father should get paid parental leave. So this proposal should, by your logic, make employers less likely to hire reproductive age people of either gender. Leaving them with a fucking HUGE labour shortage. Unless they are a lot smarter than you think.
 
Big topic. I don't know where I stand on it.

Should employers be obliged to provide paid parental leave? I'd tend to say no. I'd say it should be left up to each employer. Should society (through government, ie through taxes) provide paid parental leave? Possibly, but only if there were societal benefits (which there might be, it's too complicated for me) that outweigh any drawbacks (eg cost). A cost-benefit analysis would be needed, and I bet it'd be extremely difficult to do one that accurately accounted for everything.

Unpaid leave is a slightly different issue.

The extent of any leave, paid or otherwise, is also another issue. It may be that there's an optimum amount (in terms of weighing up the costs and benefits, to society).

In the end, having children is, by and large, a personal choice. Whether it's a 'natural human right' or not is up for grabs. I incline towards thinking it isn't. As such, I'm not sure if being disadvantaged in some ways because you made a personal choice is infringing any of your 'human rights'.
 
ruby sparks said:
Big topic. I don't know where I stand on it.

Should employers be obliged to provide paid parental leave? I'd tend to say no. I'd say it should be left up to each employer. Should society (through government, ie through taxes) provide paid parental leave? Possibly, but only if there were societal benefits (which there might be, it's too complicated for me) that outweigh any drawbacks (eg cost). A cost-benefit analysis would be needed, and I bet it'd be extremely difficult to do one that accurately accounted for everything.

Unpaid leave is a slightly different issue.

The extent of any leave, paid or otherwise, is also another issue. It may be that there's an optimum amount (in terms of weighing up the costs and benefits, to society).

In the end, having children is, by and large, a personal choice. Whether it's a 'natural human right' or not is up for grabs. I incline towards thinking it isn't. As such, I'm not sure if being disadvantaged in some ways because you made a personal choice is infringing any of your 'human rights'.
Click to expand...

Yea, it's a complicated issue. For one, many people today are self employed. Many workers are paid on production or commission. Do families that adopt get the same benefits (I'd hope so). Generally I agree with Toni that more needs to be done. However, I agree that it's not necessary a natural human right. This might seem wacky, but maybe we should consider honoring people who aren't contributing to the population problem! As a society, we create more babies than we can adequately care for.
 
Lets see, where I work I have earned 4 months sick time and over a year in vacation time.

It isn’t just me, the same policy for everyone else over a similar period of time. And the company still exists.

Would two months paternal paid leave (it can be capped people)? Four to six months for maternal paid leave? And it can be applied to people that have worked x number of years at a company.

Should a company be expected to help provide an easier venue for the transition of adding a new family member? No, if employees are statistics. Yes, if employees are considered human beings.

Personally, I think any law that passes will apply to about 15% of the work force as the law would allow small businesses (anyone with less than a bazillion workers) to be exempt, because a lot like health care, small businesses can’t be expected to treat their employees like humans.

Blessed are the SBO’s, for they shall inherit all exemptions.

And fuck unpaid leave, what the fuck is that? We promise not to fire you for not coming back to work after having just given birth? And the exemption list for corporations on even that is ridiculously huge.
 
Harry Bosch said:
Yea, it's a complicated issue. For one, many people today are self employed. Many workers are paid on production or commission. Do families that adopt get the same benefits (I'd hope so). Generally I agree with Toni that more needs to be done. However, I agree that it's not necessary a natural human right. This might seem wacky, but maybe we should consider honoring people who aren't contributing to the population problem! As a society, we create more babies than we can adequately care for.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that.

On the bit in bold, I think having babies feels like one of the most basic human 'rights' (and thus worthy of special treatment) because it's possibly the greatest evolutionary imperative. In other words, we have evolved to see it as really, really, really important. That says more about how the forces of evolution affect our psychology than anything else. And as you say there is now a moral case for doing it less, and it does not seem a wacky idea to a small but growing number of people. Including my two adult daughters. Who may of course change their minds, but there's no signs of that so far.

If you live in the 'western' developed world, not having a child (or indeed another child if you already have one or more) is said to be the largest single contribution you could make to mitigating the effects of climate change, and larger than almost all, if not indeed all, other things you could do, added together, including not flying, not driving, going vegetarian and recycling everything you buy, use or own that can be recycled.
 
There are currently a. handful of states that offer paid family leave. In at least three of these states, it's paid for by a payroll tax which is paid for by the employees. It covers more than just maternity leave. My sister is on her final week of a six week leave to help her coordinate care for our 94 year old mother. The leave can be used to care for a sick child, parent etc. In NJ, the leave is supported by a payroll tax that is added to the state's short term disability leave.

In the states that provide PFL, salary isn't paid in full. It's usually around 55 to 75% ( I think ) of the total salary. New York has a limit of something like 750 per week, but there is also a limit on how much the employee will pay into the tax. The limit is a bit over 100 per week, which I assume would be paid by the highest salaried individuals. Anyway, I just read about ten articles on the subject and didn't bother to save any links, but it's easy enough to look up the information for yourself.

I also learned that while the idea of paid family leave is very popular. The popularity drops significantly when people realize they will have to pay a tax of as little as 200 dollars per year. The only attempt to make this a federal plan was when there was some bipartisan support to allow people to delay their social security payout if they ever took any paid family leave. Most people don't like that idea, as we never know when if we might need to take SS at an earlier age than we had planned.

So, this is a complicated issue, with many different possible solutions, but none that would be currently supported enough to pass into law. Paying for these programs is always something that makes it difficult to pass them.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Lets see, where I work I have earned 4 months sick time and over a year in vacation time.

It isn’t just me, the same policy for everyone else over a similar period of time. And the company still exists.

Would two months paternal paid leave (it can be capped people)? Four to six months for maternal paid leave? And it can be applied to people that have worked x number of years at a company.

Should a company be expected to help provide an easier venue for the transition of adding a new family member? No, if employees are statistics. Yes, if employees are considered human beings.

Personally, I think any law that passes will apply to about 15% of the work force as the law would allow small businesses (anyone with less than a bazillion workers) to be exempt, because a lot like health care, small businesses can’t be expected to treat their employees like humans.

Blessed are the SBO’s, for they shall inherit all exemptions.

And fuck unpaid leave, what the fuck is that? We promise not to fire you for not coming back to work after having just given birth? And the exemption list for corporations on even that is ridiculously huge.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that it should be applied only to people who have worked at X place for a certain number of years because it hurts women who have a shorter reproductive window than do men, especially if they wish to minimize the potential for complications related to pregnancy and childbirth.

I think that the law should apply to everyone, including those who work for small businesses and that those businesses should be entitled to govt. support to cover the cost of the leave and any extra manpower needed to ensure operations of the business.

I was talking recently with a young business owner who very recently purchased the business (a vet clinic) from his former employer. One of the not well paid employees recently gave birth and because she didn't have parental leave, was back at work only 1 week post partum. He was currently in negotiations/discussions with his accountant to find a way to pay for a decent parental leave and also to give the lesser paid employees (i.e. vet techs) a raise and how to determine which insurance plan they should offer: one that cost employees a bit less, allowing them to pocket more money but have a higher deductible or one that cost more and had a reasonable deductible.

Having governmental support for family leave and medical insurance that is universal and excellent really would help small businesses a great deal. Responsible business owners want to do this for their employees. They know it allows them to attract better employees, increases employee productivity and loyalty and reduces the need and cost associated with hiring and training new employees. And they know it is the right, humane thing to do. I have friends who recently closed up a small practice (retirement) and this was something they really struggled with to the point that for years, they went without health insurance themselves in order to cover their kids and employees. They did this until the kids were on their own and one of them had a significant enough health issue that going without coverage was not feasible any longer.
 
Toni said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Lets see, where I work I have earned 4 months sick time and over a year in vacation time.

It isn’t just me, the same policy for everyone else over a similar period of time. And the company still exists.

Would two months paternal paid leave (it can be capped people)? Four to six months for maternal paid leave? And it can be applied to people that have worked x number of years at a company.

Should a company be expected to help provide an easier venue for the transition of adding a new family member? No, if employees are statistics. Yes, if employees are considered human beings.

Personally, I think any law that passes will apply to about 15% of the work force as the law would allow small businesses (anyone with less than a bazillion workers) to be exempt, because a lot like health care, small businesses can’t be expected to treat their employees like humans.

Blessed are the SBO’s, for they shall inherit all exemptions.

And fuck unpaid leave, what the fuck is that? We promise not to fire you for not coming back to work after having just given birth? And the exemption list for corporations on even that is ridiculously huge.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that it should be applied only to people who have worked at X place for a certain number of years because it hurts women who have a shorter reproductive window than do men, especially if they wish to minimize the potential for complications related to pregnancy and childbirth.
Click to expand...
If there is no vesting, then the Government would need to pitch in.

I think that the law should apply to everyone, including those who work for small businesses and that those businesses should be entitled to govt. support to cover the cost of the leave and any extra manpower needed to ensure operations of the business.
Click to expand...
That'd be nice. It isn't like a company doesn't have 6 to 8 months of early notice!

Having governmental support for family leave and medical insurance that is universal and excellent really would help small businesses a great deal.
Click to expand...
But that is Socialism and Socialism means people walking around looking like skeletons. The meme said so!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom