Paid Family Leave Discussion (derail from fertility decrease)

[lpetrich]

CBS News on Twitter: "Experts sound the alarm on declining birth rates among younger generations: "It's a crisis" (link)" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "The actual crisis is how entire generations are sunk w/inhumane levels of student debt, low incomes, high rent, no guarantee of healthcare & little action on climate change which creates a situation where feeling stable enough to have a kid can feel more like a luxury than a norm" / Twitter

But AOC has a solution, and she has implemented it for her employees.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "I’d like to share another “unusual” (but shouldn’t be) part of my office policy w/ you all: Parental Leave! ..." / Twitter

I’d like to share another “unusual” (but shouldn’t be) part of my office policy w/ you all: Parental Leave!

Three members of our small team are expectant or new parents in the first 6 mos of my term.

In my office, *every* new parent receives 3 mos paid leave - including dads.

A few notes on our approach:

1. Expecting a child has nothing to do with our hiring decisions, & we do everything we can to accommodate. That’s supposed to be law, but there are small ways (incl self-selection) where it can play a role. We work to be a pro-family workplace.

2. Paid parental leave applies to ALL new parents, period. Moms, dads, parents; biological or adopted. If you’ve got a new child, you get 12 weeks to spend adjusting your family to this huge transition.

3. Our 12 weeks parental leave is up to the parent on how they want to use that time. They don’t have to take all 12 weeks at once - for example, they can take 5 weeks off and work 2 days a week to transition in; bank 3 weeks for later in the year, etc.

4. I want to reiterate how important it is to give dads full parental leave. I strongly encourage them to take the full time.

I’ve heard the “normal” paternity leave is 2 weeks. That is NOT okay! As my partner says: “What do employers expect those new moms to do? Walk it off?”

5. Equal pay at work is about SO much more than the salary you offer.

If you give dads less paid parental leave than moms, you’re contributing to the pay gap.

If you see pregnancy or family as a workplace obstacle, you’re contributing to the pay gap.

6. We make an effort to make our office family-friendly. We talk about what play mats + cribs we need along w/ our legislative agenda. My personal office can be used for pumping/feeding.

Staff can bring their babies to work if they like & we are working to prepare to have them.

7. Additionally, paying a living min wage to our most junior staffers means they’re talented + capable (no 2nd job) to take over big-time situations, meaning senior staffers are confident enough in them to take parental leave and not feel like everything will fall apart.

8. This is convo is bigger than parental leave - it’s a larger conversation about how modern work has grown so hostile to family life. It doesn’t have to be that way!

Work + family can go together, but we have to break down the barriers that force people to choose between them.

It's good that AOC is such a forward-looking boss.

 

[lpetrich]

AOC Slams U.S. Policy on Paid Family Leave, Says Dogs Get More Time With Their Puppies Than Mothers With Newborns

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez criticized employers in the United States who do not offer paid family leave, asserting that dogs are allowed to spend more time with newborn puppies than mothers are with their babies.

The congresswoman's remarks came Tuesday during a House Oversight and Reform Committee on paid family and medical leave. The United States is one of two nations in the industrialized world that does not provide any federal form of paid leave.

"The market has decided. Eighty percent of families don't have access to paid family leave," Ocasio-Cortez said. According to most estimates, just 20 percent of American workers have access to paid family leave through their employer.

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 (link)" / Twitter

Then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Puppies aren’t separated from their moms until ~8 weeks. ..." / 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.

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.

 

[Metaphor]

CBS News on Twitter: "Experts sound the alarm on declining birth rates among younger generations: "It's a crisis" (link)" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "The actual crisis is how entire generations are sunk w/inhumane levels of student debt, low incomes, high rent, no guarantee of healthcare & little action on climate change which creates a situation where feeling stable enough to have a kid can feel more like a luxury than a norm" / Twitter

But AOC has a solution, and she has implemented it for her employees.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "I’d like to share another “unusual” (but shouldn’t be) part of my office policy w/ you all: Parental Leave! ..." / Twitter

I’d like to share another “unusual” (but shouldn’t be) part of my office policy w/ you all: Parental Leave!

Three members of our small team are expectant or new parents in the first 6 mos of my term.

In my office, *every* new parent receives 3 mos paid leave - including dads.

A few notes on our approach:

1. Expecting a child has nothing to do with our hiring decisions, & we do everything we can to accommodate. That’s supposed to be law, but there are small ways (incl self-selection) where it can play a role. We work to be a pro-family workplace.

2. Paid parental leave applies to ALL new parents, period. Moms, dads, parents; biological or adopted. If you’ve got a new child, you get 12 weeks to spend adjusting your family to this huge transition.

3. Our 12 weeks parental leave is up to the parent on how they want to use that time. They don’t have to take all 12 weeks at once - for example, they can take 5 weeks off and work 2 days a week to transition in; bank 3 weeks for later in the year, etc.

4. I want to reiterate how important it is to give dads full parental leave. I strongly encourage them to take the full time.

I’ve heard the “normal” paternity leave is 2 weeks. That is NOT okay! As my partner says: “What do employers expect those new moms to do? Walk it off?”

5. Equal pay at work is about SO much more than the salary you offer.

If you give dads less paid parental leave than moms, you’re contributing to the pay gap.

If you see pregnancy or family as a workplace obstacle, you’re contributing to the pay gap.

6. We make an effort to make our office family-friendly. We talk about what play mats + cribs we need along w/ our legislative agenda. My personal office can be used for pumping/feeding.

Staff can bring their babies to work if they like & we are working to prepare to have them.

7. Additionally, paying a living min wage to our most junior staffers means they’re talented + capable (no 2nd job) to take over big-time situations, meaning senior staffers are confident enough in them to take parental leave and not feel like everything will fall apart.

8. This is convo is bigger than parental leave - it’s a larger conversation about how modern work has grown so hostile to family life. It doesn’t have to be that way!

Work + family can go together, but we have to break down the barriers that force people to choose between them.

It's good that AOC is such a forward-looking boss.

How much, precisely, in her take-home pay, did AOC give up to implement this policy?

 

[lpetrich]

AOC: U.S. parental leave 'treats people worse than dogs'

“I have to disclose that I have a stake in this fight,” she said. “When I was first starting my office here, I decided to offer 12 weeks of paid family leave. And in my first 11 or 12 months in office there have been six pregnancies in my congressional office. And six folks have taken pregnancy or medical leave — 5 of them men in my office, new fathers or folks that are taking medical leave — taking care of their families.”

She added that “this has been a very important dynamic. Many of the men in our office have testified how after the birth of their children or in supporting their partners how critical it has been to be there for, in each of these cases, the women in their lives.”

How Ocasio-Cortez Makes an 'Unusual' Parental Leave Policy Work

Earlier this spring, Ariel Eckblad returned to work as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s legislative director following twelve weeks of paid parental leave with her new baby. In another congressional office, several things might have gotten in the way of that time: for one, congressional staffers are not guaranteed any paid leave and Eckblad was one of three on a small team who were expectant or new parents within the congresswoman’s first six months in office.

But Ocasio-Cortez decided to offer her staffers twelve weeks of paid parental leave anyway, and Eckblad felt comfortable taking it, because the team was designed to handle multiple absences in an effort to be family-friendly.

Then an interview with AE.

Were you already pregnant by the time you joined the team?

I was seven months pregnant when I joined the team and it was actually a great concern for me, the idea of joining the team and then after probably four to eight weeks, depending on when I delivered, leaving. The representative said to me, explicitly, “Listen, if you don’t want to take the job because of what the work will be or because of the substance, that’s fine. But if you’re not taking the job because you’re pregnant, I don’t accept that. We will find a way to make it work, we will find a way to make sure that we have talented people on our team that also have families.” She wanted to figure out how to make that possible.

I'm quoting all this because it seems to me a success in getting work and family to go together.

 

[Metaphor]

AOC: U.S. parental leave 'treats people worse than dogs'

How Ocasio-Cortez Makes an 'Unusual' Parental Leave Policy Work

Then an interview with AE.

Were you already pregnant by the time you joined the team?

I was seven months pregnant when I joined the team and it was actually a great concern for me, the idea of joining the team and then after probably four to eight weeks, depending on when I delivered, leaving. The representative said to me, explicitly, “Listen, if you don’t want to take the job because of what the work will be or because of the substance, that’s fine. But if you’re not taking the job because you’re pregnant, I don’t accept that. We will find a way to make it work, we will find a way to make sure that we have talented people on our team that also have families.” She wanted to figure out how to make that possible.

I'm quoting all this because it seems to me a success in getting work and family to go together.

How much, precisely, in her take-home pay, did AOC give up to implement this policy?

 

[lpetrich]

How much, precisely, in her take-home pay, did AOC give up to implement this policy?

As far as I can tell, $0.00.

 

[Metaphor]

How much, precisely, in her take-home pay, did AOC give up to implement this policy?

As far as I can tell, $0.00.

So, AOC feels free to posture about a policy that costs her nothing.

So, somebody else is paying the price.

If it's the people who remain behind in the office, it's those staff who pay the price by having to do more work without extra compensation.

If people are hired to take the place of the people on leave, it's the taxpayer who pays the price in higher public expense.

If work is left undone or done at a lower level, it's the taxpayer who pays the price in lower quality public policy.

 

[Rhea]

How much, precisely, in her take-home pay, did AOC give up to implement this policy?

As far as I can tell, $0.00.

So, AOC feels free to posture about a policy that costs her nothing.

So, somebody else is paying the price.

If it's the people who remain behind in the office, it's those staff who pay the price by having to do more work without extra compensation.

One of whom is AOC. So she does have skin in the game.

If people are hired to take the place of the people on leave, it's the taxpayer who pays the price in higher public expense.

Or it could be that AOC has a fixed budget for her office and takes it from another place like office lunches or something.

If work is left undone or done at a lower level, it's the taxpayer who pays the price in lower quality public policy.

Or maybe it's handled well by professional people who understand and appreciate the support for all manner of family needs, knowing that if they need opt be a caregiver, they will have similar understanding and support.

Often those faced with cancer treatments for a partner or sibling are buoyed by the knowledge that their office supports families. That is true in our office, anyway. The parental leave has equal billing with family care leave and major medical leave. I had the same coverage for the birth and recovery of my son as I did for the replacement and recovery of my hip.

 

[Metaphor]

One of whom is AOC. So she does have skin in the game.

I rarely find that it's the boss that picks up the slack, especially when the boss's take home pay will be unaffected and the long term viability of the boss's job is not under threat.

Or it could be that AOC has a fixed budget for her office and takes it from another place like office lunches or something.

AOC did talk about her office budget being fixed. "Office lunches" doesn't pay to replace a worker for 12 weeks, unless these staffers were being treated to $500 lunches every day. But if the lunches were part of their compensation package and they're no longer getting them, then the staffers who remain are paying the price.

Or maybe it's handled well by professional people who understand and appreciate the support for all manner of family needs, knowing that if they need opt be a caregiver, they will have similar understanding and support.

Often those faced with cancer treatments for a partner or sibling are buoyed by the knowledge that their office supports families. That is true in our office, anyway. The parental leave has equal billing with family care leave and major medical leave. I had the same coverage for the birth and recovery of my son as I did for the replacement and recovery of my hip.

Rhea, I did not even say I objected to the leave. I object to the rhetoric around it, as if nobody is paying the price, or that there is no price to be paid, or that it will somehow all sort itself out, like you appear to be arguing.

AOC is posturing. The links in lpetrich's post talked about a woman who was 7 months pregnant at the time she was hired to AOC's office and would have to stop work after 4 or 6 weeks. Someone who owned a small business would need to replace that worker and pay for the replacement, while still compensating the original hire. AOC doesn't have to do that. AOC's job is not threatened. AOC does not have to think about the profitability of her enterprise. AOC doesn't have to take a paycut no matter what happens.

 

[laughing dog]

I rarely find that it's the boss that picks up the slack, especially when the boss's take home pay will be unaffected and the long term viability of the boss's job is not under threat.

So? That does not mean that a bosses' idea is necessarily bad.

AOC did talk about her office budget being fixed. "Office lunches" doesn't pay to replace a worker for 12 weeks, unless these staffers were being treated to $500 lunches every day. But if the lunches were part of their compensation package and they're no longer getting them, then the staffers who remain are paying the price.

You are right, someone(s) have to pick up the slack/cost. That does not mean the benefits from the policy do not outweigh the cost. Focusing on the cost while ignoring the benefits is poor analysis.

AOC is posturing. The links in lpetrich's post talked about a woman who was 7 months pregnant at the time she was hired to AOC's office and would have to stop work after 4 or 6 weeks. Someone who owned a small business would need to replace that worker and pay for the replacement, while still compensating the original hire. AOC doesn't have to do that. AOC's job is not threatened. AOC does not have to think about the profitability of her enterprise. AOC doesn't have to take a paycut no matter what happens.

None of which means AOC is posturing. I am not a particular admirer of AOC.
Even if one does not agree with her position, it is quite possible that in her judgment, the benefits of mandating such a leave outweigh the costs even when factoring in your objections.

 

[Metaphor]

You are right, someone(s) have to pick up the slack/cost. That does not mean the benefits from the policy do not outweigh the cost. Focusing on the cost while ignoring the benefits is poor analysis.

Except AOC did the opposite: talked about the benefit and was silent on the cost, implying either the cost didn't exist or it was so low it would be disproportionate to even mention it.

None of which means AOC is posturing. I am not a particular admirer of AOC.
Even if one does not agree with her position, it is quite possible that in her judgment, the benefits of mandating such a leave outweigh the costs even when factoring in your objections.

It's certainly the case that AOC championing a kind of leave she herself has not implemented in her office would be the height of hypocrisy, but I really feel like AOC is so coddled she can't recognise her own privilege. The cost for AOC's kind of leave policy would be devastating to small businesses.

 

[Rhea]

So... summing up, AOC talked badly about a good policy.
Get out the pitchforks.

 

[Metaphor]

So... summing up, AOC talked badly about a good policy.
Get out the pitchforks.

How on earth do you get that from what I said?

I didn't call the policy good. I didn't call it bad. I said there was a price to be paid--which AOC ignores completely. I also think AOC's illustration of her policy is a classic example of her cosseted, white collar privilege, though worse--AOC is the boss but her company doesn't need to make a profit, she doesn't have any KPIs, and her worker budget does not vary with the viccisitudes of the market.

 

[laughing dog]

Except AOC did the opposite: talked about the benefit and was silent on the cost, implying either the cost didn't exist or it was so low it would be disproportionate to even mention it.

If AOC came out with a policy paper, you'd have a point. Since she was simply talking, there is no basis in fact to determine what any perceived omission in her discussion means.

It's certainly the case that AOC championing a kind of leave she herself has not implemented in her office would be the height of hypocrisy, but I really feel like AOC is so coddled she can't recognise her own privilege. The cost for AOC's kind of leave policy would be devastating to small businesses.

I have no idea about its alleged level of devastation. I strongly suspect you have no clue whatsoever. Or even if she would thinks exceptions for small business are reasonable.

 

[Metaphor]

Except AOC did the opposite: talked about the benefit and was silent on the cost, implying either the cost didn't exist or it was so low it would be disproportionate to even mention it.

If AOC came out with a policy paper, you'd have a point. Since she was simply talking, there is no basis in fact to determine what any perceived omission in her discussion means.

It's certainly the case that AOC championing a kind of leave she herself has not implemented in her office would be the height of hypocrisy, but I really feel like AOC is so coddled she can't recognise her own privilege. The cost for AOC's kind of leave policy would be devastating to small businesses.

I have no idea about its alleged level of devastation. I strongly suspect you have no clue whatsoever.

I often imagine myself in somebody else's shoes. What I'm imagining right now is the very small liquor shop across the road that opened up last year. The owner is an immigrant, he works at the shop every day of the week, and he is usually there either alone, or sometimes assisted by someone who I presume to be his wife. I am certain there is no help outside the family at the moment.

I rarely see other people in this shop and I hope his business picks up. I hope it picks up enough to where he could actually hire others. But let's say he reaches that threshhold: being able to hire somebody instead of working 70+ hours each week on his own. If he reaches it and he hires somebody who then promptly takes three months off, he'd be obliged to pay for that person and then he'd either have to replace them or work the hours he'd hoped to regain himself. And, of course, it is illegal for him to enquire or hint about family/carer plans at interview. He might consciously or unconsciously hire people he knows are less likely to be carers (young men, for example, compared to women of childbearing age). Or he'd take the first person on as a casual rather than part time, so that benefits like family leave simply do not accrue to them. Or he'd be unlucky and the first person he hires claims family leave and drives his business to the edge.

AOC has talking points. AOC has feelgood kumbayah dreams. AOC is in a bubble who not only has talked about three months of family leave, in her own example there was not even a minimum period of employment that needed to accrue.

I have long service leave of three months, accrued from ten years continuous public service. In AOC fantasy land, someone who joined ten minutes ago should also be able to take three months paid leave, and take it every single time they decide to expand their family.

 

[laughing dog]

If AOC came out with a policy paper, you'd have a point. Since she was simply talking, there is no basis in fact to determine what any perceived omission in her discussion means.

I have no idea about its alleged level of devastation. I strongly suspect you have no clue whatsoever.

I often imagine myself in somebody else's shoes. What I'm imagining right now is the very small liquor shop across the road that opened up last year. The owner is an immigrant, he works at the shop every day of the week, and he is usually there either alone, or sometimes assisted by someone who I presume to be his wife. I am certain there is no help outside the family at the moment.

I rarely see other people in this shop and I hope his business picks up. I hope it picks up enough to where he could actually hire others. But let's say he reaches that threshhold: being able to hire somebody instead of working 70+ hours each week on his own. If he reaches it and he hires somebody who then promptly takes three months off, he'd be obliged to pay for that person and then he'd either have to replace them or work the hours he'd hoped to regain himself. And, of course, it is illegal for him to enquire or hint about family/carer plans at interview. He might consciously or unconsciously hire people he knows are less likely to be carers (young men, for example, compared to women of childbearing age). Or he'd take the first person on as a casual rather than part time, so that benefits like family leave simply do not accrue to them. Or he'd be unlucky and the first person he hires claims family leave and drives his business to the edge.

You do realize your imagination reflects more about you than it does about reality. Really, anyone can imagine anything.

[
AOC has talking points. AOC has feelgood kumbayah dreams. AOC is in a bubble who not only has talked about three months of family leave, in her own example there was not even a minimum period of employment that needed to accrue.

I have long service leave of three months, accrued from ten years continuous public service. In AOC fantasy land, someone who joined ten minutes ago should also be able to take three months paid leave, and take it every single time they decide to expand their family.

The truth comes out - you are jealous. Wow.

 

[Metaphor]

You do realize your imagination reflects more about you than it does about reality. Really, anyone can imagine anything.

Not true. AOC does not seem to be able to imagine life outside her current pampered experience.

The truth comes out - you are jealous. Wow.

It might surprise you to learn that even your ideological enemies have thoughts and feelings.

I am not jealous of people who take parental leave. I simply refuse to lie to myself about it. Somebody is paying the price.

I have accumulated enough sick leave in my job that I could be incapacitated for six months and still receive full pay (I'm hoarding it for my mental breakdown). When I retire, my sick leave will not be paid out. I am not jealous of people who use up their sick leave and have to go on leave without pay. I do not feel robbed. But I do know that when people do call in sick, somebody has to do the work, or work gets left undone.

But you were right about one thing: although the feeling is not 'jealousy', the parental leave that AOC has described is unearned and uncontrolled and appears to me to violate principles of fairness. There's literally no upper limit. It is the use of some worker's time and money to supplement the off-work time of other workers. You yourself might not care. Perhaps as an academic, other people's leave isn't going to affect you directly the way it would in other workplaces.

If a society deems parental leave to be necessary, then society should pay for it.

 

[laughing dog]

Not true. AOC does not seem to be able to imagine life outside her current pampered experience.

I see no evidence that justifies your confidence in your expertise about AOC.

It might surprise you to learn that even your ideological enemies have thoughts and feelings.....

Sure sounds like jealously when someone complains that AOC thinks people should get 3 months leave upon taking a job when it took you 10 years.

I am not jealous of people who take parental leave. I simply refuse to lie to myself about it. Somebody is paying the price.

I have accumulated enough sick leave in my job that I could be incapacitated for six months and still receive full pay (I'm hoarding it for my mental breakdown). When I retire, my sick leave will not be paid out. I am not jealous of people who use up their sick leave and have to go on leave without pay. I do not feel robbed. But I do know that when people do call in sick, somebody has to do the work, or work gets left undone.

But you were right about one thing: although the feeling is not 'jealousy', the parental leave that AOC has described is unearned and uncontrolled and appears to me to violate principles of fairness.

And now the pettiness manifests itself.

There's literally no upper limit.

Riight because people will always have more children just to get 3 months off.

It is the use of some worker's time and money to supplement the off-work time of other workers.

Just like in the case of vacation or sick leave. Big deal.

You yourself might not care. Perhaps as an academic, other people's leave isn't going to affect you directly the way it would in other workplaces.

Another failure of your imagination. Of course when people in my department take leave, it directly affects me.

If a society deems parental leave to be necessary, then society should pay for it.

And how would society pay for it in a way that does not mean that some other worker's time is involved?

 

[Metaphor]

Sure sounds like jealously when someone complains that AOC thinks people should get 3 months leave upon taking a job when it took you 10 years.

It violates my sense of fairness. But, if it pleases you, and evidently it does, you can call it 'jealousy'. But my feelings about it are not the point.

Riight because people will always have more children just to get 3 months off.

I did not say that. I said there's no upper limit.

Just like in the case of vacation or sick leave. Big deal.

No, that is not the case of vacation leave. Everybody gets vacation leave and it is paid out to you if you don't use it. Vacation leave is built in to your paycheck. The worker has already paid for it.

Sick leave is different. Sick leave is not meant to be regularly taken. Sick leave is also built in to people's paychecks, though it is not evenly taken up.

But of course there is a crucial difference between sick leave and parental leave. Being sick is a misfortune that nobody should want and is generally not planned, and does generally not require three months to resolve. Becoming a parent is an event that somebody chooses.

Another failure of your imagination. Of course when people in my department take leave, it directly affects me.

Do you need to increase your work with no additional compensation? If you do but you don't mind, why do you think everybody should or does share your mindset?

And how would society pay for it in a way that does not mean that some other worker's time is involved?

The same way that society has decided to pay for things that society wants: tax money. If society thinks somebody ought get three months off work because they are a new parent, then society should pay the wages of that person. (Of course, if a workplace wants to do it without being forced, I don't have a particular objection, still bearing in mind that I know somebody is paying the price).

 

[Rhea]

In my workplace, we have hired someone who is pregnant, knowing they will take leave. We have also supported employees caring for spouses with cancer and children with depression and parents with dementia. Everyone in the office is ready to pitch in, even on day 1, because they know if they need the time themselves some day, they will get it.

My brother will do anything for his company, because they were there for him when his wife died of cancer. They said, take the leave you need to care for her and then when she’s gone, to pick up the pieces, we’ll do your tasks. We got you. And he and everyone in the small business feels loyalty because of it.

Sounds like you don’t react that way.
Sounds like a lot of companies do think that way, and feel it is a better way to do business.

I guess you shouldn’t work for my company, or my brother’s or AOC.