Paid parental leave for federal employees - when would it begin?

[Anonymous]

Wonder if there’s some secret side deal to forget about the 2020 pay raise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if there’s some secret side deal to forget about the 2020 pay raise.

They have to get the money somewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if there’s some secret side deal to forget about the 2020 pay raise.

They have to get the money somewhere.

No doubt. And to fund the Space Force and all the bs that will follow that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The original language had it only applicable for babies born after October 1, 2020. I haven’t been able to find the latest agreement, though. They should be voting today. So we’ll find out shortly.

SIGH. I would be very surprised then if this was earlier. It would have been SO NICE not to have to use all my leave and take time unpaid. Also, to have my husband (we're both feds) be able to spend some real time home with the baby as well.

Yup. I'm on maternity leave right now. It will be nice for others and I don't begrudge it to them, but it will be bitterly disappointing to use up all of my sick and annual leave, take a 10% pay cut for the year due to unpaid FMLA (I've only been a fed instead of a contractor for 1.5 years), and miss paid leave by a hair. Like, that's such a huge cost i would probably have waited a year to get pregnant if I'd known.

You do sound very bitter, yes.

Eh, she said it’s nice for others and she doesn’t begrudge it to them. Doesn’t sound bitter to me. I’m a fed who recently took my second maternity leave. Covering the first one was tough and covering the second one was even tougher because I didn’t have as much time to accrue sick/annual leave, plus I had a difficult pregnancy the second time around, so I had to use sick leave before the birth. The current fed approach just kind of sucks, and it’s awesome that it might change for the better!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The original language had it only applicable for babies born after October 1, 2020. I haven’t been able to find the latest agreement, though. They should be voting today. So we’ll find out shortly.

SIGH. I would be very surprised then if this was earlier. It would have been SO NICE not to have to use all my leave and take time unpaid. Also, to have my husband (we're both feds) be able to spend some real time home with the baby as well.

Yup. I'm on maternity leave right now. It will be nice for others and I don't begrudge it to them, but it will be bitterly disappointing to use up all of my sick and annual leave, take a 10% pay cut for the year due to unpaid FMLA (I've only been a fed instead of a contractor for 1.5 years), and miss paid leave by a hair. Like, that's such a huge cost i would probably have waited a year to get pregnant if I'd known.

You do sound very bitter, yes.

Eh, she said it’s nice for others and she doesn’t begrudge it to them. Doesn’t sound bitter to me. I’m a fed who recently took my second maternity leave. Covering the first one was tough and covering the second one was even tougher because I didn’t have as much time to accrue sick/annual leave, plus I had a difficult pregnancy the second time around, so I had to use sick leave before the birth. The current fed approach just kind of sucks, and it’s awesome that it might change for the better!

I feel the same way, but am a little bitter and my youngest is 16, lol.

[Anonymous]

No bitterness here. Our contract gave us paid leave.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn’t OPM have to promulgate regulations on it first before it becomes effective?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if there’s some secret side deal to forget about the 2020 pay raise.

They have to get the money somewhere.

Doesn’t cost any money. I took LWOP but when I returned I had the same amount of work as if I hadn’t been off at all. I had to stay late a lot of nights and I worked weekends unpaid. I’m mostly caught up now. I figure if I had to do the same amount of work they should have paid me. Since they saved so much money with my LWOP they should have hired a temp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The original language had it only applicable for babies born after October 1, 2020. I haven’t been able to find the latest agreement, though. They should be voting today. So we’ll find out shortly.

SIGH. I would be very surprised then if this was earlier. It would have been SO NICE not to have to use all my leave and take time unpaid. Also, to have my husband (we're both feds) be able to spend some real time home with the baby as well.

Yup. I'm on maternity leave right now. It will be nice for others and I don't begrudge it to them, but it will be bitterly disappointing to use up all of my sick and annual leave, take a 10% pay cut for the year due to unpaid FMLA (I've only been a fed instead of a contractor for 1.5 years), and miss paid leave by a hair. Like, that's such a huge cost i would probably have waited a year to get pregnant if I'd known.

You do sound very bitter, yes.

Given that unpaid maternity leave comes at a cost of tens of thousands in salary and benefits, I feel some bitterness is justified! Yes, I know not everyone is even covered by FMLA, that's just unconscionable.

[Anonymous]

The GOP will never pass this and big rump won't sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Given that unpaid maternity leave comes at a cost of tens of thousands in salary and benefits, I feel some bitterness is justified! Yes, I know not everyone is even covered by FMLA, that's just unconscionable.

Same here! It's okay to be a little bitter--I know I am.

[Anonymous]

DH's company is going to have paid 4 months parental leave effective next year. Ahhhhh, our latest baby is just born this year, and we are done with 2 kids. I wish I can take advantage of that new policy, but it is not incentive enough for us to have 1 more child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's a part of the FY21 legislation, then it should have an enactment date included in the Bill. I haven't seen the language anywhere, but in my experience, most legislation takes over a year to implement - so if you're pregnant now it probably won't help you this round. . .

I'm not sure this would actually be the case. Obviously, this would depend on the language in the bill, but this is spending authorization bill, and the money for spending is for next year I believe? But I could be wrong.

It's a spending authorization bill - but the Act enacting the legislation is not dependent on yearly authorization any more than anything else that the government needs money to do.

That said - devil in the details - but I think it's entirely possible that you could be eligible for it up to a year after the birth of the child, as long as there is still within the year of birth, similar to FMLA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The GOP will never pass this and big rump won't sign.

He is getting his Space Force in trade. He will sign. This is the type of transactional negotiation he likes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The original language had it only applicable for babies born after October 1, 2020. I haven’t been able to find the latest agreement, though. They should be voting today. So we’ll find out shortly.

SIGH. I would be very surprised then if this was earlier. It would have been SO NICE not to have to use all my leave and take time unpaid. Also, to have my husband (we're both feds) be able to spend some real time home with the baby as well.

Yup. I'm on maternity leave right now. It will be nice for others and I don't begrudge it to them, but it will be bitterly disappointing to use up all of my sick and annual leave, take a 10% pay cut for the year due to unpaid FMLA (I've only been a fed instead of a contractor for 1.5 years), and miss paid leave by a hair. Like, that's such a huge cost i would probably have waited a year to get pregnant if I'd known.

You do sound very bitter, yes.

Eh, she said it’s nice for others and she doesn’t begrudge it to them. Doesn’t sound bitter to me. I’m a fed who recently took my second maternity leave. Covering the first one was tough and covering the second one was even tougher because I didn’t have as much time to accrue sick/annual leave, plus I had a difficult pregnancy the second time around, so I had to use sick leave before the birth. The current fed approach just kind of sucks, and it’s awesome that it might change for the better!

+1 - for the professional crowd (doctors, lawyers, etc.) it's been a maxim that you have the children before you go public if you can because parental leave benefits are so far behind what the private sector offers. This will be a big attraction to would-be parents who are thinking they want kids in the future. Now, they stay put because they don't want to give up those benefits. In the future, they are more likely to jump prior to getting pregnant - which is a big bonus to the government to get new people in who may stay for a long time.