anybody else completely pissed about maternity leave?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My company also touts being a best place to work but we also have 6-8 weeks short term disability with a waiting period. You would not believe....MEN get 2 weeks paid. We just get short term disability. Unbelievable.

You aren't disabled!

I can't tell what point you're trying to make. But if dads get 2 weeks paid, how much time do you think birth moms should get paid?

Basically, we have no maternity policy. There is a "parental" policy that allows new parents to take 2 weeks 100% paid time off. However, this policy does not cover anyone on short term disability. So, if you read between the lines this is really a paternity policy. Moms are only allowed 6-8 weeks reduced pay after a 2 wk waiting period while men receive 2 weeks full pay. Considering anyone in the company can use short term disability for a medical reason, this is not a maternity specific policy and quite sexist if you ask me.

[Anonymous]

OP, I work in HR and can confirm that most private companies in the US (F100/500) the good ones anyway - offer the package you are on. I have recruited from Booz Allen, Accenture, top tier consulting firms and while the % of pay might differ (ie 40% v. 75%) while on disability, most of the time off is exactly what you are seeing. The FMLA does kick in and more or less promises your job back after you return to work - that's really all it does. In the US, work is paramount to anything else. NOTHING made me more angrier when I discovered the waiting period as you did and that I would be paid on disability only at 60% of salary. I have been fuming about it ever since my first a couple years ago

The US if you think about it does not motivate working career driven women to have families - instead our government encourages the opposite. Very ironic I find. I used to be an executive recruiter and the few top women candidates I had at that level either only had 1 child or no children at all. And having 1 usually came very early in age or late in age.

Before I had a baby, I just never realized how much it sucked having kids in this country. I think often that the best and only way to go is to have your own business and set your own rules. Have one spouse work as an employee for benefits and the other as an independent contractor and just make as much money hourly as possible because at the end of the day, as a contractor, you can save a lot on taxes. That's what my husband/I do. Esp. with a mortgage, you really do make out at the end of the year on refunds as a corp.

Makes you nuts I know but know you are not alone!!!

Best wishes to you!

Good luck!!

[Anonymous]

I work in VA, so I got the 12 weeks of leave, but NO PAY. My company does not provide any short term disability insurance either. I had to take all my leave and sick time concurrently with my 12 weeks. So, I got paid for about 3 weeks of the 12 weeks b/c I had saved that vacation. If we lived in Denmark we would get 18 months of leave at 80% of your pay, split between both partners. And yet Corporate America says it's too expensive to give women more leave and all the businesses will go under if they do!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Pregnancy and birthing a baby is not an illness. If you want more leave, take it without pay, quit your job, or, if you can't afford to not work then you can't afford to have a baby. So, wait until you can afford to have one. Simple.

wow this person is an a-hole

[Anonymous]

I believe i read somewhere that the US has the worst maternity leave policies of any industrialized country. I think they rank us with Botswana and Papa New Guinea, or something like that. Australia is the only other country that has unpaid maternity leave, but it's for a year, not 12 weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I work in VA, so I got the 12 weeks of leave, but NO PAY. My company does not provide any short term disability insurance either. I had to take all my leave and sick time concurrently with my 12 weeks. So, I got paid for about 3 weeks of the 12 weeks b/c I had saved that vacation. If we lived in Denmark we would get 18 months of leave at 80% of your pay, split between both partners. And yet Corporate America says it's too expensive to give women more leave and all the businesses will go under if they do!!

All our taxes will go up 50%. Sorry, this isn't going to happen. Contrary to what politcians spout, we are not a family friendly country. I have no desire to pay higher taxes so you can take off 28 months and be paid for taking care of your own child. This is your personal responsibility not that of society. The American village is already paying more than enough in taxes. Save 80% of your salary for 18 months before you have child and then you can take that much time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in VA, so I got the 12 weeks of leave, but NO PAY. My company does not provide any short term disability insurance either. I had to take all my leave and sick time concurrently with my 12 weeks. So, I got paid for about 3 weeks of the 12 weeks b/c I had saved that vacation. If we lived in Denmark we would get 18 months of leave at 80% of your pay, split between both partners. And yet Corporate America says it's too expensive to give women more leave and all the businesses will go under if they do!!

All our taxes will go up 50%. Sorry, this isn't going to happen. Contrary to what politcians spout, we are not a family friendly country. I have no desire to pay higher taxes so you can take off 28 months and be paid for taking care of your own child. This is your personal responsibility not that of society. The American village is already paying more than enough in taxes. Save 80% of your salary for 18 months before you have child and then you can take that much time.

Of course not. Our taxes go to much better uses, such as military spending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in VA, so I got the 12 weeks of leave, but NO PAY. My company does not provide any short term disability insurance either. I had to take all my leave and sick time concurrently with my 12 weeks. So, I got paid for about 3 weeks of the 12 weeks b/c I had saved that vacation. If we lived in Denmark we would get 18 months of leave at 80% of your pay, split between both partners. And yet Corporate America says it's too expensive to give women more leave and all the businesses will go under if they do!!

All our taxes will go up 50%. Sorry, this isn't going to happen. Contrary to what politcians spout, we are not a family friendly country. I have no desire to pay higher taxes so you can take off 28 months and be paid for taking care of your own child. This is your personal responsibility not that of society. The American village is already paying more than enough in taxes. Save 80% of your salary for 18 months before you have child and then you can take that much time.

Justify that statistic please.

Your argument is completely specious even if you had a source- I have no desire to pay higher taxes for two wars that I didn't start but I still pay. I've no desire to pay more to bail out banks that made loans to people who owe too much on their houses but I do. You make the personal choice to drive - why should I who don't drive pay for taxes for roads I don't use so you can drive on them?

Finally- can you take an 80% pay cut and still get by?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in VA, so I got the 12 weeks of leave, but NO PAY. My company does not provide any short term disability insurance either. I had to take all my leave and sick time concurrently with my 12 weeks. So, I got paid for about 3 weeks of the 12 weeks b/c I had saved that vacation. If we lived in Denmark we would get 18 months of leave at 80% of your pay, split between both partners. And yet Corporate America says it's too expensive to give women more leave and all the businesses will go under if they do!!

All our taxes will go up 50%. Sorry, this isn't going to happen. Contrary to what politcians spout, we are not a family friendly country. I have no desire to pay higher taxes so you can take off 28 months and be paid for taking care of your own child. This is your personal responsibility not that of society. The American village is already paying more than enough in taxes. Save 80% of your salary for 18 months before you have child and then you can take that much time.

Justify that statistic please.

Your argument is completely specious even if you had a source- I have no desire to pay higher taxes for two wars that I didn't start but I still pay. I've no desire to pay more to bail out banks that made loans to people who owe too much on their houses but I do. You make the personal choice to drive - why should I who don't drive pay for taxes for roads I don't use so you can drive on them?

Finally- can you take an 80% pay cut and still get by?

No. But I could afford to have children and therein lies the difference.

[Anonymous]

<i>No. But I could afford to have children and therein lies the difference.</i>

The difference in what? Your response makes no sense? You can't afford to take the 80% pay cut you yourself prescribe, but you can afford to have children? So that's the difference?

Don't make an argument you can't support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in VA, so I got the 12 weeks of leave, but NO PAY. My company does not provide any short term disability insurance either. I had to take all my leave and sick time concurrently with my 12 weeks. So, I got paid for about 3 weeks of the 12 weeks b/c I had saved that vacation. If we lived in Denmark we would get 18 months of leave at 80% of your pay, split between both partners. And yet Corporate America says it's too expensive to give women more leave and all the businesses will go under if they do!!

All our taxes will go up 50%. Sorry, this isn't going to happen. Contrary to what politcians spout, we are not a family friendly country. I have no desire to pay higher taxes so you can take off 28 months and be paid for taking care of your own child. This is your personal responsibility not that of society. The American village is already paying more than enough in taxes. Save 80% of your salary for 18 months before you have child and then you can take that much time.

Justify that statistic please.

Your argument is completely specious even if you had a source- I have no desire to pay higher taxes for two wars that I didn't start but I still pay. I've no desire to pay more to bail out banks that made loans to people who owe too much on their houses but I do. You make the personal choice to drive - why should I who don't drive pay for taxes for roads I don't use so you can drive on them?

Finally- can you take an 80% pay cut and still get by?

I like how the PP just chose to ignore this part of your post. Apparently she (or he) doesn't have an answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this PP is being unnecessarily harsh (and totally unrealistic), but there is a kernel of truth in what she says. Why do we feel entitled to be paid for time off for something that is, ultimately, a discretionary choice? Of course it's lovely to bond with our babies but the money has to come from somewhere. In other countries where more leave is standard, they also pay a ton more in taxes. And with our economy in the state it is and so much unemployment, is it really wise to put additional financial burdens on already-strapped employers?

can you believe it. Some countries tax more, have a national health system, lower unemployment, less crime, more women in the workforce, and less national debt

So move. Or do something to change it. Or quit bitching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not just bonding either - what about breastfeeding every 3 hours for the first few months? What about day and night care? What about healing from a tear? How soon are YOU going back to work then? Tell us your plan since clearly you are not taking this discretionary leave?

Not PP but I can answer some of your questions. The reality is that many women do go back to work after just a few weeks because they literally have no. other. choice. It's far from ideal, but you do what you have to do. BFing on demand and round-the-clock cuddles are wonderful, but it's insane to think you have an automatic RIGHT to those things, subsidized by your employer or the government.

I do believe all women should get better maternity benefits than most of us do. I particularly feel for women who live on the margins in minimum-wage jobs with no benefits. But I also believe in personal financial responsibility and planning in advance for major life events. It's hard to feel bad for middle-class employed women who COULD have saved for maternity leave but chose not to think about it. And I suspect that the vast majority of DCUMers fall into that category.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Not PP but I can answer some of your questions. The reality is that many women do go back to work after just a few weeks because they literally have no. other. choice. It's far from ideal, but you do what you have to do. BFing on demand and round-the-clock cuddles are wonderful, but it's insane to think you have an automatic RIGHT to those things, subsidized by your employer or the government.

Have you ever thought that maybe we are already paying high taxes because the government supports useless wars that do not make us safe, and gives millions to bank CEO's. Yet even a country like Swaziland can and does give better maternity benefits than the US.
And yes, women have a right to bfeed their infants and care for them. It is obvious the men cannot do so. And you are one idot who thinks that this is round-the-clock wonderful
Nobody can plan their life so well in advance that everything that happens happens according to plan. Taxes should go to the vulnerable in our society. It should go to pay for benefits to the elderly, the very young, the weak and disabled etc, that is how you measure a civilization. Not by how many wars they fight or who gets to go to space first

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not PP but I can answer some of your questions. The reality is that many women do go back to work after just a few weeks because they literally have no. other. choice. It's far from ideal, but you do what you have to do. BFing on demand and round-the-clock cuddles are wonderful, but it's insane to think you have an automatic RIGHT to those things, subsidized by your employer or the government.

Have you ever thought that maybe we are already paying high taxes because the government supports useless wars that do not make us safe, and gives millions to bank CEO's. Yet even a country like Swaziland can and does give better maternity benefits than the US.
And yes, women have a right to bfeed their infants and care for them. It is obvious the men cannot do so. And you are one idot who thinks that this is round-the-clock wonderful
Nobody can plan their life so well in advance that everything that happens happens according to plan. Taxes should go to the vulnerable in our society. It should go to pay for benefits to the elderly, the very young, the weak and disabled etc, that is how you measure a civilization. Not by how many wars they fight or who gets to go to space first

PP here. YOu only quoted the first paragraph of my post. The second half agrees with you. And I don't think women who have stable jobs at big companies are considered vulnerable in the way you mean. I bet anything that many of those women who bitch about unpaid maternity leave are going to spend thousands of dollars on brand new nursery furniture, bottle warmers, and adorable onesies. So no, I don't think those people need to be subsidized. The truly poor, absolutely.