How do you feel about those who take a paid maternity leave then quit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you ever actually seen this happen? Any company not run by a complete idiot has something in the contract about how if you don’t return full time for a year you pay the benefits back. I went back 30% time for the first year and had to pay back 100% of the leave pay I got. Chill the f out and maybe be concerned about how impossible it is to parent and work full time in this society.

No law firm, or consultancy, or investment bank has this. You must have worked at a serious POS company (run by non-idiots or otherwise).

What are you a telemarketer?

[Anonymous]

I assume that often the reason is that they no longer are comfortable with leaving their small infant in a daycare situation and have decided to care for the baby their self.

I am often amazed at how intolerant many on DCUM are of this phenomenon (wanting to care for your baby yourself) mostly because it is not what they chose, assuming they had a choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thoughts?

Have no issues at all with it. If the maternity/parental leave policies in this country weren't so sucky, moms would not have to be in the awkward position of choosing either their careers or their families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet another good reason to hire workers in their 50s. Babies at 50 ain’t happening.

Right? Every time someone does this I sigh on the inside that those in charge will see it as a red flag against hiring younger women.

Totally. Because no one has ever left a job to care for elderly parents. Ever! It’s just never happened. Not even once.

NP. But everyone has the same risk for that. It's only women of reproductive age that ALSO have this other risk on top of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thoughts?

Fine. Doubly Fine. SuperFine!

Next question?

[Anonymous]

I feel fine about it. Plans change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All companies should have a clawback clause in their contracts if you don’t return for at least a year after maternity leave (barring extreme medical complications that make this absolutely impossible, as verified by a company approved physician).

To go with that clause, the job should be guaranteed for a year from the date of return. If employment ends for any reason the employee is owed at least their income for the remainder of the year.

Circumstances change, especially after a child. I'm fine with someone not returning as long as they give a certain amount of notice.

The problem with that as someone needs to do the work for that year so its not reasonable to hold it a year.

From the date of return. Meaning the new Mom won't be let go for a year after she returns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this causes some anger because of the way the US system is set up. I've previously worked for multiple companies in Canada (12-18mon mat leave), when someone goes on mat leave they generally hire a contract for the same amt of time. There are no hard feelings because someone else has to cover and do 2x work. The person who just got a new job/promotion/stretch assignment is thrilled! If the person decides not to return to work, that job is basically theirs on a permanent basis.
I don't fault anyone for taking their full, entitled leave, and using that time to decide what they want to do going forward. Maybe thats being a SAHP, maybe it's a different job. Either way, it really doesnt affect me.

Ooof, 12-18 months of isolation. I would have killed myself. Literally. The isolation and PPD was so bad that going back to work saved my life.

Haha, you don't have to take it all if you don't want. During the pandemic (july 2020), one of my friends went back early because her husband was laid off. But it's always nice to have the option! You do have to decide ahead of time, as your payment rate is lower on the 18mons vs the higher rate for 12mon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this causes some anger because of the way the US system is set up. I've previously worked for multiple companies in Canada (12-18mon mat leave), when someone goes on mat leave they generally hire a contract for the same amt of time. There are no hard feelings because someone else has to cover and do 2x work. The person who just got a new job/promotion/stretch assignment is thrilled! If the person decides not to return to work, that job is basically theirs on a permanent basis.
I don't fault anyone for taking their full, entitled leave, and using that time to decide what they want to do going forward. Maybe thats being a SAHP, maybe it's a different job. Either way, it really doesnt affect me.

Ooof, 12-18 months of isolation. I would have killed myself. Literally. The isolation and PPD was so bad that going back to work saved my life.

It's not 18 months of maternity leave. Moms get 15 weeks of maternity leave, and after that it become parental leave, which can be split between parents, which can last 40-69 weeks depending on how you structure it. None of it is 100% of salary -- it's max 55% of salary up to a salary cap, and if you take extended leave it's less than that. We're talking somewhere in the realm of $400-600 a week. Some companies offer "top up" to make it 100% of salary, but obviously that's going to be for the person actually taking the leave (the mom during maternity leave or either parent during parental leave) and is more time limited.

So it's actually not common for someone to take the total available leave unless they are in fact planning to leave their jobs, whether to SAH or to change jobs/careers. People want to get back to their full salary, and also often want to get back to work, for a wide variety of reasons including feeling it will help with PPD.

For what it's worth, I had awful PPD and it's what led to me quitting my job at the end of my maternity leave (in the US), because my company would not even allow me the flexibility to go to my weekly therapy appointment, much less other accommodations that might have eased that transition (PT for a period, or some hours flexibility to help with childcare restrictions). The nice thing about Canada's system is that it would meet either of our needs, instead of only serving the needs of someone who is better off back in the office.

Where do you get that from? The 18mon option is relatively new (2017), but 99% of everyone I've known has always always taken the full 12 months offered previously. The new version is more split, but I know many people who take the full 18 months and still come back to their jobs. This is particularly helpful for when it's a second/third baby, and they can stay home for 18mons and get the older child off to pre-k/kin, thus majorly lowering daycare costs vs having two youngins in care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume that often the reason is that they no longer are comfortable with leaving their small infant in a daycare situation and have decided to care for the baby their self.

I am often amazed at how intolerant many on DCUM are of this phenomenon (wanting to care for your baby yourself) mostly because it is not what they chose, assuming they had a choice.

This. 6 pages into this thread and not one person has talked about what it is actually like to return to work after having a baby, and why for some women (who are fortunate to have the option), quitting to stay home is better than sucking it up to get through it.

Everyone is different and many moms welcome the return to work, but for some it's horribly painful and you wonder why you are putting yourself through it. I have never forgotten, a decade before I had a baby, discovering a woman from my law firm who had recently returned from maternity leave, just quietly weeping in the ladies room one day. I had no idea at the time what she was really going through, but I still think about her. She was a great lawyer and she a terrific colleague, and she toughed it out and got through. But a big part of me thinks that no woman, anywhere, should have to do that. They should just get to stay home until they are ready. And some women will never be ready and will quit instead, and I'm fine with that too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this causes some anger because of the way the US system is set up. I've previously worked for multiple companies in Canada (12-18mon mat leave), when someone goes on mat leave they generally hire a contract for the same amt of time. There are no hard feelings because someone else has to cover and do 2x work. The person who just got a new job/promotion/stretch assignment is thrilled! If the person decides not to return to work, that job is basically theirs on a permanent basis.
I don't fault anyone for taking their full, entitled leave, and using that time to decide what they want to do going forward. Maybe thats being a SAHP, maybe it's a different job. Either way, it really doesnt affect me.

Ooof, 12-18 months of isolation. I would have killed myself. Literally. The isolation and PPD was so bad that going back to work saved my life.

It's not 18 months of maternity leave. Moms get 15 weeks of maternity leave, and after that it become parental leave, which can be split between parents, which can last 40-69 weeks depending on how you structure it. None of it is 100% of salary -- it's max 55% of salary up to a salary cap, and if you take extended leave it's less than that. We're talking somewhere in the realm of $400-600 a week. Some companies offer "top up" to make it 100% of salary, but obviously that's going to be for the person actually taking the leave (the mom during maternity leave or either parent during parental leave) and is more time limited.

So it's actually not common for someone to take the total available leave unless they are in fact planning to leave their jobs, whether to SAH or to change jobs/careers. People want to get back to their full salary, and also often want to get back to work, for a wide variety of reasons including feeling it will help with PPD.

For what it's worth, I had awful PPD and it's what led to me quitting my job at the end of my maternity leave (in the US), because my company would not even allow me the flexibility to go to my weekly therapy appointment, much less other accommodations that might have eased that transition (PT for a period, or some hours flexibility to help with childcare restrictions). The nice thing about Canada's system is that it would meet either of our needs, instead of only serving the needs of someone who is better off back in the office.

Where do you get that from? The 18mon option is relatively new (2017), but 99% of everyone I've known has always always taken the full 12 months offered previously. The new version is more split, but I know many people who take the full 18 months and still come back to their jobs. This is particularly helpful for when it's a second/third baby, and they can stay home for 18mons and get the older child off to pre-k/kin, thus majorly lowering daycare costs vs having two youngins in care.

I meant the 18. Agree 12 months is pretty standard. I don't personally know anyone who has taken the 18 and returned to work -- the payout just winds up being quite low. But I see your point about 2nd and 3rd babies. I don't actually know anyone with 3 kids yet!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this causes some anger because of the way the US system is set up. I've previously worked for multiple companies in Canada (12-18mon mat leave), when someone goes on mat leave they generally hire a contract for the same amt of time. There are no hard feelings because someone else has to cover and do 2x work. The person who just got a new job/promotion/stretch assignment is thrilled! If the person decides not to return to work, that job is basically theirs on a permanent basis.
I don't fault anyone for taking their full, entitled leave, and using that time to decide what they want to do going forward. Maybe thats being a SAHP, maybe it's a different job. Either way, it really doesnt affect me.

Ooof, 12-18 months of isolation. I would have killed myself. Literally. The isolation and PPD was so bad that going back to work saved my life.

It's not 18 months of maternity leave. Moms get 15 weeks of maternity leave, and after that it become parental leave, which can be split between parents, which can last 40-69 weeks depending on how you structure it. None of it is 100% of salary -- it's max 55% of salary up to a salary cap, and if you take extended leave it's less than that. We're talking somewhere in the realm of $400-600 a week. Some companies offer "top up" to make it 100% of salary, but obviously that's going to be for the person actually taking the leave (the mom during maternity leave or either parent during parental leave) and is more time limited.

So it's actually not common for someone to take the total available leave unless they are in fact planning to leave their jobs, whether to SAH or to change jobs/careers. People want to get back to their full salary, and also often want to get back to work, for a wide variety of reasons including feeling it will help with PPD.

For what it's worth, I had awful PPD and it's what led to me quitting my job at the end of my maternity leave (in the US), because my company would not even allow me the flexibility to go to my weekly therapy appointment, much less other accommodations that might have eased that transition (PT for a period, or some hours flexibility to help with childcare restrictions). The nice thing about Canada's system is that it would meet either of our needs, instead of only serving the needs of someone who is better off back in the office.

Where do you get that from? The 18mon option is relatively new (2017), but 99% of everyone I've known has always always taken the full 12 months offered previously. The new version is more split, but I know many people who take the full 18 months and still come back to their jobs. This is particularly helpful for when it's a second/third baby, and they can stay home for 18mons and get the older child off to pre-k/kin, thus majorly lowering daycare costs vs having two youngins in care.

I meant the 18. Agree 12 months is pretty standard. I don't personally know anyone who has taken the 18 and returned to work -- the payout just winds up being quite low. But I see your point about 2nd and 3rd babies. I don't actually know anyone with 3 kids yet!

Yes, the payment is quite low, and that's also the only people I've known who take it [bridge daycare]. But being able to stay home that extra bit and avoid crazy daycare $$$ and still get a small stipend is worth it for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet another good reason to hire workers in their 50s. Babies at 50 ain’t happening.

Right? Every time someone does this I sigh on the inside that those in charge will see it as a red flag against hiring younger women.

Totally. Because no one has ever left a job to care for elderly parents. Ever! It’s just never happened. Not even once.

NP. But everyone has the same risk for that. It's only women of reproductive age that ALSO have this other risk on top of it.

Women are significantly more likely than men to wind up as caregivers to elderly parents. Most caregivers in the US are women, no matter which category you are talking about (parents caring for children, grandparents caring for grandchildren, adults caring for aging parents, spouses caring for incapacitated spouses).

So if you hire a woman, you have a higher risk that she will need to take FMLA to care for a loved one than if you hire a man. On the other hand, the entire society would fall apart if women didn't do this. You've got your pros and cons I guess.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s fine. Zero judgment here

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume that often the reason is that they no longer are comfortable with leaving their small infant in a daycare situation and have decided to care for the baby their self.

I am often amazed at how intolerant many on DCUM are of this phenomenon (wanting to care for your baby yourself) mostly because it is not what they chose, assuming they had a choice.

This. 6 pages into this thread and not one person has talked about what it is actually like to return to work after having a baby, and why for some women (who are fortunate to have the option), quitting to stay home is better than sucking it up to get through it.

Everyone is different and many moms welcome the return to work, but for some it's horribly painful and you wonder why you are putting yourself through it. I have never forgotten, a decade before I had a baby, discovering a woman from my law firm who had recently returned from maternity leave, just quietly weeping in the ladies room one day. I had no idea at the time what she was really going through, but I still think about her. She was a great lawyer and she a terrific colleague, and she toughed it out and got through. But a big part of me thinks that no woman, anywhere, should have to do that. They should just get to stay home until they are ready. And some women will never be ready and will quit instead, and I'm fine with that too.

Huge +1. It is not a biologically natural thing to leave a 3 month old baby at a daycare all day every day, and some people ultimately realize they just can’t do it. Of course we should understand that