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!
Anonymous wrote:The GOP will never pass this and big rump won't sign.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Anonymous wrote:Wonder if there’s some secret side deal to forget about the 2020 pay raise.