Six months paid maternity leave for everyone! Then, maternity leave for non-parents too!

[Rustic]

Because there's no end in sight to entitlement mentalities.

'Me-Ternity' Leave?! Author Says Non-Mothers Deserve Extended Time Off

There is no end to how pussy whipped this country can get... Hope and change...

 

[Papageorgio]

The four corporations that I have worked for in my lifetime all gave the mother 6 weeks PAID Maternity leave and the last Corp gave the fathers 2 weeks as well...it was no money out of the company's pocket, it was built in to the price of the products we manufactured or acquired, and sold...pennies if even that on the item price when you figure how few women that worked for the company and got pregnant...and how many items we sold a year....

Technically, it was built into your TOTAL COMPENSATION package. That is to say, you got less cash in hand to pay for paid parental leave. So people who didn't need parental leave essentially paid for YOUR parental leave, if you had taken it.

BTW, such a policy is inherently sexist and probably illegal. Men should have equal opportunity for parental leave. Other than that, I personally have no problems with a company doing this. It's the company's decision to offer this as part of their compensation package. But it should be left to the employer to decide. Meanwhile, this "me-ternity" bullshit is still bullshit.

no,
It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation.....you all, who bought shoes, paid for it..., not the other workers without maternity leave....and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Even so, the last Corp paid the father for a couple of weeks to bond with their child and be there to help the mother/ the wifey...mostly.... again, the Company's choice.

I think 6 months is too much for any paid maternity leave by the employers but can see 6 weeks, and I don't think father's should be getting paid leave unless the company wants to...

And I don't think it should be mandatory for small businesses, it should be their choice, but I do think a tax deduction of some sort should be available for them, to make the choice to offer it, more feasible for them to do such.

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

 

[paulitician]

Every employee should get 8 weeks paid time off every year. This would give us time to re-generate. Businesses could get government funding for their employees time off. Also the government should pay employees for their vacations, if the employee decides to stay in the US, for vacation the government would pay two weeks, if the employee wanted to visit another company, only one week.

The company I worked for paid for 8 weeks for a c section. 6 for a natural birth.

Lots of companies have paid leave if you have worked for the company for at least a year prior.

Even Starbucks.

Thanks for the info. I was always under the impression most businesses didn't offer paid Maternity Leaves. I know many do offer Maternity Leaves, but they're usually unpaid leaves. So good on Starbucks.

Most corporations offer paid leave.

You can also take FMLA if you have Heath issues related to pregancy.

I wasn't aware most offered paid Maternity Leave. I knew many offer a leave, but i thought it was unpaid. I'll check into it a bit more. Thanks.

 

[paulitician]

I go even a step further and believe the Father should also receive a leave when his child is born. I know that makes me an "Evil Communist', but so be it i guess. Human beings should start treating each other with more respect and compassion. It shouldn't always be only about the money.

This is the same rhetoric used to justify an oppressive nanny state.

Matter of opinion i guess. I don't think it's 'oppression' helping our Mothers and Fathers. In fact, i see it as a big benefit to humanity. Our children are vital to our future.

 

[paulitician]

Every employee should get 8 weeks paid time off every year. This would give us time to re-generate. Businesses could get government funding for their employees time off. Also the government should pay employees for their vacations, if the employee decides to stay in the US, for vacation the government would pay two weeks, if the employee wanted to visit another company, only one week.

The company I worked for paid for 8 weeks for a c section. 6 for a natural birth.

Lots of companies have paid leave if you have worked for the company for at least a year prior.

Even Starbucks.

Thanks for the info. I was always under the impression most businesses didn't offer paid Maternity Leaves. I know many do offer Maternity Leaves, but they're usually unpaid leaves. So good on Starbucks.

Most corporations offer paid leave.

You can also take FMLA if you have Heath issues related to pregancy.

How dare you defend those evil corporations. My evil corporation already offers maternity leave for both the mother and father, short and long term paid disability leave, 4 weeks of vacation plus 12 paid holidays plus flex time schedules to work as little as 4 hours a day which some mothers use during the first year after birth plus full medical, eye, dental, mental health benefits, plus unpaid leave some new mothers opt for after the maternity leave, plus work at home, plus...well look our benefits document is over 30 pages long. That's those evil corporations for you and they didn't need a union or the government to force them into it. Corporations, what evil bastards they are.

Yep. I get 6 weeks paid vacation. Paid maternity leave, paid holidays, flex schedule, help paying for college,Health, vision , dental, 401k, life insurance, stock options and a shit load of employee discounts for local businesses including 5k from the dealership I purchased my new car from.

Evil corporations.

That's great, and i really do mean it. But that's not the case for millions & millions of other Americans.

 

[paulitician]

Yes, treating our fellow human beings with respect and compassion is so damn outrageous. We don't need to become an enlightened compassionate species. We just need to continue hating each other and treating each other as badly as possible. So to hell with the babies and their parents. There's bleepin money to be made dammit!!. USA! USA! USA!

Not the point. And you once again expose yourself as a fake. By virtue of your support of a government mandated paid leave, you expose yourself as a fake. You're not Libertarian, as you claim to be

I'm not a Libertarian.

Look, you claimed to be one. In fact you claim a lot of things.
You're actually one who believes in your own convenience.
"I cannot be labelled"
Ya know what? If you stand for nothing, you are worthless.

I claimed it at one point. But i no longer do. I'm not a Libertarian. I can't be easily labelled.

 

[paulitician]

Sadly, i tend to agree for the most part. They live out the ugliest of human nature behavior. For them, helping a fellow human being = 'Evil Communism.' They're scared, greedy, hateful souls.

Yet most greedy white Republican dudes consider themselves 'Good Christians.' But they rarely live Jesus Christ's teachings. Helping our Mothers and Fathers actually advances humanity as a whole. Our children are our future.

I don't recall Jesus promulgating the idea that employers are obligated to pay people to sit home and raise their children.

You should read up on the old Buddhist saying about teaching people to fish.

"Sit home and raise your children"
I'm guessing you're a guy? The first four months after giving birth were the most exhausted I've ever been in my life. Sleep? Sure, for maybe four hours at a time, if you're lucky. The first month or two I had one hell of a sore ass, a five week long period, serious anemia, and breasts too tender to touch, as well. You have a mewling, puking infant tied to your hip for every quick trip to the store, the laundromat, whatever. So you don't go out much. Being a mom is a very special thing, but I can't imagine trying to drag myself back to work in order to pay the bills during those first few months. Whoever wrote that OP calling for Meternity Time has no idea what she's talking about. Neither do people who think maternity leave is to "sit home" at your leisure, having a 'vacation.' Giving birth and caring for a newborn IS work. A lot of work. We all started out as newborns with someone who took the time to care for us. Perhaps it's time our society placed some sort of value on that. Maybe not as much as Norway--we don't want to pay Norway's taxes. Just value newborns and their caretakers some way.

Oh stop complaining. My Mom did this three times. She never complained.
Biology dictates our place in life.
For my parent's generation, having children was not only socially acceptable, it was a social expectation. No one complained.
Now having children is a choice many couples make. With that in mind, once that choice is made, most deal with the ups and downs. But there is now a vocal minority who find it necessary to bitch and moan about every aspect of pregnancy and post natal care.
Ya know what? This is part of being an adult.
No one said pregnancy and child bearing/rearing was not work. it is . However, we as adults make a conscious choice to do this. Once that choice is made, there is no room for complaining. No one wants to hear it.
Me-ternity? Please. This is someone trying to stir the pot.
Although. The writer just may be on to something.
The theory I have is this is a tongue in cheek shot at this pervasive notion of equality of outcome. That if a certain interest group wants a certain benefit, yet that benefit is not extended to all, it just isn't fair.
Some may ask why it is the just because a coworker decided to pump out a kid, why they get to have a 12 week period of full pay and not having to come to the job, while others whop make the choice NOT to produce children get to come to work everyday..
He says playing Devil's advocate.

In my mother's era, MOST women did NOT have to work in order for their family's to live a good middle class, comfy life. My mother never worked, she raised my sister and me as her "job" and my father worked outside the home, joined the service at 17, without graduating high school, but then got his GED, then got his college degree paid for by the military...and then went on to work for the FAA after he retired from the air force and now in their old age, live a wealthy comfortable, life.....

It was not a rarity in my parent's era to have the comfy middle class life on simply the husband's salary, like it is today....

So yes, women like your mom and my mom had a choice to not work and didn't work for the most part, until their kids hit kindergarten at earliest....

This is simply NOT the case today.... today and yesteryear are whole different ball games in my opinion and can not be compared... as you have compared in your devil's advocate scenario....

Oh it surely can be done. One parent at home with the kids.
The problem started in the 80's when keeping up appearances became more important than family. Also the new hard line feminist movement declared that women could "have it all"...Career, family, kids......The two income family manifested itself because people felt compelled to pursue material things. Bigger house, third vehicle. high cost activities for their kids( sports, etc) two vacations instead of one. More expensive convenience foods. pay tv of the highest tier instead of what they could afford on one income. Smart phones instead of basic. And lastly two income families are a result of poor money management. People with zero spending discipline. Buying on credit instead of paying cash. Spending more than they earn.

Fact is, two parents need to work in today's America. And they're now working harder & harder for less & less. It's just the way the Slave Master wants it. Give em just a taste. Give em just enough to barely survive. Keep tossin em scraps.

 

[deltex1]

Because there's no end in sight to entitlement mentalities.

'Me-Ternity' Leave?! Author Says Non-Mothers Deserve Extended Time Off

Can you get maternity leave if you're a man who identifies as a pregnant woman? Sounds like a fundamental right to me, yo.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

I don't know where the happy medium is but a new mother belongs with their newborn. Pro life ends at birth I guess. Its a good thing fewer young couples are choosing to have kids. That way they can dedicate their whole well being to their employers.

As if people never had kids before maternity leave. BTW, that should be scrapped as well.

 

[Care4all]

The four corporations that I have worked for in my lifetime all gave the mother 6 weeks PAID Maternity leave and the last Corp gave the fathers 2 weeks as well...it was no money out of the company's pocket, it was built in to the price of the products we manufactured or acquired, and sold...pennies if even that on the item price when you figure how few women that worked for the company and got pregnant...and how many items we sold a year....

Technically, it was built into your TOTAL COMPENSATION package. That is to say, you got less cash in hand to pay for paid parental leave. So people who didn't need parental leave essentially paid for YOUR parental leave, if you had taken it.

BTW, such a policy is inherently sexist and probably illegal. Men should have equal opportunity for parental leave. Other than that, I personally have no problems with a company doing this. It's the company's decision to offer this as part of their compensation package. But it should be left to the employer to decide. Meanwhile, this "me-ternity" bullshit is still bullshit.

no,
It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation.....you all, who bought shoes, paid for it..., not the other workers without maternity leave....and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Even so, the last Corp paid the father for a couple of weeks to bond with their child and be there to help the mother/ the wifey...mostly.... again, the Company's choice.

I think 6 months is too much for any paid maternity leave by the employers but can see 6 weeks, and I don't think father's should be getting paid leave unless the company wants to...

And I don't think it should be mandatory for small businesses, it should be their choice, but I do think a tax deduction of some sort should be available for them, to make the choice to offer it, more feasible for them to do such.

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

The company raised the price of their products when they decided to add benefits for their employees Papa, NOT the other way around...

Same when they decide they need a 100 million a year CEO, Vs a 2 million dollar a year CEO.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

I don't recall Jesus promulgating the idea that employers are obligated to pay people to sit home and raise their children.

You should read up on the old Buddhist saying about teaching people to fish.

"Sit home and raise your children"
I'm guessing you're a guy? The first four months after giving birth were the most exhausted I've ever been in my life. Sleep? Sure, for maybe four hours at a time, if you're lucky. The first month or two I had one hell of a sore ass, a five week long period, serious anemia, and breasts too tender to touch, as well. You have a mewling, puking infant tied to your hip for every quick trip to the store, the laundromat, whatever. So you don't go out much. Being a mom is a very special thing, but I can't imagine trying to drag myself back to work in order to pay the bills during those first few months. Whoever wrote that OP calling for Meternity Time has no idea what she's talking about. Neither do people who think maternity leave is to "sit home" at your leisure, having a 'vacation.' Giving birth and caring for a newborn IS work. A lot of work. We all started out as newborns with someone who took the time to care for us. Perhaps it's time our society placed some sort of value on that. Maybe not as much as Norway--we don't want to pay Norway's taxes. Just value newborns and their caretakers some way.

Oh stop complaining. My Mom did this three times. She never complained.
Biology dictates our place in life.
For my parent's generation, having children was not only socially acceptable, it was a social expectation. No one complained.
Now having children is a choice many couples make. With that in mind, once that choice is made, most deal with the ups and downs. But there is now a vocal minority who find it necessary to bitch and moan about every aspect of pregnancy and post natal care.
Ya know what? This is part of being an adult.
No one said pregnancy and child bearing/rearing was not work. it is . However, we as adults make a conscious choice to do this. Once that choice is made, there is no room for complaining. No one wants to hear it.
Me-ternity? Please. This is someone trying to stir the pot.
Although. The writer just may be on to something.
The theory I have is this is a tongue in cheek shot at this pervasive notion of equality of outcome. That if a certain interest group wants a certain benefit, yet that benefit is not extended to all, it just isn't fair.
Some may ask why it is the just because a coworker decided to pump out a kid, why they get to have a 12 week period of full pay and not having to come to the job, while others whop make the choice NOT to produce children get to come to work everyday..
He says playing Devil's advocate.

In my mother's era, MOST women did NOT have to work in order for their family's to live a good middle class, comfy life. My mother never worked, she raised my sister and me as her "job" and my father worked outside the home, joined the service at 17, without graduating high school, but then got his GED, then got his college degree paid for by the military...and then went on to work for the FAA after he retired from the air force and now in their old age, live a wealthy comfortable, life.....

It was not a rarity in my parent's era to have the comfy middle class life on simply the husband's salary, like it is today....

So yes, women like your mom and my mom had a choice to not work and didn't work for the most part, until their kids hit kindergarten at earliest....

This is simply NOT the case today.... today and yesteryear are whole different ball games in my opinion and can not be compared... as you have compared in your devil's advocate scenario....

Oh it surely can be done. One parent at home with the kids.
The problem started in the 80's when keeping up appearances became more important than family. Also the new hard line feminist movement declared that women could "have it all"...Career, family, kids......The two income family manifested itself because people felt compelled to pursue material things. Bigger house, third vehicle. high cost activities for their kids( sports, etc) two vacations instead of one. More expensive convenience foods. pay tv of the highest tier instead of what they could afford on one income. Smart phones instead of basic. And lastly two income families are a result of poor money management. People with zero spending discipline. Buying on credit instead of paying cash. Spending more than they earn.

Fact is, two parents need to work in today's America. And they're now working harder & harder for less & less. It's just the way the Slave Master wants it. Give em just a taste. Give em just enough to barely survive. Keep tossin em scraps.

I really think that most of the reason the middle-class in this country is being squeezed out is inflation. 2% per year per generation adds up. It would be just a matter of time before future generations are unable to get anything at all. We try to tell people this but they would much rather cry about the lack of freebies in this country than actually working for things.

 

[Papageorgio]

The four corporations that I have worked for in my lifetime all gave the mother 6 weeks PAID Maternity leave and the last Corp gave the fathers 2 weeks as well...it was no money out of the company's pocket, it was built in to the price of the products we manufactured or acquired, and sold...pennies if even that on the item price when you figure how few women that worked for the company and got pregnant...and how many items we sold a year....

Technically, it was built into your TOTAL COMPENSATION package. That is to say, you got less cash in hand to pay for paid parental leave. So people who didn't need parental leave essentially paid for YOUR parental leave, if you had taken it.

BTW, such a policy is inherently sexist and probably illegal. Men should have equal opportunity for parental leave. Other than that, I personally have no problems with a company doing this. It's the company's decision to offer this as part of their compensation package. But it should be left to the employer to decide. Meanwhile, this "me-ternity" bullshit is still bullshit.

no,
It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation.....you all, who bought shoes, paid for it..., not the other workers without maternity leave....and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Even so, the last Corp paid the father for a couple of weeks to bond with their child and be there to help the mother/ the wifey...mostly.... again, the Company's choice.

I think 6 months is too much for any paid maternity leave by the employers but can see 6 weeks, and I don't think father's should be getting paid leave unless the company wants to...

And I don't think it should be mandatory for small businesses, it should be their choice, but I do think a tax deduction of some sort should be available for them, to make the choice to offer it, more feasible for them to do such.

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

The company raised the price of their products when they decided to add benefits for their employees Papa, NOT the other way around...

Same when they decide they need a 100 million a year CEO, Vs a 2 million dollar a year CEO.

I disagree with the building it into the price, it is an unknown and they add it into the cost of business. The idea of paying maternity time is okay by me, however if you offer the female worker, you need to offer the male the same, otherwise to me it is sexism. IMHO

 

[Tilly]

a new mother belongs with their newborn.

Fine by me. But we need to start facing the fact that parenthood is a decision, not an entitlement.

Having a child is a human right, and that is how you got here, too. For all you know, you might have been the result of a broken condom.

It isn't a right.

 

[Care4all]

The four corporations that I have worked for in my lifetime all gave the mother 6 weeks PAID Maternity leave and the last Corp gave the fathers 2 weeks as well...it was no money out of the company's pocket, it was built in to the price of the products we manufactured or acquired, and sold...pennies if even that on the item price when you figure how few women that worked for the company and got pregnant...and how many items we sold a year....

Technically, it was built into your TOTAL COMPENSATION package. That is to say, you got less cash in hand to pay for paid parental leave. So people who didn't need parental leave essentially paid for YOUR parental leave, if you had taken it.

BTW, such a policy is inherently sexist and probably illegal. Men should have equal opportunity for parental leave. Other than that, I personally have no problems with a company doing this. It's the company's decision to offer this as part of their compensation package. But it should be left to the employer to decide. Meanwhile, this "me-ternity" bullshit is still bullshit.

no,
It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation.....you all, who bought shoes, paid for it..., not the other workers without maternity leave....and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Even so, the last Corp paid the father for a couple of weeks to bond with their child and be there to help the mother/ the wifey...mostly.... again, the Company's choice.

I think 6 months is too much for any paid maternity leave by the employers but can see 6 weeks, and I don't think father's should be getting paid leave unless the company wants to...

And I don't think it should be mandatory for small businesses, it should be their choice, but I do think a tax deduction of some sort should be available for them, to make the choice to offer it, more feasible for them to do such.

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

The company raised the price of their products when they decided to add benefits for their employees Papa, NOT the other way around...

Same when they decide they need a 100 million a year CEO, Vs a 2 million dollar a year CEO.

I disagree with the building it into the price, it is an unknown and they add it into the cost of business. The idea of paying maternity time is okay by me, however if you offer the female worker, you need to offer the male the same, otherwise to me it is sexism. IMHO

how do you see it as sexism? Did the father have to be admitted in to the Hospital and go through Labor and Delivery or a C-Section? Did the father get all of his nutrients sucked out of him for 9 months giving it to the child to be? Does the father have titties that feed the child for the first few months?

Adding the ''father'' should get the time off too'', JUST KILLS the time off for the mother proposals, it's a poison pill!!!!

 

[BlueGin]

The company I worked for paid for 8 weeks for a c section. 6 for a natural birth.

Lots of companies have paid leave if you have worked for the company for at least a year prior.

Even Starbucks.

Thanks for the info. I was always under the impression most businesses didn't offer paid Maternity Leaves. I know many do offer Maternity Leaves, but they're usually unpaid leaves. So good on Starbucks.

Most corporations offer paid leave.

You can also take FMLA if you have Heath issues related to pregancy.

How dare you defend those evil corporations. My evil corporation already offers maternity leave for both the mother and father, short and long term paid disability leave, 4 weeks of vacation plus 12 paid holidays plus flex time schedules to work as little as 4 hours a day which some mothers use during the first year after birth plus full medical, eye, dental, mental health benefits, plus unpaid leave some new mothers opt for after the maternity leave, plus work at home, plus...well look our benefits document is over 30 pages long. That's those evil corporations for you and they didn't need a union or the government to force them into it. Corporations, what evil bastards they are.

Yep. I get 6 weeks paid vacation. Paid maternity leave, paid holidays, flex schedule, help paying for college,Health, vision , dental, 401k, life insurance, stock options and a shit load of employee discounts for local businesses including 5k from the dealership I purchased my new car from.

Evil corporations.

That's great, and i really do mean it. But that's not the case for millions & millions of other Americans.

It's rare for a corporation including Walmart, Target, Kmart etc to not offer benefits packages including vacation time,health insurance, retirement plans and even employee discounts.

 

[BlueGin]

I don't recall Jesus promulgating the idea that employers are obligated to pay people to sit home and raise their children.

You should read up on the old Buddhist saying about teaching people to fish.

"Sit home and raise your children"
I'm guessing you're a guy? The first four months after giving birth were the most exhausted I've ever been in my life. Sleep? Sure, for maybe four hours at a time, if you're lucky. The first month or two I had one hell of a sore ass, a five week long period, serious anemia, and breasts too tender to touch, as well. You have a mewling, puking infant tied to your hip for every quick trip to the store, the laundromat, whatever. So you don't go out much. Being a mom is a very special thing, but I can't imagine trying to drag myself back to work in order to pay the bills during those first few months. Whoever wrote that OP calling for Meternity Time has no idea what she's talking about. Neither do people who think maternity leave is to "sit home" at your leisure, having a 'vacation.' Giving birth and caring for a newborn IS work. A lot of work. We all started out as newborns with someone who took the time to care for us. Perhaps it's time our society placed some sort of value on that. Maybe not as much as Norway--we don't want to pay Norway's taxes. Just value newborns and their caretakers some way.

Oh stop complaining. My Mom did this three times. She never complained.
Biology dictates our place in life.
For my parent's generation, having children was not only socially acceptable, it was a social expectation. No one complained.
Now having children is a choice many couples make. With that in mind, once that choice is made, most deal with the ups and downs. But there is now a vocal minority who find it necessary to bitch and moan about every aspect of pregnancy and post natal care.
Ya know what? This is part of being an adult.
No one said pregnancy and child bearing/rearing was not work. it is . However, we as adults make a conscious choice to do this. Once that choice is made, there is no room for complaining. No one wants to hear it.
Me-ternity? Please. This is someone trying to stir the pot.
Although. The writer just may be on to something.
The theory I have is this is a tongue in cheek shot at this pervasive notion of equality of outcome. That if a certain interest group wants a certain benefit, yet that benefit is not extended to all, it just isn't fair.
Some may ask why it is the just because a coworker decided to pump out a kid, why they get to have a 12 week period of full pay and not having to come to the job, while others whop make the choice NOT to produce children get to come to work everyday..
He says playing Devil's advocate.

In my mother's era, MOST women did NOT have to work in order for their family's to live a good middle class, comfy life. My mother never worked, she raised my sister and me as her "job" and my father worked outside the home, joined the service at 17, without graduating high school, but then got his GED, then got his college degree paid for by the military...and then went on to work for the FAA after he retired from the air force and now in their old age, live a wealthy comfortable, life.....

It was not a rarity in my parent's era to have the comfy middle class life on simply the husband's salary, like it is today....

So yes, women like your mom and my mom had a choice to not work and didn't work for the most part, until their kids hit kindergarten at earliest....

This is simply NOT the case today.... today and yesteryear are whole different ball games in my opinion and can not be compared... as you have compared in your devil's advocate scenario....

Oh it surely can be done. One parent at home with the kids.
The problem started in the 80's when keeping up appearances became more important than family. Also the new hard line feminist movement declared that women could "have it all"...Career, family, kids......The two income family manifested itself because people felt compelled to pursue material things. Bigger house, third vehicle. high cost activities for their kids( sports, etc) two vacations instead of one. More expensive convenience foods. pay tv of the highest tier instead of what they could afford on one income. Smart phones instead of basic. And lastly two income families are a result of poor money management. People with zero spending discipline. Buying on credit instead of paying cash. Spending more than they earn.

Fact is, two parents need to work in today's America. And they're now working harder & harder for less & less. It's just the way the Slave Master wants it. Give em just a taste. Give em just enough to barely survive. Keep tossin em scraps.

^^ this I agree with. Sad when a two income household can net 30k a year and still be considered poverty level.

 

[Care4all]

The corporations are providing these benefits already and have been providing these benefits for several decades in not a half a century or more....

It's the mom and pop businesses who can't afford to do such....

 

[Papageorgio]

Technically, it was built into your TOTAL COMPENSATION package. That is to say, you got less cash in hand to pay for paid parental leave. So people who didn't need parental leave essentially paid for YOUR parental leave, if you had taken it.

BTW, such a policy is inherently sexist and probably illegal. Men should have equal opportunity for parental leave. Other than that, I personally have no problems with a company doing this. It's the company's decision to offer this as part of their compensation package. But it should be left to the employer to decide. Meanwhile, this "me-ternity" bullshit is still bullshit.

no,
It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation.....you all, who bought shoes, paid for it..., not the other workers without maternity leave....and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Even so, the last Corp paid the father for a couple of weeks to bond with their child and be there to help the mother/ the wifey...mostly.... again, the Company's choice.

I think 6 months is too much for any paid maternity leave by the employers but can see 6 weeks, and I don't think father's should be getting paid leave unless the company wants to...

And I don't think it should be mandatory for small businesses, it should be their choice, but I do think a tax deduction of some sort should be available for them, to make the choice to offer it, more feasible for them to do such.

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

The company raised the price of their products when they decided to add benefits for their employees Papa, NOT the other way around...

Same when they decide they need a 100 million a year CEO, Vs a 2 million dollar a year CEO.

I disagree with the building it into the price, it is an unknown and they add it into the cost of business. The idea of paying maternity time is okay by me, however if you offer the female worker, you need to offer the male the same, otherwise to me it is sexism. IMHO

how do you see it as sexism? Did the father have to be admitted in to the Hospital and go through Labor and Delivery or a C-Section? Did the father get all of his nutrients sucked out of him for 9 months giving it to the child to be? Does the father have titties that feed the child for the first few months?

Adding the ''father'' should get the time off too'', JUST KILLS the time off for the mother proposals, it's a poison pill!!!!

If you offer one, you offer all. Everything should be equal. Women, men, black, white, gay, straight.

 

[Care4all]

no,
It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation.....you all, who bought shoes, paid for it..., not the other workers without maternity leave....and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Even so, the last Corp paid the father for a couple of weeks to bond with their child and be there to help the mother/ the wifey...mostly.... again, the Company's choice.

I think 6 months is too much for any paid maternity leave by the employers but can see 6 weeks, and I don't think father's should be getting paid leave unless the company wants to...

And I don't think it should be mandatory for small businesses, it should be their choice, but I do think a tax deduction of some sort should be available for them, to make the choice to offer it, more feasible for them to do such.

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

The company raised the price of their products when they decided to add benefits for their employees Papa, NOT the other way around...

Same when they decide they need a 100 million a year CEO, Vs a 2 million dollar a year CEO.

I disagree with the building it into the price, it is an unknown and they add it into the cost of business. The idea of paying maternity time is okay by me, however if you offer the female worker, you need to offer the male the same, otherwise to me it is sexism. IMHO

how do you see it as sexism? Did the father have to be admitted in to the Hospital and go through Labor and Delivery or a C-Section? Did the father get all of his nutrients sucked out of him for 9 months giving it to the child to be? Does the father have titties that feed the child for the first few months?

Adding the ''father'' should get the time off too'', JUST KILLS the time off for the mother proposals, it's a poison pill!!!!

If you offer one, you offer all. Everything should be equal. Women, men, black, white, gay, straight.

it is equal....when you can carry a child for 9 months, go through labor and delivery and have your child feed off your titties, YOU can have the time off for it.

 

[Papageorgio]

It is money out of the company's pocket. The company takes a tax deduction on the loss of wages. It is a cost of business that is factored in to the cost of the product. If no one took maternity time off, the company would not lower the cost of the product or service.

The company raised the price of their products when they decided to add benefits for their employees Papa, NOT the other way around...

Same when they decide they need a 100 million a year CEO, Vs a 2 million dollar a year CEO.

I disagree with the building it into the price, it is an unknown and they add it into the cost of business. The idea of paying maternity time is okay by me, however if you offer the female worker, you need to offer the male the same, otherwise to me it is sexism. IMHO

how do you see it as sexism? Did the father have to be admitted in to the Hospital and go through Labor and Delivery or a C-Section? Did the father get all of his nutrients sucked out of him for 9 months giving it to the child to be? Does the father have titties that feed the child for the first few months?

Adding the ''father'' should get the time off too'', JUST KILLS the time off for the mother proposals, it's a poison pill!!!!

If you offer one, you offer all. Everything should be equal. Women, men, black, white, gay, straight.

it is equal....when you can carry a child for 9 months, go through labor and delivery and have your child feed off your titties, YOU can have the time off for it.

So women aren't equal? Interesting. Liberals all my life said women were equal to men and now you say it is not true?