Most federal workers, i.e. State Department, get accrued sick leave and annual leave, maternity leave, as well as health benefits. If you are posted overseas, you get home leave every 3 years that can be up to 4-6 weeks. I can only assume that those surveyed who don't trust federal government mandates don't know how generous government can be to its workers.
10
The "here's why part" is that those in power to make it happen never have to use it because they can take care of themselves. End of story.
12
Please stop showing Ivanka Trump's face in association with the idea of paid leave. Let's bring the ideas of the best people who have thought about this for years, not Donald Trump's daughter who is, at best, a new kid on the block -- and at worst, mostly concerned about building a reputation to further amass her and the Trump forturne.
43
Government mandates set a level playing field. Instead the US is stuck with a 19th century mindset that makes life for so many in the US a struggle. Nobody in Europe has these issues. Their may wealthy grumble about taxes, but the poorer folks can live stable secure lives.
17
The solution is simple. (1) Do not ever elect a Republican government.
(2) Vote for a Progressive Democratic government. Rather than put the onus on private business, establish a payroll tax that everyone contributes to similar to Medicare and Social Security.
(2) Vote for a Progressive Democratic government. Rather than put the onus on private business, establish a payroll tax that everyone contributes to similar to Medicare and Social Security.
20
Higher taxes is the answer to most things but if we get something in return, universally, it should get popular support. From Facebook employees to GM to Wall Street and yes, fast food establishments, everyone should receive paid leave. And none of this nonsense about working less than 40 hours to ensure benefits are cut. Congressmen and the rest of the feds get their paid leave, so should others.
10
If the anti-immigration forces in this country ever prevail, they may discover that the only way to encourage more births among the kinds of Americans they approve of is to offer paid maternity leave, a policy many of them probably regard as dangerous overreach by government. These policies, adopted in several European countries in response to low postwar birth rates, have come to be regarded as basic human rights. In this, as in so much else, we are a less civilized place than our older fellow nations.
10
You say, "Yet women still shoulder the bulk of caregiving, and especially for conservative voters, opinions about gender roles color their views on paid leave." Call a spade a spade. This is misogyny, patriarchy and systemic sexism in action. Women provide the bulk of unpaid caregiving for kids, disabled spouses or parents (aka: systemic sexism) yet some "conservative voters" (aka: misogynist voters) still feel that women working outside the home for pay threatens the family (aka: patriarchy).
19
The whole world is a lab where the best ideas win and the best society will rule for the time it is best. America had its time, fueled by guts, grits and the spoils of a virgin continent.
Now our ideas are stale, our kids rank at the low end of industrialized countries, and the time is coming where the rest of the world will reject our culture, whether it is shoot'em up movies of invincible heroes or warmed up beats in music.
It takes maternity leave and even paternity leave to produce the next generation of winners. Unfortunately there are not growing up here.
Now our ideas are stale, our kids rank at the low end of industrialized countries, and the time is coming where the rest of the world will reject our culture, whether it is shoot'em up movies of invincible heroes or warmed up beats in music.
It takes maternity leave and even paternity leave to produce the next generation of winners. Unfortunately there are not growing up here.
18
The best ideas win? Always? That's far from a certain conclusion on the basis of available evidence. In fact, to me it seems clear that the opposite is often the case.
2
In France, working women are allowed 16 weeks’ paid maternity leave. If you have twins you're entitled to 34 weeks and triplets 46 weeks. You can choose how many weeks to take before and after the birth; for example, you could take 6 weeks antenatal and 10 weeks postnatal, or 3 weeks antenatal and 13 weeks postnatal. Fathers are also entitled to parental leave of 11 consecutive days.
Also, women are financially rewarded for having babies. The French government grants baby bonuses called "prime de naissance." The 2017 amount for one child is 923,08 euros, 1,846 euros for twins and 2,769 euros for triplets.
Why is the USA - the "GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD" - so backward in this respect?
France provides universal health coverage through social health insurance contributions from employers and employees. A uniform medical service is available throughout the country and medical care is available to all, so no distinctions are made between rich and poor.
Get with the program, USA.
https://julietinparis.net/
Also, women are financially rewarded for having babies. The French government grants baby bonuses called "prime de naissance." The 2017 amount for one child is 923,08 euros, 1,846 euros for twins and 2,769 euros for triplets.
Why is the USA - the "GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD" - so backward in this respect?
France provides universal health coverage through social health insurance contributions from employers and employees. A uniform medical service is available throughout the country and medical care is available to all, so no distinctions are made between rich and poor.
Get with the program, USA.
https://julietinparis.net/
25
The US doesn't need to bribe people to live & breed here. We already have 4 million births a year including 2 million new humans born each year to Medicaid moms.
And millions more wishing to emigrate here. We have zero projected population shortfall & nor would any non-xenophobic country. There are more than enough humans to go around.
And millions more wishing to emigrate here. We have zero projected population shortfall & nor would any non-xenophobic country. There are more than enough humans to go around.
8
get with the program? taxpayers should subsidize financial rewards for having babies?
6
Americans continue to compare the USA to N. Korea to tell them how good life is. When I worked I had 4 weeks paid vacation per year, 15 days sick leave and long service leave, (which Americans would die for). Everyone pays into superannuation, 401K, for their future. We have national health care for all. Who fills the American mind with the protestant work ethic or work til you drop? When are Americans supposed to enjoy life, when they can afford to retire?
15
If you are a teacher in NYC there is no maternity leave, let alone paid sick leave. You use your vacation days instead
7
Anyone believing that Ivanka Trump (IT) is making something from women is naïve and does not know anything about reality. What she does and argues is a fallacy. The issue about a federal paid leave policy is archaic, highly politicized, and so far it has not been solved. She brings this issue now only because she is a woman and is trying to find excuses to do something to fill her time at the WH. But reality tells us that she only cares about herself pretending to advocate for women issues. For IT everything is about image, showing the latest fashion and jewelry, being in the news headlines, pretending to be a politician, showing her face at the WH in meetings with heads of other countries, and pretending to care about women issues. Come on! She has everything in life from daddy so she does not have to worry about anything that concerns women. Everything she has done so far has been a disaster (from bad businesses, to unethical behavior, to copycat, to law suits, you name it.). But always daddy comes to the rescue and save her from her own failures. The NYT shouldn’t waste precious news time talking about her. We already have enough from DT and what he does 24/7.
15
We don't have universal health care, we do not have paid leave, we have the most billionaires. Maybe there is only one answer. Greed!
14
Seeing Ivanka Trump put forth as the poster child for paid family leave is laughable and disingenuous. It's like Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton has become of Secretary of Luxury for the country.
29
It is a truth universally acknowledged that the only proper role of a Republican government is to protect our persons and our property, including a man's hard earned wealth. Our Founding Fathers knew this and we forget it at our peril. Freedom! and Justice Gorsuch!!
Your right, a patriarchal society such as ours is only interested in protecting a 'man's' wealth.
13
The US is the only industrialized country that doesn't mandate paid leave
What does this mean? .... and what do the advocates of paid leave understand by pushing such an agenda?
As a European living in the States for past 17 years, the only paid leave I was aware of in the UK was pregnant women being allowed paid maternity leave under Government rules and regulations. Up to something like 26 weeks of maternity leave were paid either in full or partly by the employer, after which the state stepped in depending on how long the woman had worked.
This article is talking about parents being home for sick children, people looking after aging parents or relatives and other personal matters.
None of the latter are paid for by employers or the Government in the UK - you take this time off out of your vacation time - unless you have a very sympathetic boss who allows you some 'unofficial time off'.
Hopefully, whatever plan the US comes up with regarding paid leave, it will not go overboard like some European countries whereby employers now have serious concerns about employing certain members of society (read women of a certain age) as their absence from work due to family commitments has been shown to have a detrimental affect on company business and their fellow workers.
What does this mean? .... and what do the advocates of paid leave understand by pushing such an agenda?
As a European living in the States for past 17 years, the only paid leave I was aware of in the UK was pregnant women being allowed paid maternity leave under Government rules and regulations. Up to something like 26 weeks of maternity leave were paid either in full or partly by the employer, after which the state stepped in depending on how long the woman had worked.
This article is talking about parents being home for sick children, people looking after aging parents or relatives and other personal matters.
None of the latter are paid for by employers or the Government in the UK - you take this time off out of your vacation time - unless you have a very sympathetic boss who allows you some 'unofficial time off'.
Hopefully, whatever plan the US comes up with regarding paid leave, it will not go overboard like some European countries whereby employers now have serious concerns about employing certain members of society (read women of a certain age) as their absence from work due to family commitments has been shown to have a detrimental affect on company business and their fellow workers.
3
The UK also offers paid parental leave for partners of women who are having babies. Albeit it's a short two weeks, but that's still more than anyone here is mandated to get.
6
The only paid leave you were aware of in the UK is maternity leave? The UK requires 28 days of annual leave for most workers, particularly those working 5 days a week.
https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights/entitlement
https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights/entitlement
6
"As a European living in the States for past 17 years, the only paid leave I was aware of in the UK was pregnant women being allowed paid maternity leave under Government rules and regulations. Up to something like 26 weeks of maternity leave were paid either in full or partly by the employer, after which the state stepped in depending on how long the woman had worked. This article is talking about parents being home for sick children, people looking after aging parents or relatives and other personal matters.
None of the latter are paid for by employers or the Government in the UK - you take this time off out of your vacation time - unless you have a very sympathetic boss who allows you some 'unofficial time off'."
Not true at all. I've had colleagues gone for weeks or even months at a time when parents or spouses get sick. This was both in the private sector and in the Ministry of Defence.
No, it does not come out of holiday time either (another thing Americans don't get).
Maternity leave is generally 6-9 months here, although you continue accruing annual leave in that time, so it tends to stretch a bit. You can usually get 10-11 months if you plan it well.
None of the latter are paid for by employers or the Government in the UK - you take this time off out of your vacation time - unless you have a very sympathetic boss who allows you some 'unofficial time off'."
Not true at all. I've had colleagues gone for weeks or even months at a time when parents or spouses get sick. This was both in the private sector and in the Ministry of Defence.
No, it does not come out of holiday time either (another thing Americans don't get).
Maternity leave is generally 6-9 months here, although you continue accruing annual leave in that time, so it tends to stretch a bit. You can usually get 10-11 months if you plan it well.
My "paid" maternity leave consisted of four weeks short-term disability (at about 60% or 70% of full pay) followed by accrued vacation and sick days, is that what this article means? I guess I am lucky.
Better to have this set up and administered through the state Department of Labor. Funding from the employer similar to unemployment. That helps even things out, employers can augment as they choose.
Better to have this set up and administered through the state Department of Labor. Funding from the employer similar to unemployment. That helps even things out, employers can augment as they choose.
5
It so sad to see people have to ask for paid leave. We are living in a modern civilized world, not in a medieval arcane time. Paid leave for pregnant woman and new father should be a basic right, I am sure a lot of business owners won't accept because they don't understand what others go through. Since they can take leave when they want or they can afford to have the help they don't care.
Almost all western countries give paid leave to new mothers Even India give 26 weeks paid holiday to pregnant women. Conservatives care so much about abortion This is one of the reasons why a lot of people are finding it hard to have babies.
Giving pregnant women paid time off is the most humane thing to do. You want the government to interfere and take full control of outsiders entering the country but you don't want the government to interfere on behalf of the helpless.Yes I used the word Helpless for pregnant women.
Almost all western countries give paid leave to new mothers Even India give 26 weeks paid holiday to pregnant women. Conservatives care so much about abortion This is one of the reasons why a lot of people are finding it hard to have babies.
Giving pregnant women paid time off is the most humane thing to do. You want the government to interfere and take full control of outsiders entering the country but you don't want the government to interfere on behalf of the helpless.Yes I used the word Helpless for pregnant women.
5
Tell your representatives to enact a VAT and start paying for it, the same as other countries do
2
"American workers can get 12 weeks of unpaid leave through the Family and Medical Leave Act, but only about 60 percent are eligible." It is not clear how the 60% is calculated. If 60% of _full-time_ workers are getting unpaid leave, then the first step should be to extend unpaid leave of 12 weeks to all workers. Anything more than 12 weeks of unpaid leave would unnecessarily complicate workplace rules and the labor market dynamics. Unpaid leave and guarantees of getting job back upon return are no small matter to workers, and should be a great relief especially to workers whose jobs are easily replaceable. Other assistance to working population's care burden will have to be separated from the workplace in order to avoid a whole set of unintended consequences.
You're only eligible for FMLA after working for one year at a large company. I imagine that excludes a lot of people.
1
Why does Ivanka Trump have an office in the White House? What is her job title and who vetted her? If none of above has not been done, then her presence there is unlawful and she should leave.
19
The U.S.'s social assistance is lousy to petty to nastily stingy, way behind other nations (more attuned to human needs, frailty, and convenience). Do we suffer, perhaps, from a collective Grinch-like attitude, in need of scolding? Is it to save money so it can be given back to the rich, privatize the gains and socialize the losses, and leave the average American grasping for help? Is greed, the god of Wall Street, so demanding, we cannot provide a lending hand to the average working woman? For now at least, we do not value family life in its full dimension, a tremendous loss to everybody.
10
Plenty of people want to live and work here. We do not need to rob some citizens more than we already do to make it easier for others to produce additional human beings, because we simply don't need additional homegrown human beings. Particularly the offspring of the illiterate, semi-literate and shiftless.
I would much rather deal with imported workers who are motivated, multi-lingual, already adult and educated when they get here, than subsidize the production of more paunchy little American Walmart shoppers.
There is absolutely zero shortage of human beings on the planet. Think globally, not locally. Having kids in the USA is a selfish lifestyle choice, not a societal good.
I would much rather deal with imported workers who are motivated, multi-lingual, already adult and educated when they get here, than subsidize the production of more paunchy little American Walmart shoppers.
There is absolutely zero shortage of human beings on the planet. Think globally, not locally. Having kids in the USA is a selfish lifestyle choice, not a societal good.
5
Yikes. Well unfortunately for us, your parents didn't feel the same.
2
Wow. I don't even like children all that much. But I was a kid myself once, and I do realize it's important to have parents around to help you grow into one of those motivated adults you want to hire. Kinda hard to do that on your own.
And then there are people like me, childless by choice, but with aging and disabled relatives that need my help every so often. Should I just dump them in a nursing home and promise to try to visit on Thanksgiving? Why should I have to choose between helping my disabled sister move out of nursing home back to her house and getting a full paycheck?
And then there are people like me, childless by choice, but with aging and disabled relatives that need my help every so often. Should I just dump them in a nursing home and promise to try to visit on Thanksgiving? Why should I have to choose between helping my disabled sister move out of nursing home back to her house and getting a full paycheck?
13
Begin Quote:
“It was really, really rough,” said another woman, in Birmingham, Ala., who needed to care for her mother but had no leave. “Some days I would just have to let them know I couldn’t come in because I had to assist her, and that would mean not a full paycheck and that was very stressful.”
End Quote
Life can be very difficult. It doesn't mean everyone in the country needs to chip in for someone else's problems. Money does not grow on trees. Every expense in the world is paid for by someone. Typically that is the employer, not the employee. Apparently it's ok for employers to pay for the expense but not the individual who created the expense.
“It was really, really rough,” said another woman, in Birmingham, Ala., who needed to care for her mother but had no leave. “Some days I would just have to let them know I couldn’t come in because I had to assist her, and that would mean not a full paycheck and that was very stressful.”
End Quote
Life can be very difficult. It doesn't mean everyone in the country needs to chip in for someone else's problems. Money does not grow on trees. Every expense in the world is paid for by someone. Typically that is the employer, not the employee. Apparently it's ok for employers to pay for the expense but not the individual who created the expense.
5
So ... her sick mother should cover her missed pay? That's mighty compassionate of you. Hope you never need help from anyone. But, hey, you're probably one of those bootstrappers who had a job right out of the womb and never depended on anyone else in your life.
12
The individual often cannot pay. That's the whole point of this article. And rather than shift responsibility to employers (because that benefit IS expensive), why not fund it through payroll taxes, like SDI, social security, etc? Family leave benefits us all. You pay taxes for roads, hospitals, all sorts of programs for the public good, so why not this? Because you think having children is only for the wealthy?
14
No one should be guaranteed paid leave. That is NOT the business of government. Paid pregnancy leave is even more absurd. Pregnancy should not have taken place by accident. If you get pregnant companies should not be forced to give you paid leave. It's a wonderful option but it should not be forced on a company to offer it.
Sometimes in life you need to be responsible for your own actions as hard as that may seem to be. As an employer I have offered paid leave for pregnancy for a number of years. However, I totally feel the government has no right to force it on me as an employer.
As time goes on we as a nation just seem to feel more and more the government needs to be involved in everything. I do NOT want the government continuing to get more and more into my face.
Sometimes in life you need to be responsible for your own actions as hard as that may seem to be. As an employer I have offered paid leave for pregnancy for a number of years. However, I totally feel the government has no right to force it on me as an employer.
As time goes on we as a nation just seem to feel more and more the government needs to be involved in everything. I do NOT want the government continuing to get more and more into my face.
8
Perhaps if the government would allow all women access to all forms of family planning, then pregnancy could actually be considered a choice that people have the education and resources to make.
Also, why shouldn't companies have a mandate to cover their employees? You never really identify a reason beyond your feeling that nothing should be "forced." Don't like it? Don't own a business. You made a choice, didn't you?
Also, why shouldn't companies have a mandate to cover their employees? You never really identify a reason beyond your feeling that nothing should be "forced." Don't like it? Don't own a business. You made a choice, didn't you?
8
The reason government ends up having to enforce things is that most companies won't do them if they're optional. As the article says very few companies actually provide paid leave. You appear to be one of the good guys but that doesn't help employees of the others. Most companies put the bottom line above everything else and won't do anything that directly costs them money. Indirect benefits aren't considered, especially if they don't accrue to the company. Environmental regulations are another example; if they were optional few companies would implement them voluntarily.
12
Spoken like a man who doesn't have a clue. Again, why do other countries have paid leave and maternity/paternity leave? For healthier families, less stress which can all reduce health care costs BTW. We need to get our act together. Some big brains need to work on universal health care and universal paid leave.
Our military have expanded the number of weeks of paid maternity leave....guess what? Improves retention (turnover costs big bucks), quality of life, and builds healthy families.
Our military have expanded the number of weeks of paid maternity leave....guess what? Improves retention (turnover costs big bucks), quality of life, and builds healthy families.
9
Not really a paradox. It has bi partisan support among Americans, but is solidly opposed by greed head republicans , who don't want to raise taxes on the rich.
7
Seems to me that workers, male, on the west coast are having a lot of problems with this. Perhaps you need to look at how things are implemented in your industry (is it tech?) And perhaps you need to look at the ethos there.
Or maybe KosherDill is right. Stop reproducing, it's time to end homo sapiens. We're not evolving, time to exit.
Or maybe KosherDill is right. Stop reproducing, it's time to end homo sapiens. We're not evolving, time to exit.
4
Imagine the vast, heartfelt sigh of relief all of the earth's other species (what's left of them) will heave when the last human being expires?
4
a) Decide if you want it
b) Decide what you want
c) Decide the best way to achieve it for the most people.
Seriously, guys. This isn't that hard.
b) Decide what you want
c) Decide the best way to achieve it for the most people.
Seriously, guys. This isn't that hard.
2
If men had babies, they would be given a year off work, fully paid. Just saying.
27
A lot of commenters seem to think telling people "well just don't have children" is an acceptable solution. Aside from being tyrannical and anti-Christian, it's also unrealistic.
12
Then plan for them and save up in advance for the time off you need, just like the rest of us save up to finance our lifestyle choices. As a woman who's been not having babies for 35 years, I can assure you it's quite possible to control one's reproduction until or unless the timing is right.
No one who can't afford to save up and self-finance parental leave needs to be producing additional human beings. Two committed would-be parents living on one income and saving the other should be able to set aside a heft sum in 3-5 years, more than enough to augment income during the stay-home-parent years. If one can't muster up a job and a committed partner to engage in this preparation with, one shouldn't be producing additional human beings for the rest of the world to take care of.
No one who can't afford to save up and self-finance parental leave needs to be producing additional human beings. Two committed would-be parents living on one income and saving the other should be able to set aside a heft sum in 3-5 years, more than enough to augment income during the stay-home-parent years. If one can't muster up a job and a committed partner to engage in this preparation with, one shouldn't be producing additional human beings for the rest of the world to take care of.
7
And yet they do and are. I find the argument that only well-off folks should have children to be unrealistic, let alone incredibly distasteful. Add to this that the poor in this country lack access to comprehensive sex education, contraception, and other family-planning services, and your argument falls apart at the seams. Furthermore, your argument completely ignores paid leave for people who become disabled due to illness or accident.
Paid family leave has been shown to significantly reduce infant mortality rates, of which the US has among the highest in the developed world. Paid family leave works in every other civilized country on earth. If US corporations can afford multi-million-dollar bonuses for executives, we can afford to finance paid leave.
Paid family leave has been shown to significantly reduce infant mortality rates, of which the US has among the highest in the developed world. Paid family leave works in every other civilized country on earth. If US corporations can afford multi-million-dollar bonuses for executives, we can afford to finance paid leave.
18
You don't have to be "well off." Just able to find a committed partner and live on mostly one income while saving.
I have no problem for paid leave for true misfortune, illness or caregiving for those who are ill or disabled.
I have no desire to get up and work every day to fund even more perks than we already do (see EITC, TANF, WIC, SNAP, USDA school nutrition, Medicaid, Section 8, ad infinitum) for people who make imprudent reproductive choices.
Anyone who cannot manage a stable relationship and several years of planning and saving does not need to be producing additional human beings. I send a very large sum to Planned Parenthood each year as well as donations to several abortion services facilitators such as the Lilith Fund in Texas. For those who can't access such clinics, well, multiple forms of birth control are available at Walmart and condoms can be found at any gas station.
I have no problem for paid leave for true misfortune, illness or caregiving for those who are ill or disabled.
I have no desire to get up and work every day to fund even more perks than we already do (see EITC, TANF, WIC, SNAP, USDA school nutrition, Medicaid, Section 8, ad infinitum) for people who make imprudent reproductive choices.
Anyone who cannot manage a stable relationship and several years of planning and saving does not need to be producing additional human beings. I send a very large sum to Planned Parenthood each year as well as donations to several abortion services facilitators such as the Lilith Fund in Texas. For those who can't access such clinics, well, multiple forms of birth control are available at Walmart and condoms can be found at any gas station.
7
Seems most agree who should pay...someone else.
19
How ironic is it that Ivanka supports paid leave when her father thinks that taking away access to healthcare will Make America Great.
Mandated or optional? What we have now is optional and most businesses choose not to offer it.
Mandated or optional? What we have now is optional and most businesses choose not to offer it.
2
There's something wrong in a country in which over half the births are paid for by Medicaid. If you cannot afford to have kids then you should not have them. It's not like birth control isn't readily available.
14
What a shameful mentality.
4
If all businesses are required to provide paid leave, it seems that none would at a competitive disadvantage. If the government were to provide paid leave, on the other hand, this would provide a strong incentive for businesses to not provide any paid leave.
1
Where I work we have a tacit agreement to not hire anyone of childbearing age, because we've been burned too often by "busy moms" barely showing up and shoving work on to the rest of us. Fortunately we get so many apps for every open position, from people in all demographics, that we have plenty of others from which to choose. A department of entirely childfree people runs quite smoothly. Some of us are doing eldercare and since we've all been there, and it's hardly a self-indulgent lifestyle choice, we don't mind covering for that.
5
Are you saying that having children is a "self-indulgent lifestyle choice"? I find your overall statement shortsighted. Where do you think you get all your wonderful applications for all those positions? If nobody raised healthy, smart children you wouldn't have any applicants. So all those 'busy' moms you're complaining about are working very hard to raise the next generation of workers who will be supporting our economy, paying into taxes, and creating communities. And some of them will be caregiving for childless people who need help as they age. Lastly, some 'busy' family took the time to raise you and the people in your department. Look, I'm also saying this as a woman of childbearing age with little interest in having children. But at least I have the capacity to understand that those who decide to raise children are contributing to society in very large and significant ways.
13
"Self-indulgent lifestyle choice" - wow. Since when did we all become so anti-children and parenting? Really dangerous.
4
Having kids to have a family is a choice. Going to work to make money is another choice. If you want to have both, then you pay the consequences. Either you pay someone to take care of kids when necessary or you do not work. Americans want to have both but not willing to pay the price nor accept the consequences. It is called hypocrisy. We are full of it.
12
Just to play devil's advocate, one can argue that a family that cannot afford to self-fund maternal leave through savings, it probably isn't in a smart financial position to be adding a new dependent.
11
Ivanka Trump--worst than Daddy Trump. She makes a big deal about standing-up for working rights; but, along with that minimum wage that's stuck on 1987, you get a "paid"maternity leave, just use vacation days and put your own money into a self-funded Health Savings Account.
What a gal? HMMM!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
What a gal? HMMM!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
3
As more than one commenter has recently observed, virtually all articles about America the exceptional, the only, the one that "...is the only industrialized country that doesn’t mandate paid leave (feel free to replace 'paid leave' with any one of a number of options such as free university, 6 week vacation..." fail to provide any data about life in UHC countries.
Readers who do not even have a passport, who have not lived in a Universal Health Care country, or who do not have family members who do, know zero about overall life situations in these countries. If you read the many negative comments (29 total comments showing) you will instantly see that they suggest a paradox.
The negative voices, among them Kosher Dill, Chris, Zack, do not want to contribute one cent to the general public health of America and appear to believe that people like them in UHC countries feel the same way. Before drawing such conclusions, they should look at the list of countries in which the population over all appears to be happy, happier, happiest. All 5 of the Nordic countries are in the top 10 even though it can be pretty cold and dark up here. (US is no. 12 so not so bad, but will soon fall I suggest.)
Three days ago, in an NYT first, Anu Partunen, grew up in Finland, lives in US, told readers about life in a UHC country - better. The Times is an International newspaper so it should be giving readers basis for comparisons.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US Se
Readers who do not even have a passport, who have not lived in a Universal Health Care country, or who do not have family members who do, know zero about overall life situations in these countries. If you read the many negative comments (29 total comments showing) you will instantly see that they suggest a paradox.
The negative voices, among them Kosher Dill, Chris, Zack, do not want to contribute one cent to the general public health of America and appear to believe that people like them in UHC countries feel the same way. Before drawing such conclusions, they should look at the list of countries in which the population over all appears to be happy, happier, happiest. All 5 of the Nordic countries are in the top 10 even though it can be pretty cold and dark up here. (US is no. 12 so not so bad, but will soon fall I suggest.)
Three days ago, in an NYT first, Anu Partunen, grew up in Finland, lives in US, told readers about life in a UHC country - better. The Times is an International newspaper so it should be giving readers basis for comparisons.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US Se
3
Larry, please do not mischaracterize our statements.
I am happy to contribute my fair share as a citizen of the United States, including to free public education. I would happily contribute to free public university IF the inept were winnowed out as they are in, say, Germany and if admission standards were rigorous and objective. I would happily pay more to insure Medicare for All and I am happy to go to work and pay taxes on my wages to support people with mental and physical limitations and misfortunes. I am happy to support the arts and humanities and public goods such as PBS and NPR. I am happy to support national parks and other such riches.
What I resent is that Americans are segregated by personal relationship choices and reproductive choices when it comes to taxation, to societal assistance, to Social Security and Medicare.
I merely want to pay the same taxes as a childed, married person on the exact same income, and I want the same household retirement benefit as a married person with a non-working spouse who applies for SS. The latter household should not get a 50 percent boost in retirement income plus free Medicare because they chose to have a non-working spouse for decades. We all should be treated equally under each and every taxpayer funded public program whether or not we have married or reproduced.
I am happy to contribute my fair share as a citizen of the United States, including to free public education. I would happily contribute to free public university IF the inept were winnowed out as they are in, say, Germany and if admission standards were rigorous and objective. I would happily pay more to insure Medicare for All and I am happy to go to work and pay taxes on my wages to support people with mental and physical limitations and misfortunes. I am happy to support the arts and humanities and public goods such as PBS and NPR. I am happy to support national parks and other such riches.
What I resent is that Americans are segregated by personal relationship choices and reproductive choices when it comes to taxation, to societal assistance, to Social Security and Medicare.
I merely want to pay the same taxes as a childed, married person on the exact same income, and I want the same household retirement benefit as a married person with a non-working spouse who applies for SS. The latter household should not get a 50 percent boost in retirement income plus free Medicare because they chose to have a non-working spouse for decades. We all should be treated equally under each and every taxpayer funded public program whether or not we have married or reproduced.
10
@Kosher Dill-Thanks for a detailed reply that I cannot adequately reply to for several reasons. I am on the upper deck of Bus4You and cannot read your original comment now.
Your first paragraph is clear and on the surface would suggest you would therefore support paid leave. But you do not and I am afraid I do not know all the ins and outs that you present in your 2d paragraph.
That is a main point of my comment is that the the Times needs to tell readers how such a system works in, for example, Sweden.
I have never seen anything at all arguing against PPL and therefore nothing as intricate as your 2d paragraph.
As for your argument about being treated equally by the tax laws, we US do not do that with Donald Trump as a probable case study.
perhaps researchers could tell me how much it would cost you above your present taxes to pay for parental leave.
thats all I can manage from here.
Larry
Your first paragraph is clear and on the surface would suggest you would therefore support paid leave. But you do not and I am afraid I do not know all the ins and outs that you present in your 2d paragraph.
That is a main point of my comment is that the the Times needs to tell readers how such a system works in, for example, Sweden.
I have never seen anything at all arguing against PPL and therefore nothing as intricate as your 2d paragraph.
As for your argument about being treated equally by the tax laws, we US do not do that with Donald Trump as a probable case study.
perhaps researchers could tell me how much it would cost you above your present taxes to pay for parental leave.
thats all I can manage from here.
Larry
Yes. As a person who's traveled and lived abroad, I fully agree that it can be much better elsewhere. I came back to be with my aging parents, and it's been hard to get back out there. There's research in even the Wall Street Journal that shows that more and more people could have a better life if they didn't live in the U.S.
3
Paid leave is just like health insurance. Everyone wants it but wants either someone else or the "rich" to pay for it. If we want Universal Coverage and the kinds of benefits that European countries offer we are going to have to institute a VAT and up our taxes so that everyone pays including the 40% of Americans that don't pay Federal taxes. I already pay half my income in taxes. Time for everyone else to pony up too.
16
Same here. And most of the things my outsize taxes fund, I am not even eligible to be helped by because of my marital and/or reproductive status.
It's about time everyone started remaining his/her own legal and economic entity. No tax breaks for supporting dependents, no dipping on spouse's account to beef up social security benefits, no special perks for overpopulating the planet. It's the 21st century and for the purposes of societal perks and benefits we need to stop categorizing people by the status of their wombs and whether or not they have trotted their personal relationship through some formality or other.
It's about time everyone started remaining his/her own legal and economic entity. No tax breaks for supporting dependents, no dipping on spouse's account to beef up social security benefits, no special perks for overpopulating the planet. It's the 21st century and for the purposes of societal perks and benefits we need to stop categorizing people by the status of their wombs and whether or not they have trotted their personal relationship through some formality or other.
12
If you have paid half your earnings in taxes, aren't you therefore victim of your own success, in investments, e.g., unearned income? Or, on the other hand, do you need a better accountant? Isn't the top personal income tax rate 39.6%? Haven't Europeans, by having instituted UHC, indicated that they receive good value on their taxes? Isn't it astounding they pay 50% less per capita than we Americans do for healthcare, including parental leave?
5
Kosher dill, it's not the 1800s. We have no workhouses.
1
Paid leave is discriminatory against those who do not have children. If such a policy is implemented, compensatory time off should be given to those who choose not to have children.
Time off for taking care of elderly/sick is even more fraught with potential for inequality and abuse.
Time off for taking care of elderly/sick is even more fraught with potential for inequality and abuse.
13
Everyone has parents; paid leave is for caregiving, time and resources for which creates healthier and more productive workers. At the same time, it is the requirement of an employer and employee to develop a trusting relationship so that paid leave is not abused. Jack's argument is akin to eliminating taxpayer funded education because not everyone has kids or because some kids skip school.
3
No, his argument is not akin to saying we want to eliminate education.
In most workplaces, paid leave is for parents only. The rest of us can get unpaid FMLA. Take it from one who knows.
We need to start supporting people who have involuntary misfortune and let those who put themselves into a circumstance voluntarily, such as choosing parenthood, finance it on their own dimes. No one is forced to have children and this planet would benefit substantially from a sharp decline in the birth rate.
In most workplaces, paid leave is for parents only. The rest of us can get unpaid FMLA. Take it from one who knows.
We need to start supporting people who have involuntary misfortune and let those who put themselves into a circumstance voluntarily, such as choosing parenthood, finance it on their own dimes. No one is forced to have children and this planet would benefit substantially from a sharp decline in the birth rate.
6
Setting aside the other elements of Jack's comments, Molly, not "everyone has parents"...at least not living, a situation I and many others sadly know.
4
One aside to the paid leave issue, only indirectly related to the question of pass/not pass, is that the difficulty and expense of taking maternity leave ACCURATELY reflects the expense of raising a child and bringing a young adult into a working world that doesn't have jobs for them. The costs of raising children are ever higher because of the necessity of raising a child with "a leg up" over the competition - other people's offspring. Are parents prepared to pay for all the coaching (both physical, educational, and emotional) and push, push, push their child ever harder to be a competitive job seeker? It seems unlikely that the US will be creating massive numbers of "good jobs with good benefits" - that is, jobs with relatively high pay, very good medical benefits, and a generous retirement program. Therefore, fewer and fewer children can ascend that ladder, and maybe the difficulty of getting a generously funded maternity leave reflects that reality.
4
Americans have been bludgeoned with anti-government/anti-tax hysteria and "rugged individualism' to the point that they're incapable of even answering polling questions in accordance with their own best interests.
44
That is very true!
1
They have also been bludgeoned with "the government" as something unique and self-sustaining. I have heard more than one person over the years saying that the government, not the taxpayers should fund various things...many just don't seem to get that it is OUR money not the bureaucrats.
8
The "government" is 5% corrupt politicians and 95% useless, parasitic, self-serving bureaucrats.
3
It’s not just a matter of who will support the parents while they are taking time from work to care for and bond with their baby. It is also a problem for the employers. Who will do the parents’ jobs?
If the jobs are at all specialized, will their substitutes have the necessary training? How much time would it take to hire and train subs, and how much would the subs cost?
If permanent workers are asked to assume the additional workload, will they become overstressed? How would this affect their own families or personal needs? Would they be compensated?
How much of the additional costs would employers absorb before raising the prices of their products or services?
If the jobs are at all specialized, will their substitutes have the necessary training? How much time would it take to hire and train subs, and how much would the subs cost?
If permanent workers are asked to assume the additional workload, will they become overstressed? How would this affect their own families or personal needs? Would they be compensated?
How much of the additional costs would employers absorb before raising the prices of their products or services?
15
My office has 17 people-15 are women. Currently we have 5 out on maternity leave, and this is the busiest time of the year in my department. Company policies forbid replacing anyone on maternity leave; as a result, everyone else's workload has increased over 100%. However, people who are not pregnant are not given the same paid leave; I took care of my mother who passed away at age 92, and was only allowed 1 day off every 6 months. The only reason I was allowed time off after my mother's death was that I was in an accident the day before she died and could not work for 51 days. I was not paid the same as the pregnant employees. Leave policies should be fair to all.
86
Same here. I lost about $11,000 in wages taking care of my mom when she was dying of cancer at age 68.
At the same exact time, a similarly paid co-worker was out on fully-paid maternity leave. She didn't lose a dime even though her situation was voluntary (and thus could've been planned and saved for) and my family's situation was an unexpected tragedy.
We don't need to reward breeding on a planet groaning under the weight of 7 billion people. Before we pick each other's pockets to fund voluntary lifestyle choices, let's make sure workers can get paid time off to take care of involuntary misfortune such as their own illness or that of a family member.
If mandatory parental leave is implemented, then chidlfree workers should get equivalent voluntary time off. There are many worthwhile things to do besides bio-reproduction and we all deserve the same opportunity to live out our own value system.
(Btw in the early 1960s my parents wanted my mom to stay home when we kids were small. They SAVED UP in advance, while both were working at relatively low-paid jobs, so they had a fund to carry them through and augment dad's pay till we were in school. They didn't put out their paws to the rest of the world to fund their voluntary life choices. Of course, they also shared a car, had an 800 square foot house, didn't vacation or dine out, and made other trade-offs that today's young parents seem incapable of fathoming.)
At the same exact time, a similarly paid co-worker was out on fully-paid maternity leave. She didn't lose a dime even though her situation was voluntary (and thus could've been planned and saved for) and my family's situation was an unexpected tragedy.
We don't need to reward breeding on a planet groaning under the weight of 7 billion people. Before we pick each other's pockets to fund voluntary lifestyle choices, let's make sure workers can get paid time off to take care of involuntary misfortune such as their own illness or that of a family member.
If mandatory parental leave is implemented, then chidlfree workers should get equivalent voluntary time off. There are many worthwhile things to do besides bio-reproduction and we all deserve the same opportunity to live out our own value system.
(Btw in the early 1960s my parents wanted my mom to stay home when we kids were small. They SAVED UP in advance, while both were working at relatively low-paid jobs, so they had a fund to carry them through and augment dad's pay till we were in school. They didn't put out their paws to the rest of the world to fund their voluntary life choices. Of course, they also shared a car, had an 800 square foot house, didn't vacation or dine out, and made other trade-offs that today's young parents seem incapable of fathoming.)
61
Both paid and unpaid time off benefits should be the same for all workers. It should not matter what the time is used for.
41
I am surprised by Stuck in Cali's comments since California has its own family leave policy that mandates 6 weeks at 55% of your salary to care for ailing family members.
https://blog.dol.gov/2016/08/18/caring-for-elderly-parents
There should be equal coverage to care for ailing family members OR have a child. Just because we haven't done better in the past doesn't mean we shouldn't do better in the future.
https://blog.dol.gov/2016/08/18/caring-for-elderly-parents
There should be equal coverage to care for ailing family members OR have a child. Just because we haven't done better in the past doesn't mean we shouldn't do better in the future.
4
"I don't think the government should pay for it because, I mean, we'd all be paying for it." That is, actually, the point. Spreading the burden makes it achievable. This is the classic attitude that will keep America from achieving worthwhile goals that require something from everyone in order to benefit everyone. All Canadians enjoy cradle-to-grave health care at a cost per capita of 55% of what we pay here. And also a full year of paid maternity leave. Our unwillingness to play on the same team because we are so afraid that someone, somewhere, might get something they didn't earn means we cannot enjoy the kinds of benefits that all other Western democracies enjoy - like paid leave.
117
Actually it's because we the cash cows of the federal entitlement and tax systems (single, childfree -- and we also get to pick up the slack for all the absent parents at work) already get the short end of the stick, bigtime. We aren't willing to pay more so people who make the sanctioned LifeScript choices can get even more perks. There is hardly a shortage of humans; we don't need to smooth the path of producing more.
I have never, ever heard a parent offer to pay more in taxes so that unmarried and/or childfree citizens can get the sort of perks that would make their lives easier and more fulfilling. It's all about the breeding. Sorry but with the Great Barrier Reef dying, climate change causing other deleterious effects and clean water and air jeopardized, I am not getting up and going to work every day to subsidize the production of more little western consumers. We can import all the new citizen we'll ever need.
I have never, ever heard a parent offer to pay more in taxes so that unmarried and/or childfree citizens can get the sort of perks that would make their lives easier and more fulfilling. It's all about the breeding. Sorry but with the Great Barrier Reef dying, climate change causing other deleterious effects and clean water and air jeopardized, I am not getting up and going to work every day to subsidize the production of more little western consumers. We can import all the new citizen we'll ever need.
20
Where does the line of thinking lead us? Surely, if Junior took piano lessons or Missy took tennis lessons throughout life it would benefit them and benefit all of us because Junior and Missy would be smarter and healthier. Or how about SAT tutoring sessions? If it is good for Junior and Missy, which those would be, wouldn't it be better for all of us? Should the burden of paying for those lessons be spread among all of us as well?
I am using absurd examples of course. However, we know what happens when government establishes an entitlement. It never goes away even if it is later shown to provide benefits that are lesser than its costs. The one thing that government does extremely well is create programs that benefit individuals and organizations at the expense of most of us. It takes many forms but essentially is the privatization of profit and the socialization of cost/risk (see ethanol, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, etc.). Just because a program may benefit a certain set of individuals, rather than a corporation, doesn't necessarily make it less objectionable.
Programs never go away, so we better think long and hard before we start a new one.
I am using absurd examples of course. However, we know what happens when government establishes an entitlement. It never goes away even if it is later shown to provide benefits that are lesser than its costs. The one thing that government does extremely well is create programs that benefit individuals and organizations at the expense of most of us. It takes many forms but essentially is the privatization of profit and the socialization of cost/risk (see ethanol, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, etc.). Just because a program may benefit a certain set of individuals, rather than a corporation, doesn't necessarily make it less objectionable.
Programs never go away, so we better think long and hard before we start a new one.
9
Indeed, and these children are who will be paying our Social Security some day.
4
If you can not afford to take care of your children, don't have children. The idea of paying someone to not come to work for 6 weeks is absolutely outrageous. If you want your check, go to work.
28
I assume you don't have children or don't appreciate what your mother did to have you. Your level of selfishness is the reason this country is going down the tubes. I would be ashamed to be your mother.
4
He sounds just like my sons and I'm very PROUD of them.
Ian's wife here... I gave up my job the day our first child was born. We waited until we could live on one income before I got pregnant. I would never expect taxpayers to cushion my decision to have children.
3
It would be ironic that we pass a bill mandating paid leave that is supported by tax dollars, but, if repeal of the ACA passes, remove pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care as a mandated essential benefit for health care plans. It's hard to talk about paid leave when we can't even get everyone a decent and affordable health care plan that allows mom to receive the necessary and proper medical treatment for the pregnancy itself.
29
Everyone should understand that more benefits lead to lower cash salaries. The high and rising cost of medical insurance has already caused cash pay to stagnate, even as overall compensation increases.
12
yes wages stagnated at the same time CEO salaries and corporate cash reserves have never been higher and keep increasing. Darn benefits! Please, cut more of my benefits!!!
32
We have it in California.
14
We do, and employees pay for it with a minimal deduction. The CA fund is doing well.
13
We have had paid maternity leave for years in Canada. I used it for my three children. Then (in the 80's) it was at 60% of your salary for 1 year (there was a maximum $ cap). You had to have worked for a consecutive period of time to be eligible, as well you had to have paid into a federal employment insurance fund through employee deductions.
23
So you self-funded to an extant. That makes sense-if you could bank the pay ahead of time, then you can plan your leave.
4
This is a very misleading article. Ms Miller pretends that "(Americans) disagree on the details: who should pay, and whether it should be mandatory or optional."
In fact, the Pew report shows that Americans overwhelmingly favor paid family leave, and even the least favored policy- higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations- enjoys 60% support.
In other words, Americans want this done. Period. They're really not confused about the details.
In fact, the Pew report shows that Americans overwhelmingly favor paid family leave, and even the least favored policy- higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations- enjoys 60% support.
In other words, Americans want this done. Period. They're really not confused about the details.
40
So we can summarize this as: Americans know who should pay for Paid Leave - and it is someone else.
That sounds remarkably familiar.
That sounds remarkably familiar.
45
Yes, but if you defined 'the wealthy' as the respondents answering the question - you have enough money to buy lunch, so you're rich! - then they'd sing a different tune.
7
On the question of who would pay. Probably single men and women, and those with no children. They would have to bear the burden of the extra work, as well as be discriminated against in terms of overall paid leave - in other words, work more for relatively less compensation. Essentially, we are taking from one group to give to another. Is this fair?
46
Single people and those without children would still have access to family leave policies. They still have parents, spouses, etc who may require their care. Additionally, in countries with paid leave policies, parents or other people who do need to take leave at some point in their working lives are not being "given" this leave by those who don't take it - they have paid into it the same as everyone else, same as with unemployment insurance, which is not "given" from the employed to the unemployed but rather is something everyone pays into in the event that they should ever need it someday.
People without children do not "have to" bear the burden of the extra work. They often do so in our current system, because we essentially have no current system, which leads to lots of "making do" by everyone, employers included. In countries where family leave is regulated and standardized, it is quite common for leave policies to act not just as "paid time off" for the employee in need but also to act as an entry into (or back into) a given industry for the temporary worker who is hired to fill the position. This acts as a crucial way to get around the conundrum of "industry experience needed" for job positions but no way to access said experience - a catch-22 that many younger people in this country know well. Standardized leave creates a greater demand for employees who can fill a void, lowering the unrealistic expectations for many positions.
People without children do not "have to" bear the burden of the extra work. They often do so in our current system, because we essentially have no current system, which leads to lots of "making do" by everyone, employers included. In countries where family leave is regulated and standardized, it is quite common for leave policies to act not just as "paid time off" for the employee in need but also to act as an entry into (or back into) a given industry for the temporary worker who is hired to fill the position. This acts as a crucial way to get around the conundrum of "industry experience needed" for job positions but no way to access said experience - a catch-22 that many younger people in this country know well. Standardized leave creates a greater demand for employees who can fill a void, lowering the unrealistic expectations for many positions.
53
Here's the thing, Chris. Single men and women have this strange habit of, you know, getting married and having kids! So although they might have greater work load at one point in their young lives, they will benefit from paid time off when they need it just a few years later.
It's what civilized societies provide their citizens. Time that America joined the rest of the civilized world.
It's what civilized societies provide their citizens. Time that America joined the rest of the civilized world.
53
If someone doesn't bear the burden of reproduction, then there's not going to be a younger generation to support all the single men and women aging into social security, Medicare, and other programs that are funded by payroll deductions. In the U.S., we are hardly even talking about a significant amount of leave. Somewhere between 6 to 12 weeks, a handful times in life. Probably averages out to one week per year of work!
23