User not logged in - login - register
Home Calendar Books School Tool Photo Gallery Message Boards Users Statistics Advertise Site Info
go to bottom | |
 Message Boards » » Moms of Lesotho, Papua New Guinea,Swaziland and US Page [1]  
pryderi
Suspended
26647 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/redir.php?jid=5d58ccd1e...

U.S. stands apart from other nations on maternity leave
The Associated Press
In Santa Fe, Linda Strauss McIlroy, a first-time mother, is trying to get used to the thought of soon putting her two-month-old boy in day care so she can get back to work.

Linda Strauss McIlroy plays with her two-month-old baby, Gabriel, whom she'll soon have to put in day care so she can get back to work.
By Jeff Geissler, AP

"It's hard for me to imagine leaving him," she says. "Just not being with him all day, leaving him with a virtual stranger. And then that's it till, you know, I retire. It's kind of crazy to think about it."

Across the border in Vancouver, Canada, Suzanne Dobson is back at work after 14 months of paid maternity leave.

"It was great," she says. "I was still making pretty good money for being at home."

Across the ocean, in Sweden, Magnus Larsson is looking forward to splitting 16 months of parental leave at 80% pay with his girlfriend. They are expecting their first baby in a week.

With little public debate, the United States has chosen a radically different approach to maternity leave than the rest of the developed world. The United States and Australia are the only industrialized countries that don't provide paid leave for new mothers nationally, though there are exceptions in some U.S. states.

Australian mothers have it better, however, with one year of job-protected leave. The U.S. Family and Medical Leave Act provides for 12 weeks of job-protected leave, but it only covers those who work for larger companies.

To put it another way, out of 168 nations in a Harvard University study last year, 163 had some form of paid maternity leave, leaving the United States in the company of Lesotho, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland.
"

7/27/2005 9:21:45 AM

LoneSnark
All American
12317 Posts
user info
edit post

If you want paid maternity leave, go work for a company that provides it.

7/27/2005 10:28:59 AM

aaronburro
Sup, B
52220 Posts
user info
edit post

is it exactly right to pay someone not to work for more than a year? Give them job protection, yes, but don't make companies pay for the person not to work...

7/27/2005 5:58:35 PM

AVON
All American
4770 Posts
user info
edit post

Equal pay and superior benefits.... another way to fuck over the males...

If you can afford to have kids don't.
Imagine folks having kids right after the other... constant maternity leave...

7/27/2005 7:29:10 PM

aaronburro
Sup, B
52220 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"If you can afford to have kids don't."

you mean "can't," right?

Quote :
"Imagine folks having kids right after the other... constant maternity leave..."

i don't think that this occurs often, if ever. Generally, the companies that provide maternity leave are larger companies, and to get into such a company, it would seem that you would need to have a bit of a work ethic... Such qualities in a person would seem to run counter to the "qualities" necessary to constantly mooch off the company via maternity leave...

7/27/2005 8:11:07 PM

RedGuard
All American
5596 Posts
user info
edit post

^ I think the point that was being made though was that if you extended not only guaranteed job protection but mandatory paid maternity leave for twelve months or more, the less scrupulous who don't work for those top companies and lack that work ethic are going to start abusing smaller companies and small businesses by getting a job and then popping out babies for the next couple of years.

I'm torn about this; while I certainly would like to see greater maternity leave privileges, I understand the business side. Do we want to pin a business into keeping an employee on the books for more a year or more at a time? What happens if you have someone who has two children almost back to back? What happens if the business simply cannot afford to bring them back on in a year or two? Or the position is no longer available? True, you could do it in companies for positions where you have skilled labor, but what about unskilled working positions? I could imagine a small business being creamed because it's forced to pay for a year's maternity leave and thus does not have the money to hire someone else to backfill.

7/28/2005 10:18:45 AM

pyrowebmastr
All American
1354 Posts
user info
edit post

Im with burromon on this

7/28/2005 10:53:50 AM

ddlakhan
All American
990 Posts
user info
edit post

this is an ubsurd idea... payment for not working.... i think this sums it up
Quote :
"Equal pay and superior benefits.... another way to fuck over the males..."


[Edited on July 28, 2005 at 11:06 AM. Reason : ...]

7/28/2005 11:06:32 AM

Woodfoot
All American
60354 Posts
user info
edit post

i'd say give it to them
but with the stipulation they can never, ever complain about glass ceilings or un-equal wages
ever again

7/28/2005 11:10:09 AM

Mr. Joshua
we want chilly willy
43926 Posts
user info
edit post

I say we promise them maternity leave, but then fire them as soon as they get knocked up and not call them back.

Of course, I have a long history of lying to women to get what I want.

7/28/2005 11:28:08 AM

SandSanta
All American
22435 Posts
user info
edit post

Good idea but I wouldn't want to implement something like this in the US.

Too man fatasses that would take a long time off to "take care" of kids.

7/28/2005 12:20:59 PM

TGD
All American
8912 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"AVON: Equal pay and superior benefits.... another way to fuck over the males..."

I was going to comment on this here, and how the feminists would never be able to achieve equal pay or "parity in the boardroom" if this went into effect. but then I saw Woodfoot...

Quote :
"Woodfoot: i'd say give it to them
but with the stipulation they can never, ever complain about glass ceilings or un-equal wages
ever again"

and can accomplish the same thing by just saying "Agreed"

[Edited on July 28, 2005 at 2:33 PM. Reason : ---]

7/28/2005 2:31:32 PM

cookiepuss
All American
3486 Posts
user info
edit post

you know there is such thing as paternity leave, right you guys?

oh wait, why look that up when i can pull out my JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS mat!

it's a mat with CONCLUSIONS that you can JUMP TO.

[Edited on July 28, 2005 at 2:45 PM. Reason : d]

7/28/2005 2:45:06 PM

Mr. Joshua
we want chilly willy
43926 Posts
user info
edit post

Goddammit cookiepuss, you're like a kid that walks into the middle of a movie with no frame of reference.

7/28/2005 3:25:18 PM

cookiepuss
All American
3486 Posts
user info
edit post

these guys are bitching about superior benefits when males can also take paternity leave. but they wouldn't know that because they just assume whatever they like.

7/28/2005 3:53:31 PM

Mr. Joshua
we want chilly willy
43926 Posts
user info
edit post

you just assume that they just assume whatever they like.

Paternity leave is much much less widespread than maternity leave.

7/28/2005 3:58:47 PM

cookiepuss
All American
3486 Posts
user info
edit post

clearly they do not realize or know that often men get the same benefits as women in these cases (but not necessarily in the US).

regardless of how widespread it is, it still exists, which means they are ignoring that men DO get equal benefits. But they would rather complain about how much women bitch about work.

7/28/2005 4:03:19 PM

Mr. Joshua
we want chilly willy
43926 Posts
user info
edit post

Well, yeah. Bitching about your job is the American way.

7/28/2005 4:07:44 PM

aaronburro
Sup, B
52220 Posts
user info
edit post

i'd be equally against paternity leave as I am against maternity leave

7/28/2005 5:49:04 PM

ddlakhan
All American
990 Posts
user info
edit post

exactly they both are retarded ideas.... if you cant afford to have the damn baby you shouldnt be having one...the more benefits you give to the person for free means that it has to be made up somewhere else and costs somebody else there free time and effort.

7/28/2005 11:01:18 PM

Patman
All American
5873 Posts
user info
edit post

I think companies that don't have some form of paid maternity leave should be forced to actually pay their taxes.

7/29/2005 10:40:20 AM

Patman
All American
5873 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
" if you cant afford to have the damn baby you shouldnt be having one..."


I agree on some level, but your comments seem to imply that most folks can't afford a baby and shouldn't have them. To say that is short sited would be an enormous understatement. Our society is making reproduction more and more difficult, with serious implications, Social Security being the least of which. Having (and raising) children is crucial to sustaining our freedom and way of life and anything the gov't can do to promote that will pay off ten-fold.

Most comments I've seen in this thread are with the mentality of max profit now with no vision of future investment.

7/29/2005 10:46:33 AM

aaronburro
Sup, B
52220 Posts
user info
edit post

how is our gov't making reproduction harder? yes, it is making RAISING the child hard, but thats all I can see they are doing w/ respect to children...

7/29/2005 5:26:09 PM

Patman
All American
5873 Posts
user info
edit post

society != gov't

7/29/2005 9:50:40 PM

aaronburro
Sup, B
52220 Posts
user info
edit post

the question still stands...

7/30/2005 8:44:15 PM

ddlakhan
All American
990 Posts
user info
edit post

we are by no means in danger of our species dying out, a few extra people not having babies isnt goin to hurt anything. this is not some massive problem b/c if it was then italy, which i assume ranks up there with the rest of europe wouldnt be having a negative pop. growth rate while we have a pos. one.

i realize that there are many other factors to this, and that is exactly my point this is not an issue that effects the rate at which we have children significantly and is only an issue, in my opinion, of fairness and equality among people.

7/31/2005 12:43:31 AM

pryderi
Suspended
26647 Posts
user info
edit post

Women should just have abortions, if they can't afford to take care of the baby.

7/31/2005 12:45:55 AM

ddlakhan
All American
990 Posts
user info
edit post

thats a personal choice.... it still leaves the previous issue untouched if they feel they would be sacrificing to much then yes, if not then no... but not be getting a free ride b/c they made a mistake. assuming its an accident.

7/31/2005 11:02:45 AM

moron
All American
33151 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
" exactly they both are retarded ideas.... if you cant afford to have the damn baby you shouldnt be having one...the more benefits you give to the person for free means that it has to be made up somewhere else and costs somebody else there free time and effort."


I bet you complain about outsourcing when the issue comes up, don't you?

7/31/2005 11:57:24 AM

ddlakhan
All American
990 Posts
user info
edit post

hell no cause, i believe in a company having the right to outsource. i believe in free markets. if a company of their own will decides to have maternity leave, to maybe attract employees or such, then they have the right to do it. i am more against this mandatory idea, where by companies in general are forced into this and the free market hasnt made it necessary.

7/31/2005 3:04:45 PM

 Message Boards » The Soap Box » Moms of Lesotho, Papua New Guinea,Swaziland and US Page [1]  
go to top | |
Admin Options : move topic | lock topic

© 2022 by The Wolf Web - All Rights Reserved.
The material located at this site is not endorsed, sponsored or provided by or on behalf of North Carolina State University.
Powered by CrazyWeb v2.38 - our disclaimer.