Moms are turning to crowdfunding to help pay for maternity leave

[Arianrhod]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

It's actually kind of liberating. When compensation is solely in the form of wages, it leaves each employee free to choose whatever 'benefits' are the most valuable to them. That might be vacation time, more money in their savings or family leave.

Sounds fascinating. And they're allowed to keep their jobs, too?

 

[dblack]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

It's actually kind of liberating. When compensation is solely in the form of wages, it leaves each employee free to choose whatever 'benefits' are the most valuable to them. That might be vacation time, more money in their savings or family leave.

Sounds fascinating. And they're allowed to keep their jobs, too?

Depends on what they've worked out with their employer, but this isn't an uncommon arrangement. When I worked as a sheet metal worker, the union voted to forgo paid vacation and sick leave in lieu of better wages. It worked out great. The people who wanted extra time off could have it, the people who wanted to maximize their income could do that. Of course, not all employees have that freedom. Unions, ironically, can opt out of the mandates imposed on other workforces and choose they benefits they want. It's not fair, but that's the kind of "some are more equal than others" bullshit our labor laws create.

 

[Arianrhod]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

It's actually kind of liberating. When compensation is solely in the form of wages, it leaves each employee free to choose whatever 'benefits' are the most valuable to them. That might be vacation time, more money in their savings or family leave.

Sounds fascinating. And they're allowed to keep their jobs, too?

Depends on what they've worked out with their employer, but this isn't an uncommon arrangement. When I worked as a sheet metal worker, the union voted to forgo paid vacation and sick leave in lieu of better wages. It worked out great. The people who wanted extra time off could have it, the people who wanted to maximize their income could do that. Of course, not all employees have that freedom. Unions, ironically, can opt out of the mandates imposed on other workforces and choose they benefits they want. It's not fair, but that's the kind of "some are more equal than others" bullshit our labor laws create.

Brave of you to say anything positive about unions on this board. Interesting thought...unionize all workers. It would eliminate a lot of the inequities. But since the pull from the RW is legislation to destroy unions and make all states "right to work" states, doesn't seem as if it would happen. Too bad.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

Paid maternity leave is not the same as vacation and sick days

You're absolutely right, though anyone who's walked the floor all night with a colicky neonate could tell you that. Then there are little things like post-cesarean recovery, the complications of a preemie who needs a stay in the NICU, etc.

Nothing vacationy about any of that.

P.S. For future reference, I stopped reading everything else in your post past "idiot." If you want civil discourse, you first need to be civil.

Fuck you.

 

[Arianrhod]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

Paid maternity leave is not the same as vacation and sick days

You're absolutely right, though anyone who's walked the floor all night with a colicky neonate could tell you that. Then there are little things like post-cesarean recovery, the complications of a preemie who needs a stay in the NICU, etc.

Nothing vacationy about any of that.

P.S. For future reference, I stopped reading everything else in your post past "idiot." If you want civil discourse, you first need to be civil.

Fuck you.

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

 

[dblack]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

It's actually kind of liberating. When compensation is solely in the form of wages, it leaves each employee free to choose whatever 'benefits' are the most valuable to them. That might be vacation time, more money in their savings or family leave.

Sounds fascinating. And they're allowed to keep their jobs, too?

Depends on what they've worked out with their employer, but this isn't an uncommon arrangement. When I worked as a sheet metal worker, the union voted to forgo paid vacation and sick leave in lieu of better wages. It worked out great. The people who wanted extra time off could have it, the people who wanted to maximize their income could do that. Of course, not all employees have that freedom. Unions, ironically, can opt out of the mandates imposed on other workforces and choose they benefits they want. It's not fair, but that's the kind of "some are more equal than others" bullshit our labor laws create.

Brave of you to say anything positive about unions on this board.

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

 

[Arianrhod]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners. I don't have to tell you this is not the case. Sometimes an intermediary is required. Again, in an ideal world, that would be your union negotiator. But as long as there are more workers than jobs, and corporate execs and their phalanx of lawyers call the shots, sometimes a third party with a big stick - and an awareness of the correlation between a strong corporate sector and a strong nation - has to step in and the guys with the private jets and remind them this ain't the 19th century anymore.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No employer should be compelled to pay people for not working. For whatever reason,

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

Paid maternity leave is not the same as vacation and sick days

You're absolutely right, though anyone who's walked the floor all night with a colicky neonate could tell you that. Then there are little things like post-cesarean recovery, the complications of a preemie who needs a stay in the NICU, etc.

Nothing vacationy about any of that.

P.S. For future reference, I stopped reading everything else in your post past "idiot." If you want civil discourse, you first need to be civil.

Fuck you.

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Oh so you read that despite your bullshit tender sensibilities?

FYI what you read or don't read is your problem not mine

 

[Arianrhod]

So you get no paid vacation/personal days at your job? That's unfortunate. But it does explain your envy of anyone who does.

Paid maternity leave is not the same as vacation and sick days

You're absolutely right, though anyone who's walked the floor all night with a colicky neonate could tell you that. Then there are little things like post-cesarean recovery, the complications of a preemie who needs a stay in the NICU, etc.

Nothing vacationy about any of that.

P.S. For future reference, I stopped reading everything else in your post past "idiot." If you want civil discourse, you first need to be civil.

Fuck you.

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Oh so you read that despite your bullshit tender sensibilities?

FYI what you read or don't read is your problem not mine

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Paid maternity leave is not the same as vacation and sick days

You're absolutely right, though anyone who's walked the floor all night with a colicky neonate could tell you that. Then there are little things like post-cesarean recovery, the complications of a preemie who needs a stay in the NICU, etc.

Nothing vacationy about any of that.

P.S. For future reference, I stopped reading everything else in your post past "idiot." If you want civil discourse, you first need to be civil.

Fuck you.

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Oh so you read that despite your bullshit tender sensibilities?

FYI what you read or don't read is your problem not mine

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Then stop giving etiquette lessons

 

[Arianrhod]

You're absolutely right, though anyone who's walked the floor all night with a colicky neonate could tell you that. Then there are little things like post-cesarean recovery, the complications of a preemie who needs a stay in the NICU, etc.

Nothing vacationy about any of that.

P.S. For future reference, I stopped reading everything else in your post past "idiot." If you want civil discourse, you first need to be civil.

Fuck you.

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Oh so you read that despite your bullshit tender sensibilities?

FYI what you read or don't read is your problem not mine

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Then stop giving etiquette lessons

In my view, some people are unteachable.

That said, what do you think about unions? A solution to the inequities the adults are discussing in this thread, or evil incarnate?

 

[dblack]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

 

[Arianrhod]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

 

[dblack]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

Corporatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dblack]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

Corporatism is interest-group politics, where power and privilege is distributed to factions based on political clout.

 

[Arianrhod]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

Corporatism is interest-group politics, where power and privilege is distributed to factions based on political clout.

I get that part. But it seems to me that unionizing workers would give them some power to negotiate with the people in the executive suite and mitigate the inequities. Otherwise you end up back in the 19th century.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

Corporatism is interest-group politics, where power and privilege is distributed to factions based on political clout.

I get that part. But it seems to me that unionizing workers would give them some power to negotiate with the people in the executive suite and mitigate the inequities. Otherwise you end up back in the 19th century.

It was BECAUSE of the working conditions in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that workers decided to form unions. Look up the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire sometime. It was because of that one incident that the garment unions were formed.

 

[dblack]

Unions are great. It's labor law that's all fucked up. There's no reasons union members should get special exemptions and privileges.

The point here is there's no justification to have outside parties dictating our benefits. Such negotiations should be a private matter between employers and those they hire.

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

Corporatism is interest-group politics, where power and privilege is distributed to factions based on political clout.

I get that part. But it seems to me that unionizing workers would give them some power to negotiate with the people in the executive suite and mitigate the inequities. Otherwise you end up back in the 19th century.

Nope.. all we can do is go forward in time. Again, what you long for is corporatism, and I'm adamantly opposed to it. Government should protect the rights of all individuals equally, regardless of which 'bargaining unit' they belong to.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Fuck you.

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Oh so you read that despite your bullshit tender sensibilities?

FYI what you read or don't read is your problem not mine

Thank you for your thoughtful, on-topic post.

Then stop giving etiquette lessons

In my view, some people are unteachable.

That said, what do you think about unions? A solution to the inequities the adults are discussing in this thread, or evil incarnate?

Who says I want to be taught anything by some anonymous message board participant?

And the title of the thread has nothing to do with unions

 

[Arianrhod]

Unfortunately, you're describing an ideal world in which workers en masse have equal power with business owners.

No, I'm not. I'm questioning the notion that some workers get special exemptions and protections, and some don't. Corporatism is wrong.

I'm not sure how your second sentence (with which I agree) follows from the first.

Corporatism is interest-group politics, where power and privilege is distributed to factions based on political clout.

I get that part. But it seems to me that unionizing workers would give them some power to negotiate with the people in the executive suite and mitigate the inequities. Otherwise you end up back in the 19th century.

Nope.. all we can do is go forward in time. Again, what you long for is corporatism, and I'm adamantly opposed to it. Government should protect the rights of all individuals equally, regardless of which 'bargaining unit' they belong to.

Where did you get the notion I'm pro-corporatist when virtually everything I post says the opposite?