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

[LordBrownTrout]

I identify as a new mother.

You can do that now, Nola. Who's to question or judge you if youre a man wanting to be a woman carrying a baby.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

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

You're damned right. She needs to be clocking back in 24 hours after that baby is crowning.

Maybe if there also was a father, she could take time off, without stealing money from others via government...

Ah, but that would require having some respect towards the children. We can't afford that as regressives! That is rather clear as the person thinks that the maternity leave should be expanded to women without children (absolutely ridiculous). I bet she thinks your kids should be on the hook for her retirement too. Classic loser personality.

Let using kids as ATMs continue!

Well....where did the father go?

 

[BlueGin]

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

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

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

Even Starbucks.

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

Most corporations offer paid leave.

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

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

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

Evil corporations.

 

[Care4all]

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

The negatives on a basic maternity benefit comes with tiny/small mom and pop businesses, who are unable to sell a lot of items/merchandise to spread the cost of maternity benefits, and making the price of the mom and pop's goods not competitive enough to sell them at the same turn rate...basically pricing them out of the market, that they were already close to being priced out of due to not being able to buy bulk discounted goods out of China, Viet Man, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil, Korea, the Philippines, Taiwan etc that the corps I worked for or the Wal-Mart's of the world can do.

Well, so much for the Morality aspect... it's only a good idea if you can afford it? According to some on this board, that shouldn't matter. You know, nutters like Paulie. Everyone is obligated to suffer so someone else is comfy.

Maybe there are some things that could be written in to the tax code, like double the deduction for a pregnant woman's yearly salary for the small businesses which could help in getting us there... "there" as in getting our Nation to the point of all other westernized nations that care about their nation's future, which lies with the children born today? This simply would allow these businesses to "keep their own money" as many on the right aisle claim....No?

Then you'll get he cries from those without children about how mothers are "getting" things from the government. Like they do about the home mortgage deduction.

My husband and I were never able to have children, and we own our house paid for by hard earned income saved a penny at a time and profit from investments, so no mortgage write off for us and we pay property tax for the education of every one else's children's education...but we do not mind at all....we know that those who were able to have children, are blessed, and honestly have the future of our Nation in their hands...

We have become too much of a me, me, me society imho....and not those that need some help for such a big, important job as being parents to our Nation's future drs, lawyers, chiefs and future parents to the next generation of children, Americans. ....but those that bitch about being single without children and having to do something...to help their nation's future.

 

[Care4all]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[SwimExpert]

It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation

You are sorely mistaken. Pricing is based on setting maximum profitability based on the balance willingness to buy. Nobody is going to increase prices by 10% if it will result in a volume decrease that will erase the higher margin. And nobody is going to leave a price at a certain level when a higher price could be achieved without significant loss of consumption volume. What you are claiming is as short sighted and uninformed as the morons on the conservative side who claim that raising the minimum wage will result in $20 Big Macs. Only difference is that you're supposed to be intelligent.

and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Which, of course, means that men are inferior and less important parents. Yeah, not sexist at all. We're going to end this little back and forth here, because you're getting real close to pissing me off with your sexist bullshit.

 

[Anathema]

A report on the State of the World’s Mothers notes that the U.S. has the “least generous maternity leave policy of any wealthy nation.” American women are resigning in numbers that far outpace men, in part for reasons of motherhood. Where is the best place to be a mother? Not the U.S.""""

American women are supposed to understand their place is in tbe kitchen, NOT THE BOARD ROOM .

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

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

I'm not a Libertarian.

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

 

[thereisnospoon]

Right wingers really are primitive, greedy, miserly and regressive.



The smart economics of Norway’s parental leave, and why the U.S. should consider it
The smart economics of Norway’s parental leave, and why the U.S. should consider it

""""In Norway, parents are entitled to 46 weeks at full salary, or 56 weeks at 80 percent pay. In France, I had four months of paid maternity leave, plus an additional paid month for breastfeeding (not to mention the nice cheese selection in the maternity ward and the fully-covered ‘re-education’ sessions for my nether regions). Both Norway and France also offer highly-subsidized early child care.

Had I stayed at my federal government job in Washington, D.C., I would have had zero paid maternity leave. I would have had to apply for “disability” pay – capped at four weeks, and unpaid. What incentive did this provide for me to start my family in my mother country?

A report on the State of the World’s Mothers notes that the U.S. has the “least generous maternity leave policy of any wealthy nation.” American women are resigning in numbers that far outpace men, in part for reasons of motherhood. Where is the best place to be a mother? Not the U.S.""""

Norway's standard of living compared to other countries? Top ten regardless of which source you refer to.
Standard of Living by Country

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[thereisnospoon]

Right wingers really are primitive, greedy, miserly and regressive.



The smart economics of Norway’s parental leave, and why the U.S. should consider it
The smart economics of Norway’s parental leave, and why the U.S. should consider it

""""In Norway, parents are entitled to 46 weeks at full salary, or 56 weeks at 80 percent pay. In France, I had four months of paid maternity leave, plus an additional paid month for breastfeeding (not to mention the nice cheese selection in the maternity ward and the fully-covered ‘re-education’ sessions for my nether regions). Both Norway and France also offer highly-subsidized early child care.

Had I stayed at my federal government job in Washington, D.C., I would have had zero paid maternity leave. I would have had to apply for “disability” pay – capped at four weeks, and unpaid. What incentive did this provide for me to start my family in my mother country?

A report on the State of the World’s Mothers notes that the U.S. has the “least generous maternity leave policy of any wealthy nation.” American women are resigning in numbers that far outpace men, in part for reasons of motherhood. Where is the best place to be a mother? Not the U.S.""""

Norway's standard of living compared to other countries? Top ten regardless of which source you refer to.
Standard of Living by Country

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

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

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

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

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

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

Biology dictates our place in life.
Only because people like you insist on it; maybe in your next life you'll come back as a woman and be taught a few important life lessons you have missed up to now.

Spare me the feminist nonsense.
You know exactly to which I am referring. Or maybe you're too thick that you don't.
Not my problem. And I am not going to take the time to explain it to you. You can shove the political correctness.

 

[SwimExpert]

You can shove the political correctness.

Shove it where?

 

[thereisnospoon]

You can shove the political correctness.

Shove it where?

HUH?.......

 

[SwimExpert]

You can shove the political correctness.

Shove it where?

HUH?.......

NVM

 

[Care4all]

It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation

You are sorely mistaken. Pricing is based on setting maximum profitability based on the balance willingness to buy. Nobody is going to increase prices by 10% if it will result in a volume decrease that will erase the higher margin. And nobody is going to leave a price at a certain level when a higher price could be achieved without significant loss of consumption volume. What you are claiming is as short sighted and uninformed as the morons on the conservative side who claim that raising the minimum wage will result in $20 Big Macs. Only difference is that you're supposed to be intelligent.

and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Which, of course, means that men are inferior and less important parents. Yeah, not sexist at all. We're going to end this little back and forth here, because you're getting real close to pissing me off with your sexist bullshit.

The corporation does not need to price the goods 10% more, maybe 1/10th or 1/100th of 1%..... it's unnoticeable....and the payback with smart, qualified, happy employees produces MORE for them, more for the corporation year after year.

 

[initforme]

Employees owe their employee no more than showing up and being g productive. A smart employee is not, repeat, not loyal to their employer and they do not go into work thinking they want to help the company. Its all about a paycheck nothing more. To top that off, they are always looking to leave the split second a better offer is on the table. No 2 weeks notice, nothing. Tell em to stick it. You owe your employer the requirements of the job. That's it. No more. Words to live by.

 

[Norman]

It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation

You are sorely mistaken. Pricing is based on setting maximum profitability based on the balance willingness to buy. Nobody is going to increase prices by 10% if it will result in a volume decrease that will erase the higher margin. And nobody is going to leave a price at a certain level when a higher price could be achieved without significant loss of consumption volume. What you are claiming is as short sighted and uninformed as the morons on the conservative side who claim that raising the minimum wage will result in $20 Big Macs. Only difference is that you're supposed to be intelligent.

and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Which, of course, means that men are inferior and less important parents. Yeah, not sexist at all. We're going to end this little back and forth here, because you're getting real close to pissing me off with your sexist bullshit.

The corporation does not need to price the goods 10% more, maybe 1/10th or 1/100th of 1%..... it's unnoticeable....and the payback with smart, qualified, happy employees produces MORE for them, more for the corporation year after year.

Is this the liberal regressive giving business advice again? The one that couldn't run a lemonade stand?

Ah thanks for your advice. But, actually no thanks, you would bankrupt any business in matter of seconds. What on earth makes you think you are qualified to give any advice to anyone? You are a loser bum, remember?

The arrogance of the regressive...

 

[SwimExpert]

The corporation does not need to price the goods 10% more, maybe 1/10th or 1/100th of 1%..... it's unnoticeable....and the payback with smart, qualified, happy employees produces MORE for them, more for the corporation year after year.

You realize that makes no sense, right? I mean, it's a fun thing to say hypothetically, I suppose. But in a real world application is falls apart. Let's consider some actual math....

Let's imagine that your company sells widgets at $1 a piece. One one hundredth of a percent doesn't even exist. There is no denomination for $.00001 in our money system.

Your company would have to be selling widgets of at least $100 to be able to add 1/100 of a percent. And it would come out to be exactly one penny. So your claim is that your company retails widgets for $100.01 a piece. Show me one thing in this world that retails at $100.01!

Maybe your company is selling high end widgets at $10,000 a piece. Your claim then means that your company has increased the price of widgets to $10,010. You really want us to believe that a company selling to a high end clientele is insulting its clients by trying to nickel-and-dime them for an extra $10 on a widget? You really think the clientele would tolerate that kind of pettiness?

Try again.

 

[Care4all]

It was built in to the price of the product....just like all compensation

You are sorely mistaken. Pricing is based on setting maximum profitability based on the balance willingness to buy. Nobody is going to increase prices by 10% if it will result in a volume decrease that will erase the higher margin. And nobody is going to leave a price at a certain level when a higher price could be achieved without significant loss of consumption volume. What you are claiming is as short sighted and uninformed as the morons on the conservative side who claim that raising the minimum wage will result in $20 Big Macs. Only difference is that you're supposed to be intelligent.

and no, it's not sexist...you can't bear a child through labor....you can't breast feed....

Which, of course, means that men are inferior and less important parents. Yeah, not sexist at all. We're going to end this little back and forth here, because you're getting real close to pissing me off with your sexist bullshit.

The corporation does not need to price the goods 10% more, maybe 1/10th or 1/100th of 1%..... it's unnoticeable....and the payback with smart, qualified, happy employees produces MORE for them, more for the corporation year after year.

Is this the liberal regressive giving business advice again? The one that couldn't run a lemonade stand?

Ah thanks for your advice. But, actually no thanks, you would bankrupt any business in matter of seconds. What on earth makes you think you are qualified to give any advice to anyone? You are a loser bum, remember?

The arrogance of the regressive...

You are quite ignorant, eh? Corporations have already decided it was in their best interest to provide good benefits for their employees, most all of them do this....it's the mom and pops that have trouble competing with them and the benefits offered by them.

I don't see corporations failing and going bankrupt simply because they offer good benefits, do you?

So who's really the ill-informed loser, you, or me?

 

[Care4all]

The corporation does not need to price the goods 10% more, maybe 1/10th or 1/100th of 1%..... it's unnoticeable....and the payback with smart, qualified, happy employees produces MORE for them, more for the corporation year after year.

You realize that makes no sense, right? I mean, it's a fun thing to say hypothetically, I suppose. But in a real world application is falls apart. Let's consider some actual math....

Let's imagine that your company sells widgets at $1 a piece. One one hundredth of a percent doesn't even exist. There is no denomination for $.00001 in our money system.

Your company would have to be selling widgets of at least $100 to be able to add 1/100 of a percent. And it would come out to be exactly one penny. So your claim is that your company retails widgets for $100.01 a piece. Show me one thing in this world that retails at $100.01!

Maybe your company is selling high end widgets at $10,000 a piece. Your claim then means that your company has increased the price of widgets to $10,010. You really want us to believe that a company selling to a high end clientele is insulting its clients by trying to nickel-and-dime them for an extra $10 on a widget? You really think the clientele would tolerate that kind of pettiness?

Try again.

you are being ridiculously infantile just to try to make your point, and obviously have no experience in how retail prices are chosen/created....

Corporations/Businesses have a planned initial mark up that their management needs to achieve each season in order to be profitable once said and done....

This initial mark up covers a multitude of known estimated expenses of the overall company, the cost of goods & keeping competitive retails that are at the forefront as well when choosing their retail price.

What you are missing is that each item is not priced at the initial mark up they need to achieve...each item is priced at what it can retail for at the acceptable turn over rate...(sales rate)

Let's say your initial mark up on your seasonally offered goods needs to be a modest 60% mark up, in order to come out profitable in the end....

Some items they may price at a 65% initial mark up, but other items might need to be priced at around a 55% mark up because they a going on sale all the time by your competitors and you need to be sharper on your retail price point to compete....

There is no $101, or $10010 that you have given in your example... there is no taking 1 benefit at a time to calculate in to your retail price at a corporation....you know on the WHOLE of what benefits/labor costs you, along with all other expenses...and work your planned initial mark up to get your retails from there for the overall business, so to be profitable in the end.

I can go in to further detail if you would like, but it would be rather boring...

 

[SwimExpert]

[QUOTE="Care4all, post: 14148635, member: 4748"you are being ridiculously infantile just to try to make your point, and obviously have no experience in how retail prices are chosen/created....[/QUOTE]

1 - Since when is math infantile? You're the one who made the claim. Instead of railing against mathematical facts maybe you should open your mind and realize that your hypothesis just doesn't make much sense.

2 - I've operated my own sideline business for about 10 years. I happen to know a thing or two about setting prices.