I live in the USA and I get 3 weeks paternity.
I received 7 days paid time off when my wife had our children. It was not charged against my vacation time. I thought that was fair.
It seems like 3 mos of medical leave (short term disability) is pretty typical, and most companies will pay a percentage of your salary during short-term disability.
I worked one place, though, where you were given the standard 3 mos short term disability paid at 60 or 80% of your salary. You were forced to use up all your paid vacation first though (so you come back after having baby and have no paid time off!). but the kicker was that if the husband and the wife both worked for the company, they only were allowed 3 mos between the 2 of them - however they wanted to split it. That doesn’t seem fair IMO.
The thing with the family medical leave act is that the US government only requires that the company hold your position for you (or another position at a similar level) while you car for newborn, aging parents, other family circumstances. THe family medical leave act does NOT require that said person get paid for the time off. Many people take short term disability (which they pay into to begin with) to make up for the shortfall of salary while on leave whereas other countries have social plans in place to help offset the cost.
In the US it is completely up to the company’s discretion as to whether or not they want to contribute an additional portion of salary over and above short term disability. Sadly, it’s not universal and my old company (quite possibly because it was a smaller company) would give you the time off (as required by law) but wouldn’t pay you anything while gone.
So I have to agree - for a country (and government) which apparently places such a high value on “family values” - why isn’t there something in place to help cover the costs associated with maternal/paternal leave for a newborn?
I’m still trying to figure out why some one thinks they should have time paid off for having a kid, a tax break for having a kid yada yada yada… Seriously, if I want kids, should I have to pay for them? Shouldn’t I plan to create a scenario that is best for my children? Why is it that my employeer should take care of my kids, my government?
I think there is some merit to the discussion that these children will eventually benefit society in some way, however they may also be a detriment and if they turn out to be a benefit to society, more than likely they will be of great benefit to the parents first, then society.
Frankly I think it’s high time we start shifting the burden BACK onto the parents to raise their own kids rather than parents expecting that society take a larger and larger chunk of the load. If both parents have to work, then they should look for a job that allows them time off, time off as deemed by the job, not by the government. The market, as usual, will offer what that level of employee demands.
~Matt
Here ,Here I agree MJuric Do you want more of the fed.gov. in our lives.And as a small bussines owner I’m killed enough on taxes etc.Maybe Hillary will fix it for this guy like she tried to nationalize heath care years ago, please no.I know the system needs some work but keep the Feds out.LESS TAXES ,LESS GOVERNMENT
Gotta agree with Matt on this. People with kids get tax benefits yet already use more social services. They get paid better already at many jobs because they get more benefits i.e. their children’s health insurance is covered. In return they thank their employers with more sick days.
Dick
Australians get a “baby bonus” though, something around $7k.
What do you know in detail about alternative health care systems, there costs, the outcomes, life expectancies, medical error and medication error rates and how they compare to the US system? What do you know about the availability of new medications and techniques being practiced in alternative systems, how much experience and knowledge do you have of both the US and other systems in order to make an informed judgement?
You say the American system needs “some work”? you have poorer outcomes, higher costs, comparably similar error rates, enormous variation in the quality of care providing you can get coverage. If you cant obtain coverage or you can in an area where there is a sole provider all the previous statements are true but the costs are higher and the outcomes poorer.
So which part of the system particularly do you think needs “some work”? Is it the 100,000 people a year being killed by medical error or the further 100,000 being killed by medication error, or is it that the cost per person is higher in the US than systems with comparably better outcomes per dollar spent in other systems. Which part specifically do you think needs “some work” to improve the system and do you think that a private company (the insurer and there brokers) / industry are really interested in improving outcomes because to do so means that they “lose” more money by paying out on claims.
So come on, tell me what is so attractive about a system for which there is enormous amounts of evidence is failing its consumers, both those that are covered and those that are not.
Im not a doctor , Im the doctor from Steely Dans ,“Dr.Wu”.I was talking about maternity leave not medical error.But you do bring up some good points.I agree the system failing,and Im in excellent health now and getting priced out system soon,I have now been forced to sign up with the VA system as a last resort,Im a Veteran.
Ken, it sounds like you are taking my advice and planning to make a baby or three with your new bride. I am glad to hear it, but you are a very prosperous person and you do live in the most prosperous country on Earth in the most prosperous time in the history of mankind so I would really like you to just suck it up and pay for your own damn time off. Stop whining to the government to give you what you want since they can only do that by first taking it from you and everyone else.
Ya know, China has a pretty good, if not unique solution, to this issue. You could always give that a try.
I’m still trying to figure out why some one thinks they should have time paid off for having a kid, a tax break for having a kid yada yada yada…<<
Exactly!
Oh my, have you stopped to breath yet?
Umm lets see. Welfare, SS, Medicare, WIC are designed to help people who would not otherwise have food, medical care or housing. I would hope that people reproducing while employed have these things. Of course you’re assuming that everyone in Irag, Iran, Russia, Yemen and Honduras are employed @ oh let’s say 50% of the income of the average american worker.
“Pay for your own leave”. No actually I don’t believe it is either elitist or insulting. Many people are either unable to, or have life situations that force them to go childless. Should their unfortunate or responsible position be further insulted by having to subsidize the breeders of the world? If you want to argue for more equitable pay for lower and middle-income people of this nation then I think that includes people who are not reproducing. I’m not sure why the urge to populate an already over populated world entitles people to special privileges. Honestly if you’re trying to get by on 8/hr I would suggest reconsidering the decision to produce and support another human being.
I think not having paid leave for one segment of the population might say “hey, we respect all of our citizens right to make their own family building choices but we chose not to discriminate against those that are not contributing to overpopulation”. Now if you want to argue for paid leave for all workers I would have more respect for your position.
Best of luck on $8/hr.
I agree that the the lower income class needs a wage rage. But, they also get free lunch, school fee waived, midicaid card, link card (food card), etc. To top it off, what costs me $125/wk (nice daycare) costs them $1 through a state-run program AND their kids go to the top of the waiting list.
I’m not sure where I stand on the “paid materinity leave” type of thing, and I don’t know how it affects other aspects of the company, etc.
I tend to be more on the side of Matt, etc … in that the gov’t is already taking on WAY more responsibility than it should for people. The more our govnernment does, the less it can do well (seriously).
So, when we’re talking about this group of people, just who is providing for them (described above), and for just how many families does that prevent them from finding a higher-paying job, or for both parents working, or reporting their actual income, etc?
I think companies can/should offer paid leave based on whether they want to or not, as means of keeping the most talented and highly-trained people at their company. There’s their incentive. The low SES folks are likely working jobs where they can be replaced in 2 weeks. I don’t think business necessarily have the same incentive to pay them for 6 weeks maternity, and I’m not sure how many of them would come back to a low-paying job once they have to pay out for childcare, etc. I’m even more certain that I don’t want the government to write checks for people staying home with infants.
I’d like more information on to how this actually works and what the actual affects are and how comparable other country’s societies are to ours.
Hmm, I thought you were suggesting paid maternity/paternity leave for people that have a child. Did I misunderstand? Is this leave available for people who are not having/adopting/fostering a child?
Then you are talking about mandatory leave that’s another thread IMO. And just curious who’s going to provide that for the self employed? Do you really think that the domestic workers of honduras get a paid 6 week leave/year at the inconceivable cost of 180/leave (5$/dayx6days/week/6week). Cuz that does sound much, much cushier than being an American.
Dick
That is what I’m suggesting.
You already get that with vacation time, sick time, and the various PTO (Paid Time Off) programs offered by most jobs. Now you want your company to pay you to take time off when you have kids? The Family Medical Leave Act allows you to use paid leave like vacation time in as part of your 12 weeks of allotted time, so if you save your vacation time, you can get most or all of it paid for anyway.
Agreed. Maybe prospective parents should take this into consideration before choosing to have a child.
Now if you want to argue for paid leave for all workers I would have more respect for your position.
That is what I’m suggesting.
And are you’re suggesting that this is a burden that should be placed on employers?
I think he’s talking about"socialism",Hillary is your guy,I mean gal.