FMLA: Once again America is rather behind the times

[snake]

Just popping in to link an article that refers to a recent study that links the benefits of maternity leave with the health of children and mothers and therefore benefits society.

Article.

Will look for a study that gives the negative effects of having paid maternity leave and I do not mean some op-ed piece.

[Swordfish]

Swordfish,

Is this not about giving women not merely maternity leave, but paid maternity leave -- and not eight weeks but twelve? So the "both" option is both child and livelihood/career.

The point is, you haven't proven that 12 weeks paid is superior in any quantifiable way, other than to proclaim it to be so.

On it's face, the notion that a few extra weeks of paid maternity leave somehow levels the employment playing field is at best a stretch, and at worst borderline ridiculous.

The pretending bit is about pretending that it's not our option to permit a woman to choose both child and career.

It's our option to do whatever we want. Some of us would prefer that there be a tangible benefit in return for the associated costs.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Rates of pre-term delivery were lower among female factory workers in France if the women took antenatal leave, and a study conducted in several industrialized countries found that paid leave, but not unpaid leave, significantly decreased low birthweight rates.

This is what I'm talking about. Here is a study pointing to difference between paid and unpaid leave. However, this study points to pre-birth leave, not post. Also, I don't see a benefit to society that would justify the huge cost and moral hazard of such a program.

[snake]

Well, here's a study done in New Zealand and Australia that looks at post-birth.

Article.

Just a highlight from the study.

Respondents with no or limited access to paid parental leave perceived an imperative to return quickly to full-time employment. This employment transition was generally perceived as premature and as having adverse personal consequences (e.g., personal health, child attachment, and breast-feeding) and organisational consequences (e.g., diminished job commitment and increased turnover intentions).

I'm still looking for a study on the negative aspects of maternity leave.

[snake]

Yet another web page but this one does talk of negative effects.

Link.

Some quotes.

Ruhm and Teague (1995) considered the macroeconomic outcomes associated with the provision of parental leave, using data from Europe and North America. Entitlements to lengthy periods of parental leave tend to be associated with negative labour market outcomes.

In contrast, short to moderate periods of leave are strongly positively correlated with both employment and income.

He found that parental leave entitlements substantially reduce post-neonatal and early childhood mortality. A 10-week extension decreases expected post-neonatal deaths by 4.5 to 6.6 % and child fatalities by between 2.6 and 3.1%.

The data also strongly suggested that women pay for greater leave entitlement by accepting lower earnings. Ruhm predicted wage reductions ranging from 1.5% to 3% for laws that mandate parental leave periods of 6 months or more.

So long maternity leaves could have a negative impact while short to moderate maternity leaves could be beneficial.

[Shryke]

And you're not really understanding the concept.

The people who are doing it (whatever the good idea is) are getting tired of paying for the people who are not doing it.

Get used to it. You pay for the stupid decisions of others all the time, one way or the other.

[RWHamel]

I've never heard anything from other men about this issue, but I've had 3 women who were, or are, managers tell me that they won't hire woman who they think might want to get pregnant, because, as one put it, "the maternity leave issue is a pain." So, I figure thousands of young young have trouble getting a job because of this, and there's a sure bet small companies are especially biased.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Get used to it. You pay for the stupid decisions of others all the time, one way or the other.

So because some stupid decisions are on the bill we should add more? Should we also provide paid leave to people who break their arms skiing? To people who burn their house down trying to light their farts?

[Trebla]

This topic probably belongs in here.

a school teacher was terminated while she is battling leukemia. She's been off before so if it's anything like Illinois, she can't take FMLA again within a year. The employer can they fire you without fear of the Americans with Disability act since it has been gutted. And I'm not talking paying her sick leave. This is her not being able to hold onto her job.

Teacher terminated

So lemme guess, was it her lifestyle that caused the cancer? Her fault she didn't have a year's savings?

I guess she should have done more cardio!! :lol:

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

As one of the recently hired teachers at Smyth Road Elementary School, Robator knew she was at risk for being cut, talking about the situation in a May 31 phone interview with CNN. Robator is one of a slate of 78 teachers that the area school board decided to lay off in early May, according to media reports out of New Hampshire.

So they had to lay off 78 teachers, and one of the ones they laid off was a (relatively) new employee who hadn't been coming to work anyway, and likely wouldn't be for some time. Should they have instead fired an active teacher in her stead, and continued to hold the space open while the kids went uneducated for lack of a teacher?

[Guest Raidne]

Yet another web page but this one does talk of negative effects.

Link.

Some quotes.

So long maternity leaves could have a negative impact while short to moderate maternity leaves could be beneficial.

I've never met a German who didn't bitch about the amount of parental leave offered there. I think there are definitely limits on what should be offered.

I've never heard anything from other men about this issue, but I've had 3 women who were, or are, managers tell me that they won't hire woman who they think might want to get pregnant, because, as one put it, "the maternity leave issue is a pain." So, I figure thousands of young young have trouble getting a job because of this, and there's a sure bet small companies are especially biased.

That's why it should be parental leave, and men should feel as free to take it as women.

So because some stupid decisions are on the bill we should add more? Should we also provide paid leave to people who break their arms skiing? To people who burn their house down trying to light their farts?

Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but you do already. As an insurance agent told a friend of mine recently "we pay stupid."

And that, often, is what government is - mandatory insurance. Mandatory cost-sharing.

[RWHamel]

Hopefully, when they are hiring again and she is well, she can return to her passion. I am sure that since she was a good employee, the school will happily re-hire her when she's able to work and they have an open position.

Yes, because Universal Health Care will take care of her while she's out of work. Oh,..... wait a minute......that's right we don't have that here.

[Joanna vander Poele]

Because her family will take care of her while she's out of work. It's the system we have in place, here in the US. No need to overdose on the sarcasm. Also, "coworkers, students and parents helped to organize a blood drive in her name, advertised on the school's front door, and are planning a Relay-for-Life event".

What about people who don't have that kind of support?

[Shryke]

The odds favor bankruptcy either way.

[RWHamel]

What about people who don't have that kind of support?

You're SOL kid. Not only that, it becomes a pre-exitsting condition, so good luck on getting future health insurance. There is the Cobra program, but it doesn't last very long, and in most cases, is too expensive.

[Trebla]

So they had to lay off 78 teachers, and one of the ones they laid off was a (relatively) new employee who hadn't been coming to work anyway, and likely wouldn't be for some time. Should they have instead fired an active teacher in her stead, and continued to hold the space open while the kids went uneducated for lack of a teacher?

They should have held her a position because she got sick. You say she's missing work like she's playing hooky while she goes shopping. And something tells me they could have found her a position when she come back. My former employer did it numerous times when it was someone the HR manager wanted to keep.

and RWH is dead-on with the pre-existing condition, because why should honest hard-working people pay for something when it should bankrupt the sick person and their family. 'Course, again, that person should have lived a better life so they wouldn't get sick. :P

Oh and on happily re-hiring. :lol: She has a "history" of missing work, right?

[Guest Raidne]

To the libertarians and similar types - what if it was demonstrable that providing parental leave ultimately resulted in lost profits for the company. Even taking into account the costs of retraining a replacement employee and whatever else. Should publicly held companies still be able to choose to have parental leave?

[litechick]

I have two kids. My wife took 12 weeks off for each of them, part of it unpaid (I don't remember the amount of weeks). It depended on how many days of vacation she had saved up (ie Insurance paid for x amount of days, then she took "vacation", then she took unpaid days until the 12 week time was up). When we got pregnant the first time, we sat down and figured out our finances. How much we had, how much we needed to save, decided if we could afford to stay in our current house and still pay for daycare, etc. So we tightened out belts and made it happen.

I love this paragraph. I think too often people get away with saying 'I can't afford it' like budget is some concrete thing in which choices play no part. Thousands of choices go into any given situation.

[Watcher]

Snake posted a couple of the studies that I've heard about on the benefits of having paid maternity leave. This is a study done on California bill that would've mandated paid maternity leave for employees in that state.

The report was examining:

In this report, researchers conduct a cost benefit analysis of one such piece of legislation, SB 1661, introduced in the California legislature in February 2002. This legislation expands the state’s existing State Disability Insurance (SDI) system. The current SDI system already provides partial paid family and medical leave, providing employees 55-60 percent wage replacement when they take leave to recover from a non-workplace-related serious illness, including pregnancy- and birth-related disabilities. SB 1661 would extend this family and medical leave insurance system to allow employees 50-60 percent wage replacement when they take up to 12 weeks of leave to care for a newborn or newly adopted child or for a seriously ill family member.

Their key findings include:

California companies could save $89 million under a paid family leave program due to increased employee retention and decreased turn-over;

The State of California could save $25 million annually, due to decreased reliance on assistance programs, including TANF and Food Stamps. Many individuals currently turn to these programs when taking unpaid leave causes them financial hardship

.

Because her family will take care of her while she's out of work. It's the system we have in place, here in the US.

It's a good thing she got lucky in the family lotto. Because it's a shitty system for people like me who doesn't have any family members that would be willing to take care of me if I become seriously ill. What are my options?

[Shryke]

It's a good thing she got lucky in the family lotto. Because it's a shitty system for people like me who doesn't have any family members that would be willing to take care of me if I become seriously ill. What are my options?

This + This