Started By
Message

re: Maternity leave in the USA...

Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:27 am to
Posted by ForeverLSU02
Albany
Member since Jun 2007
52505 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:27 am to
quote:

assuming 2 weeks vacation
quote:

Which probably means she's getting 100% for 5 weeks
I'm not sure where the 5 weeks are coming from

She'll be getting 100% for her 2 weeks vacation
Posted by slackster
Houston
Member since Mar 2009
91302 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:28 am to
60% STD and 40% vacation. That is fairly standard. Spread the vacation out to fill in the gap for 5 weeks.
Posted by ForeverLSU02
Albany
Member since Jun 2007
52505 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:29 am to
Posted by cas4t
Member since Jan 2010
71992 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:29 am to
Bro you didn't know?? These bitches are gonna take their paid leave and then sail off into the sunset!!1 It's not like they even need their job after having a baby. And shite, applying for and interviewing for a new job isn't stressful; especially with a newborn!

I laughed pretty hard at the one guy who mentioned the cost of paying them 100% leave for 12 weeks. A new hire is fricking expensive.

Posted by cas4t
Member since Jan 2010
71992 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:31 am to
quote:

I'm sure you're not alone, particularly on this board, but your breed it is adying.



as it should be. The days of treating your employees like automated machines are over.

There was a time when Worker's Compensation wasn't mandatory. Henry Ford would fire you and tell you to not let the door hit you on the arse on your way out after losing a finger on the assembly line.
Posted by ForeverLSU02
Albany
Member since Jun 2007
52505 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:32 am to
quote:

Wow, that sucks. Does she plan on going back to that employer? I don't know how I could sleep at night if I were her boss.

Oh yeah she'll be going back. They're a decent sized company and I doubt they'd make an exception to her because that would set a precedent that they probably want to avoid. One good thing about the company is that she's allowed to bring the baby to work with her for the first 9 months of its life. Seems weird to me and I would hate to work in an office like that, but I'll take it in this case
Posted by Black n Gold
Member since Feb 2009
15822 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:32 am to
quote:

I laughed pretty hard at the one guy who mentioned the cost of paying them 100% leave for 12 weeks. A new hire is fricking expensive.


And a complete pain in the arse to train. Then there is the chance the new hire won't even like the position or company. There is also the 98% chance the existing women in the office won't like the new hire.
Posted by cas4t
Member since Jan 2010
71992 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:36 am to
All in all, if you work for a company with means (Progressive obviously falls into this) then we can assume the folks who built that company or are in hiring positions are smarter than the hard dicks on this board. It's common knowledge that good benefits and a comfortable working environment=loyal employees. Not to mention you get the pick of the litter in the talent pool.
Posted by ForeverLSU02
Albany
Member since Jun 2007
52505 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:36 am to
quote:

60% STD and 40% vacation. That is fairly standard. Spread the vacation out to fill in the gap for 5 weeks.

Ok. I think I'm following you now. My brain hasn't completely booted up this morning
Posted by cuyahoga tiger
NE Ohio via Tangipahoa
Member since Nov 2011
6102 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:36 am to
Yep, 100% pay for 12 weeks.
Posted by slackster
Houston
Member since Mar 2009
91302 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:37 am to
quote:

laughed pretty hard at the one guy who mentioned the cost of paying them 100% leave for 12 weeks. A new hire is fricking expensive. 



I agree with you that it is a great benefit to help retain good employees, but you're being shortsighted with respect to the cost for some companies. We have a branch manager who has been out for 8 weeks and still has 4 weeks to go and it has been a disaster at that branch in her absence. We'll be happy to have her back, and she deserves her time and pay, but filling the void for longer than that would be detrimental.

It has effectively put a halt to the advancement opportunities of the assistant branch manager for the foreseeable future.
Posted by cas4t
Member since Jan 2010
71992 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:37 am to
Congrats by the way. That's got to be an awesome feeling after trying for so long.
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
53509 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:38 am to
quote:

One good thing about the company is that she's allowed to bring the baby to work with her for the first 9 months of its life. Seems weird to me and I would hate to work in an office like that, but I'll take it in this case


That is awesome. One of the big stresses on new mothers is the idea of putting them in a daycare at 6 weeks old or 12 weeks old or whenever the time off runs out.
Posted by cuyahoga tiger
NE Ohio via Tangipahoa
Member since Nov 2011
6102 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:39 am to
quote:

Reading the OP, this is kid #6.


NO, my 3 children have produced 6 of my grandbabies.
Posted by Tigerpaw123
Louisiana
Member since Mar 2007
17747 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:39 am to
Why should I as an employer pay for someone to have children?
Posted by cuyahoga tiger
NE Ohio via Tangipahoa
Member since Nov 2011
6102 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:39 am to
quote:

Although he worded it weird, I believe he meant this is grandkid #6, not her sixth child.


Correct. 3 children, 6 grandbabies
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
53509 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:42 am to
quote:

Why should I as an employer pay for someone to have children?


Why should you as an employer pay for someone to take vacations, why should you as an employer pay for someone when they aren't working because of an injury, why should you as an employer pay a match for someone's retirement, why should you as an employer pay for health insurance?

Maybe because it is 2016, not 1916.
This post was edited on 4/15/16 at 9:43 am
Posted by Black n Gold
Member since Feb 2009
15822 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:42 am to
quote:

Why should I as an employer pay for someone to have children?


I am assuming this is a hypothetical question, because with a response like that, you would most likely be the guy that drives a business into the ground.
Posted by ForeverLSU02
Albany
Member since Jun 2007
52505 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:43 am to
Thanks man. We're starting to clean one of the spare rooms out now that we've been using for storage to convert into a nursery. We've started buying a few things already and each time I purchase something I get this giddy feeling.

I can't wait. Everyone tells me that it's life changing. I'm starting to feel it each time we go to the doctor. I can't wipe this damn shite eating grin off my face.

We're going to doctor next Friday and we'll have the opportunity to find out the sex, but we've decided that we're not going to find out. Needless to say next week's appointment should be interesting
Posted by cas4t
Member since Jan 2010
71992 posts
Posted on 4/15/16 at 9:43 am to
I won't deny that some companies can't afford to offer benefits like Progressive. It's a choice you make when job hunting.

But if your balance sheet forces you to make mothers use their vacation and STD time, you're going to have a hard time retaining women employees.
Jump to page
Page First 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 7 of 11Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram