Americans may finally get paid maternity leave like in all other developed countries

[Arcade22]

Quote:

President Trump’s budget proposal next week will include a new benefit for America’s working parents, one Democrats have long championed and Republicans have long opposed: paid family leave.

The president’s first detailed budget request on Tuesday will seek funds for the creation of a program to grant mothers and fathers six weeks of paid leave after the birth or adoption of a child, two senior White House budget office officials said.

The proposal for a family leave program was one of the few relatively large ticket items in a budget which is expected to contain sweeping reductions in spending on nondefense measures.

...

The United States is the only developed country that does not guarantee new mothers or fathers a single day of paid time off. Trump’s proposals would change that, but the six weeks of paid leave would still be much less than other industrialized countries.

Under the Trump administration proposals, states would be required to run their own programs, unless they already have one in place. So far, only California, Rhode Island and New Jersey offer new parents the benefit, which is financed through temporary disability insurance programs. New York and Washington, D.C., have approved measures that start taking effect next year.

“The states would have a big stake in it,” said one of the White House officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe a program that had not yet been formally proposed. “They could help design the program.”

As of today, workers in the United States can take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave after a birth, as long as they’ve worked at a company that employs at least 50 people for a year.

A little more than half of American companies already offer the benefit: 58 percent replace at least some wages during maternity leave, and 12 percent cover some leave for dads.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...er-trump-plan/

Here's a image showcasing how utterly pathetic the US is regarding supporting working women compared to developed and even many developing countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F...by_country.gif

[logger]

Hail to the nanny state.

[twinstead]

Originally Posted by logger

Hail to the nanny state.

So screw 'em, huh? Pop those babies out and get back to work!

[logger]

Originally Posted by twinstead

So screw 'em, huh? Pop those babies out and get back to work!

We've been doing it for centuries! We aren't socialists like your side.

What has changed? Oh wait, we're raising pussys now, I forgot. And why not when a person can get the government to steal it for them. Its thievery and the left as usual are thieves.

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by logger

We've been doing it for centuries! We aren't socialists like your side.

What has changed? Oh wait, we're raising pussys now, I forgot. And why not when a person can get the government to steal it for them. Its thievery and the left as usual are thieves.

That's right, there is only money for missiles we will never use, and tax cuts for those needy 1 percenters.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by twinstead

So screw 'em, huh? Pop those babies out and get back to work!

Yes, and the sooner, the better! Because I'm covering your workload on top of my own while you're gone. I'm not even getting an additional six week's paid leave to indulge my hobbies, to show for it.

[logger]

Originally Posted by acbytesla

That's right, there is only money for missiles we will never use and tax cuts for those needy 1 percenters.

Yeah sure, because that's reality. No safety net in this country, its a safety hammock.


Can't wait till the threads pop up about paying everyone a living wage whether they want to work or not.

[logger]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Yes, and the sooner, the better! Because I'm covering your workload on top of my own while you're gone. I'm not even getting an additional six week's paid leave to indulge my hobbies, to show for it.

Yep, as a business owner, I get nothing, just told by the government what I have to do to wipe people's asses.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by logger

Yep, as a business owner, I get nothing, just told by the government what I have to do to wipe people's asses.

And I work for a company that has paid family leave. It seems like something people are able to navigate without government interference.

[mgidm86]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

And I work for a company that has paid family leave. It seems like something people are able to navigate without government interference.

There ya go. Companies can provide paid leave if they want to, and can afford to. Choosing to have a child and how to take care of it are decisions for parents to make. Remember when having a choice was a good thing?

We don't need to encourage people to have children anymore. People who do not have kids should get tax breaks (if anyone should) not the other way around. Where are my freebies for choosing not to have a child?

You can't compare our health system with other countries because it's apples and oranges. Their entire economy is set up different than ours and what works there may not work here.

Why should an employer be responsible for anything other than a paycheck? Company health care used to be a perk, now it's becoming a requirement. I don't see the rationale behind that.

[Dr. Keith]

This doesn't seem to be playing well with local Trump supporters. Hmm.

[p0lka]

Its a step in the right direction.

[p0lka]

Originally Posted by mgidm86

There ya go. Companies can provide paid leave if they want to, and can afford to. Choosing to have a child and how to take care of it are decisions for parents to make. Remember when having a choice was a good thing?

We don't need to encourage people to have children anymore. People who do not have kids should get tax breaks (if anyone should) not the other way around. Where are my freebies for choosing not to have a child?

You can't compare our health system with other countries because it's apples and oranges. Their entire economy is set up different than ours and what works there may not work here.

Why should an employer be responsible for anything other than a paycheck? Company health care used to be a perk, now it's becoming a requirement. I don't see the rationale behind that.

because you are gaining a profit out of the workers, and they are more than just cogs in a wheel.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by p0lka

because you are gaining a profit out of the workers, and they are more than just cogs in a wheel.

And the employees gain what they negotiated their labor as worth.

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

And the employees gain what they negotiated their labor as worth.

Never mind that the employer almost always has a huge advantage in them.

[Cleon]

Huh, for once the phrase "nanny state" might actually apply.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Well if it is in a President's budget proposal, it definitely is going to happen. /s

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by p0lka

because you are gaining a profit out of the workers, and they are more than just cogs in a wheel.

What exactly do you imagine the paycheck is for? Do you not understand how money works?

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Never mind that the employer almost always has a huge advantage in them.

Either party can walk. Neither side is going to agree to a deal that makes them worse off.

You sound like Trump and his trade policy where win win deals are bad because he somehow isnt "winning."

[shuize]

My father is getting ready to close the family business in California. He's older so it's probably time. But he said he would have liked to have kept it open and managed the workers in semi-retirement. Problem is, he said, with all the extras the state required, most of the workers just weren't worth the added cost and hassle.

He usually employed two to three workers. Now he'll just enjoy his retirement.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by shuize

My father is getting ready to close the family business in California. He's older so it's probably time. But he said he would have liked to have kept it open and managed the workers in semi-retirement. Problem is, he said, with all the extras the state required, most of the workers just weren't worth the added cost and hassle.

He usually employed two to three workers. Now he'll just enjoy his retirement.

Where does it say businesses will pay for family leave? It looks like the states will.

Yes I know, taxes etc, but it's inaccurate to paint it as a burden only companies carry.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by lionking

Where does it say businesses will pay for family leave? It looks like the states will.

Yes I know, taxes etc, but it's inaccurate to paint it as a burden only companies carry.

You still need someone to do the work in that time.

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by shuize

My father is getting ready to close the family business in California. He's older so it's probably time. But he said he would have liked to have kept it open and managed the workers in semi-retirement. Problem is, he said, with all the extras the state required, most of the workers just weren't worth the added cost and hassle.

He usually employed two to three workers. Now he'll just enjoy his retirement.

I feel for many small businesses. It's a different situation with them. To me the three biggest economic problems this country needs to solve is health care, health care and health care. Obamacare is not the solution, neither is Trump care and neither is the employer paid health insurance system we have had since WW2. The alliance between big pharma, for profit hospitals, the insurance industry and their bought and paid for lawmakers has led to the highest price, worst outcomes and a huge drain on our economy. There's a reason that these other nations are able to make sure that maternity care is guaranteed and that is employers aren't paying as much of the health care bill.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

You still need someone to do the work in that time.

So what? You do if someone resigns.

If companies don't pay for maternity leave how are they disadvantaged?

We've had maternity leave in Australia for decades. Unlike in the days when my wife had her first child, and had to resign, skilled women (in the main) return to work after birth and make an immediate contribution. This is actually good for business.

[mikado]

It's a way to companies get to keep highly experienced employees who happen to be women who have had a baby, it's a win win, shocking that anyone would argue against it.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by mikado

It's a way to companies get to keep highly experienced employees who happen to be women who have had a baby, it's a win win, shocking that anyone would argue against it.

Absolutely. Some people in this thread simply don't understand good business.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by mgidm86

We don't need to encourage people to have children anymore. People who do not have kids should get tax breaks (if anyone should) not the other way around. Where are my freebies for choosing not to have a child?

Can you demonstrate the above?

[Darat]

I think it is right and proper for society to see that all children are looked after for their basic rights and needs but I do think having a child is a choice and it is up to the parents to determine if they can afford the costs. I'm not against parents not being penalised for having a child, so think not being able to sack someone who needs time off during pregnancy and for a time afterwards is a good thing but don't see why the financial burden of that should fall on anyone but the parents.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Can you demonstrate the above?

Of course he can't. The biggest demographic timebomb is the forthcoming peak in the world's population and the subsequent reduction. Parenthood should be rewarded.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Darat

I think it is right and proper for society to see that all children are looked after for their basic rights and needs but I do think having a child is a choice and it is up to the parents to determine if they can afford the costs. I'm not against parents not being penalised for having a child, so think not being able to sack someone who needs time off during pregnancy and for a time afterwards is a good thing but don't see why the financial burden of that should fall on anyone but the parents.

This depends on how much you value children. You know, those who will support your health and welfare as you age.

There's no doubt that financial support for parents increases the birth rate. Most western nations have a below replacement birth rate. This trend is increasing. Parenthood needs to be encouraged.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by lionking

This depends on how much you value children. You know, those who will support your health and welfare as you age.

There's no doubt that financial support for parents increases the birth rate. Most western nations have a below replacement birth rate. This trend is increasing. Parenthood needs to be encouraged.

Give that, for the vast majority of the population, wages are effectively falling, I think a great deal more incentive is going to be required to keep the birth rate up.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Give that, for the vast majority of the population, wages are effectively falling, I think a great deal more incentive is going to be required to keep the birth rate up.

I don't think wages are falling at all. Can you support this?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by lionking

This depends on how much you value children. You know, those who will support your health and welfare as you age.

There's no doubt that financial support for parents increases the birth rate. Most western nations have a below replacement birth rate. This trend is increasing. Parenthood needs to be encouraged.

Times change, how we deal with issues have to change, I hold it is a good thing that we have less children than we used to do.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by lionking

I don't think wages are falling at all. Can you support this?

For the UK, which is where my mind was - that would be trivial.

for the US, my understanding was that wages were stagnating, causing a real world drop in spending power after factoring in inflation.

http://www.epi.org/publication/chart...ge-stagnation/

This covers it to a degree.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Darat

Times change, how we deal with issues have to change, I hold it is a good thing that we have less children than we used to do.

Okay. You therefore support an aging population. Have a look at Japan and expand that worldwide. This is not the future world I want to see.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by lionking

Okay. You therefore support an aging population. Have a look at Japan and expand that worldwide. This is not the future world I want to see.

Increased automation is going to mean there are less jobs anyway for tomorrow's adults, we need to change how we approach work and non working.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Darat

Increased automation is going to mean there are less jobs anyway for tomorrow's adults, we need to change how we approach work and non working.

I'm not talking about robotics. The median age in Japan and Germany is near 50, with most of Europe not far behind. Ageing populations eventually paralyse nations. European countries need higher birth rates for their future.

[Craig B]

Originally Posted by mgidm86

Why should an employer be responsible for anything other than a paycheck? Company health care used to be a perk, now it's becoming a requirement. I don't see the rationale behind that.

Why even a paycheck? I'll tell ya why. Cos the guvmint stole all the slaves in 1863. I don't see the rationale behind that.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by lionking

So what? You do if someone resigns.

If companies don't pay for maternity leave how are they disadvantaged?

We've had maternity leave in Australia for decades. Unlike in the days when my wife had her first child, and had to resign, skilled women (in the main) return to work after birth and make an immediate contribution. This is actually good for business.

If it is such a good idea for business then make participation optional.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by twinstead

So screw 'em, huh? Pop those babies out and get back to work!

Wait a second. You're not telling me that you're promoting gender and sexual inequalities here, right? Husbands and Gay couples are completely fine in having the same rights as what you just called "babypoppers".