Is it fair for women in the workplace to use maternity leave every 1-2 years?

[RW]

But cc, there are so many!



   :woodoo:    :0c0KHxD:  :sm(56):      :sdfjh(2):        :sm(45):

[cc]

Godwin's Theory rears its ugly head.

[cc]

Godwin's Theory rears its ugly head.

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/039/090/godwins-law1.png">



http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/694/274/fc5.png">

[@realAzhyaAryola]

All this talk about parents staying at home vs parents who go back to work does not bother me one bit. I stayed at home with my infants because I wanted to and I did and I also returned to work because I enjoyed my job and just because I went back to work does not mean I love my children less than the parents who stayed home. Working parents: don't ever let anyone tell you different. I have a 22-year old and a 16-year old who are happy and well-adjusted. I don't buy into that kids-are-better-off-when-their-parents-stay-home-with-them charade. There may be some extraordinary success stories but it does not mean the same can't be true for the children of parents who go off to work as well.

[Bricktop]

Your investment is neither here nor there. In most organisations, very few individuals are indispensable...in fact, quite the reverse.



The fact is that being a mother and full time worker is incompatible. Do your work, then have your babies. If, later you can return to work, go for it.



If not, be a mother. Its a great job.

Still you act as though women should be blamed for the audacity of having children. As if they're fertilizing themselves or something.



A man got you pregnant? Your fault! Your problem! Get in the kitchen and make me a sandwich!



How come you don't blame men for women needing maternal leave? "Just don't have babies", right?



And it's as if you don't realize you were a child and you've had a mother. I don't know about you, but most people haven't grown up in Leave It to Beaver world. Women have been having children, jobs and careers for quite some time now. I haven't seen the breakdown of society yet.

If you walked a mile in MY shoes, sunshine, you may re-consider.

[cc]

If you walked a mile in MY shoes, sunshine, you may re-consider.

With every post he demonstrates that he has never come within 1,000 miles (or 1609.344 kilometers ) of  real life like that

[RW]

Your investment is neither here nor there. In most organisations, very few individuals are indispensable...in fact, quite the reverse.



The fact is that being a mother and full time worker is incompatible. Do your work, then have your babies. If, later you can return to work, go for it.



If not, be a mother. Its a great job.

Still you act as though women should be blamed for the audacity of having children. As if they're fertilizing themselves or something.



A man got you pregnant? Your fault! Your problem! Get in the kitchen and make me a sandwich!



How come you don't blame men for women needing maternal leave? "Just don't have babies", right?



And it's as if you don't realize you were a child and you've had a mother. I don't know about you, but most people haven't grown up in Leave It to Beaver world. Women have been having children, jobs and careers for quite some time now. I haven't seen the breakdown of society yet.

If you walked a mile in MY shoes, sunshine, you may re-consider.

Oh hell!  He hasn't even walked a mile in the shoes he argues for walking in!

[cc]

Excellent point, but can we be sure of that?





The devil made me say that

[Romero]

If you walked a mile in MY shoes, sunshine, you may re-consider.

Why would I have to walk a mile in your shoes? As if you have some secret shoe walking thing that somehow proves me wrong?



"Do your work, then have your babies."



So women shouldn't have babies during their career, right? Doesn't that mean men shouldn't have sex with women during their careers?



You can't just blame women for wanting to have children. Men are part of the equation too. I suppose you've only had sex with unemployed women.

[Anonymous]

It also discriminates against those who do not, or can not have babies. Maternity leave is a victory for rabid feminism, nothing more. We all know that once feminists start screaming, the trade unions come a running.

What, no Nazi reference? Don't you think that a mother looking after her newborn for a few months is just like Nazi Germany?

Not particularly.



On the other hand, I think forcing an employer to pay for women to have babies does lean that way. Moreso the Soviet Union, perhaps, but there is little socio-political difference between socialism and fascism.

 Peoples attitudes on this are really twisted. Your employees are not disposable slaves. Employment is an agreement. You ought to appreciate and support your employees,  They are there to do a job that supports you, right?  So you best support them.

[Frood]

I'm for maternity and paternity leave, assuming it's not abused and it doesn't place an organization in a bad way or worse. I do however think that rules should be tightened up to prevent mothers and fathers using it every 1-2 years because that's just ridiculous to me, and extremely unfair to your coworkers who are inevitably forced to fill the big holes left.



There should be limits placed on frequency of use and combined duration of absence. Perhaps allotting a number of weeks per man and woman in each of their workplaces and forcing them to alternate if the time needed is not adequate. There should also be more flexibility to negotiate in employment contracts so that those who will not be having children, or more, can let it be known right away and achieve better responsibilities, perks, or salaries.



Every 3-5 years is probably fair. Every 1-2 is bullshit.

[RW]

Dictating when a woman can have a baby is bullshit.



That said, here, you have to work so many weeks to be entitled to paid leave.

[cc]

True, and similarly



Dictating what a company has to do / tolerate  is bullshit



"paid leave" - is that by company or EI?

[RW]

True, and similarly



Dictating what a company has to do / tolerate  is bullshit



"paid leave" - is that by company or EI?

EI

[J0E]

Bottom line - whatever reason a person temporarily leaves an organization, they should be forced to relinquish their seniority within it.

I was at a place where women who left for maternity leave, also relinquished their seniority.

They were allowed to come back, but not at the position when they left.

They had to give up the perks they enjoyed before they went for mat leave.

So the person behind them, be it a man or a woman, took their place.



There's something wrong with the way your organization/place of employment is run if workers can come and leave without penalty.



If a person does the work of the person on mat leave, doesnt' get any credit for their hard work, and the person who left gets to retain their position because of the temporary worker's efforts, then a change is needed.



I saw this situation at another organization as well, where someone took a year off from her job, then her replacement, a woman, was let go after she came back. She was just as good (maybe better) than the person in a permanent position.

I'm for maternity and paternity leave, assuming it's not abused and it doesn't place an organization in a bad way or worse. I do however think that rules should be tightened up to prevent mothers and fathers using it every 1-2 years because that's just ridiculous to me, and extremely unfair to your coworkers who are inevitably forced to fill the big holes left.



There should be limits placed on frequency of use and combined duration of absence. Perhaps allotting a number of weeks per man and woman in each of their workplaces and forcing them to alternate if the time needed is not adequate. There should also be more flexibility to negotiate in employment contracts so that those who will not be having children, or more, can let it be known right away and achieve better responsibilities, perks, or salaries.



Every 3-5 years is probably fair. Every 1-2 is bullshit.