LoveShack.org Community Forums

Reload this Page LoveShack.org Community Forums > Platonic > Business and Professional Relationships

Is Maternity Leave a Form of Employee Discrimination...?


Business and Professional Relationships Networking and maintaining a positive environment in the work place is important! Surviving the 9-to-5 within.

Like Tree70Likes
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 8th May 2013, 2:38 AM   #16
Established Member
 
USMCHokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 15,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbf View Post
This makes no sense at all. Any idea how social security works in the U.S.?
Do you...?
__________________
Ad hominem - attacks on a person rather than on the validity of evidence or an argument
Reductio Ad Absurdum - argument that an extreme of a position must be true as well
False Dilemma - giving two extremes as the only alternatives to a position
Confirmation Bias - considering only evidence favorable to one's own position
USMCHokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 2:43 AM   #17
tbf
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMCHokie View Post
Do you...?
Apparently a lot more than you do and I'm Canadian.
tbf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 2:48 AM   #18
Established Member
 
USMCHokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 15,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbf View Post
Apparently a lot more than you do and I'm Canadian.



-----
USMCHokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 2:52 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Denver Colorado
Posts: 6,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbf View Post
Refer to above post. Does this mean that childless individuals should automatically be disqualified from receiving any social security?

What does having children have to do with receiving ss benefits?
skydiveaddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 2:53 AM   #20
Established Member
 
Radu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMCHokie View Post
The protected classes in the US are race, color, national origin, religion, age, sex, and disability.
You forgot gender [or sexual orientation].

Also, the race part doesn't always apply.
If you're white, you are SOL.

Over here women get 1yr of maternity leave paid for by the state at 75% of wage, the employer has to keep the job open for her so they can only hire a temp.
2yrs at 50% pay and the employee can look for a permanent fill.
__________________
Democracy, the playground of the narcissist. Be the BCB.
Bugs is who we want to be, Daffy is who we are.
A shortcut that everyone knows about is an absolute oxymoron. - Howard Marks
The map is not the territory.

Last edited by Radu; 8th May 2013 at 2:56 AM..
Radu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 2:57 AM   #21
Established Member
 
USMCHokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 15,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by skydiveaddict View Post
What does having children have to do with receiving ss benefits?
I think the point she's trying to make is that the money young people contribute are directly paying for the benefits of old people, which is essentially true at this point. And without young people, there is no more social security. So she attempts to make the connection that bearing children is a "contribution" to social security, and those who do not make this "contribution" should not be entitled to benefits...benefits they are actually entitled to based on their monetary FICA contributions.
USMCHokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 2:59 AM   #22
Established Member
 
USMCHokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 15,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radu View Post
You forgot gender [or sexual orientation].
Gender is in the list as "sex." And sexual orientation is not a protected class in the US.
USMCHokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 5:14 AM   #23
Established Member
 
Radu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMCHokie View Post
Gender is in the list as "sex." And sexual orientation is not a protected class in the US.
You mean you can get fired in the US for being gay ?
Radu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 5:21 AM   #24
Established Member
 
USMCHokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 15,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radu View Post
You mean you can get fired in the US for being gay ?
Why do you think we had to have all those policies (e.g., "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military)?

It was an executive policy designed to circumvent the lack of legislation preventing the discharge of service members based on sexual orientation. And now, you have an executive policy allowing gays to openly serve, another effort to circumvent lack of legislation protecting gays from being discharged on the basis of sexual orientation.
USMCHokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 9:30 AM   #25
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,360
Maternity leave and Paternity leave are not government mandated rights, i.e. paid leave. What the US says is if you are pregnant you fall into the rights of FMLA and ADA. So your position is protected while you are out for a multiple array of medical reasons and or accommodation.

Some companies agree to put in maternity and/or paternity leave which will give time off for an individual that is having or adopting a child and will consider it paid leave.

It is not discriminator as not having children is not a protected class so those that do not qualify are not protected. It is a preferential benefits like other benefits such as stoke options, executive benefits, etc. A company is not required to offer equal benefits for all employees, they are expected to not discriminate negatively against one on a protected class. They can discriminate positively towards those in a protected class.
Got it is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 9:33 AM   #26
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radu View Post
You mean you can get fired in the US for being gay ?
The Federal protected classes are:

Race Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
Color Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
Religion Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
National origin Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
Age (40 and over) Federal: Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Sex Federal: Equal Pay Act of 1963 & Civil Rights Act of 1964
Familial status - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII (Housing, cannot discriminate for having children, exception for senior housing)
Disability status Federal: Vocational Rehabilitation and Other Rehabilitation Services of 1973 & Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Veteran status Federal Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974
Genetic information Federal: Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

Some states do recognize sexual orientation so in those states it is illegal to discriminate if one is gay. But at this time it is not recognized on a Federal level.
Got it is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 9:59 AM   #27
Established Member
 
USMCHokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 15,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Got it View Post
It is not discriminator as not having children is not a protected class so those that do not qualify are not protected. It is a preferential benefits like other benefits such as stoke options, executive benefits, etc. A company is not required to offer equal benefits for all employees, they are expected to not discriminate negatively against one on a protected class. They can discriminate positively towards those in a protected class.
Well done. This covers the legal aspect of it. But benefits such as stock options and executive benefits are awarded based on merit rather than a lifestyle choice...
USMCHokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 10:14 AM   #28
Established Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 45,855
Journal Entries: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMCHokie View Post
I was just reading a random article about Yahoo's CEO boosting the amount of maternity leave granted new mothers. Are the benefits afforded new mothers a form of discrimination against employees who don't bear children while employed? Is it a form of discrimination against male employees who can't bear children? Should these employees be entitled to the same paid leave and benefits?

And why would people cry discrimination if an employer chooses not to hire a woman of child-bearing age so that he wouldn't have to deal with paying for an employee that contributes nothing while she's on maternity leave? It just seems ironic that someone would cry discrimination because an employer did not want to give them preferential treatment (i.e., discriminate against those who don't bear chlidren).
IMO, the CEO is signaling that he/she is pro-family and pro-children. Prospective employees can use that information to decide if that corporate culture is beneficial to them or not. If the CEO offers maternity/paternity leave/pay in excess of state/federal statute, they are providing additional benefits/incentives for those employees. In Cali, from reading the statute, the 'rules' apply to companies with five or more employees.

If I were working for a company which was keeping a position open for a mother on maternity leave and that choice/process was causing an undue burden upon myself due to handling part or all of their workload, I'd be gone in a flash. Then again, I don't like being an employee anyway. The company does what it does. I do what I do. We're not friends.
carhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 12:05 PM   #29
Established Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,858
I wouldn't really call it discrimination. I see it as a huge disadvantage for anyone in a professional environment to have to take multiple months away from work. My issue with it arises when people try to cry "pay disparity" without taking into account all of these 3 month, 6 month, or what have you absences from work over a period of years. My other issue arises when childless people are taken advantage of at work, as though their life/plans are less important because they don't have children. I can't tell you how many times I've had to pick up the slack for some mother or father who has to run off at 3 p.m. to attend a dance recital or go to parent-teacher conference, or have had to travel because some mother or father couldn't find a sitter. These are the same women who will complain about their pay later on, without acknowledging that they do far less than their childless counterparts. It's absurd.
__________________
In the end one loves one's desire and not what is desired. -- Nietzsche
clia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2013, 12:09 PM   #30
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMCHokie View Post
Right. In the US, we have paternity leave too. But what about those individuals (men and women) who elect not to have a child while employed?
This is like asking what about those individuals who don't become disabled while employed?

Pregnancy is a form of temporary disability.

Parental leave is a form of leave from FMLA, the same kind you're elligible to take if YOUR parent falls ill and you need to take care of him/her.
Star Gazer is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

 

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this discrimination SarahRose Business and Professional Relationships 7 18th December 2010 11:44 PM
Discrimination? princess75 Business and Professional Relationships 8 13th March 2008 5:54 AM
Would an employer push an employee to leave? Heavenly55 Business and Professional Relationships 5 3rd August 2007 3:14 PM

 

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:17 PM.

Please note: The suggestions and advice offered on this web site are opinions only and are not to be used in the place of professional psychological counseling or medical advice. If you or someone close to you is currently in crisis or in an emergency situation, contact your local law enforcement agency or emergency number.


Copyright © 1997-2013 LoveShack.org. All Rights Reserved.