• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should All Companies be Required to Provide Paid Maternity Leave?

Should Congress Pass A Bill That Requires Employers to Provide Paid Maternity Leave?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 30.8%

  • No

    Votes: 58 63.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 5 5.5%
  • Total voters
    91
chromium said:
Only would if she or the govt paid me for their maternity leave, which is the opposite of this bill proposal. Even then you have to find and train a temp replacement or pay others overtime to get her work done. Then god knows if she'll actually return.

So i agree but you know how the mods are here.
Click to expand...

Immaterial. They can't do anything about opinions within the scope of rules.

If they offered paid leave (mandatory) for women, they'd have to do the same for men if they recognize their child for birthing purposes. I seem to recall us having an amendment for this purpose.

It's rather simple really - all the liberals, socialists, and anti-capitalists resort to nothing more than argumentum ad populum with this crap. "Because every other country does it" is not enough reason.
 
Gipper said:
If they offered paid leave (mandatory) for women, they'd have to do the same for men if they recognize their child for birthing purposes. I seem to recall us having an amendment for this purpose.

It's rather simple really - all the liberals, socialists, and anti-capitalists resort to nothing more than argumentum ad populum with this crap. "Because every other country does it" is not enough reason.
Click to expand...

Well that's a good point about paternity leave, especially after the kid is born. Why should the mom automatically be the one to stay home to look after newborn? But you know plenty of conservs will support this too as 'pro family'/religious
 
tres borrachos said:
You (plural)? What? Is that cryptic for something.

I'm a mother of 3. I can assure you, he didn't disrespect me. I see you're a man based on that little blue arrow. Since when does a man speak for mothers?
Click to expand...

Today, in the Supreme Court. That's when.
 
chromium said:
Well that's a good point about paternity leave, especially after the kid is born. Why should the mom automatically be the one to stay home to look after newborn? But you know plenty of conservs will support this too as 'pro family'/religious
Click to expand...

Conservatives can be wildly wrong on a ton of stuff too.
 
gdgyva said:
women dont have to do anything

they choose to do something

hard to be a mom when the job requires 80 hour weeks.....

Hard to be a mom when you have to travel 40-50% of the time

everyone understands that women have to make these choices.....

You dont like them.....i understand

that wont change the fact that in order to get to the highest rungs in a lot of companies, you have to do the 80 hour weeks, and the travel

it sucks for everyone......not just women, everyone

making choices in life decide which paths we follow.....

I have met a few women who can do it all (career, kids, marriage) but they are fairly rare

usually one of the three gets less attention than required......

Again...choices......

Woman's choice to have a child.....and her and her partner's choice on who will care for said child

but the employer has zero to do with their decision......
Click to expand...
...
Ok?
 
tres borrachos said:
Which has nothing to do with what I asked you, and no man spoke in the SCOTUS today on behalf of women.
Click to expand...

Save it. Your advocacy against your own freedoms is a scathing indictment of your judgment.
 
chromium said:
Well that's a good point about paternity leave, especially after the kid is born. Why should the mom automatically be the one to stay home to look after newborn? But you know plenty of conservs will support this too as 'pro family'/religious
Click to expand...

Pro-family would be one parent giving up their career and staying home to raise the kid. Simply giving a woman free money for a bunch of weeks after she has the kid, then she dumps the kid and is back to work, is not pro-family.
 
Okay, liberals...no matter how you try to make excuses, concoct reasons, spin, lie and contort...this whole parental leave BS boils down to one thing: You guys trying to spend other people's money.

(see my sig)
 
Mycroft said:
Okay. You think the idea of parental leave is okay...if the government pays for it. But, as you say, it depends on if the taxpayer wants to pay for it or not.

It sounds, though, as if you are not American. Do you live in a country that provides such parental leave? If so, I have a question:

Let's say a woman goes on parental leave. The government pays her. She's good to go. But what about the company she was working for? Does the government pay THEM for their lost income? Does the government pay THEM the cost of hiring a replacement worker? And does that woman get to come back when the leave is over and step back into her old job? Even if the replacement worker is doing better work for the company?

Or...do y'all just think, "Screw the company. They got money. Let them suck it up."?
Click to expand...

Yes the woman have the right to comeback to her job and the replacement cost the companie have to pay, but is having a functional society not screw the company. That a functional society you need new generations to born and that also womans skills and competence can be used. This is also something that is also benificial for companies in the long run.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Yes the woman have the right to comeback to her job and the replacement cost the companie have to pay, but is having a functional society not screw the company.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like you are precisely saying, "screw the company".

That a functional society you need new generations to born and that also womans skills and competence can be used.
Click to expand...

Why should it be the company's responsibility to ensure new generations are born? And, don't you think that any woman's skills and competence can be matched by men? Why shouldn't a company hire a man instead of a costly woman?

This is also something that is also benificial for companies in the long run.
Click to expand...

Uh-huh...in the long run...assuming the company can last till the long run with the added costs you want to pile on top of them.
 
The Man said:
Pro-family would be one parent giving up their career and staying home to raise the kid. Simply giving a woman free money for a bunch of weeks after she has the kid, then she dumps the kid and is back to work, is not pro-family.
Click to expand...

Of course, but paid maternity leave encourages them to have more and more kids. "Pro family" in the sense it expands the family.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you agree with the President's recent statements that the US should join the rest of the industrialized world and have provided paid maternity leave? The President said that Congress should work on legislation requiring employers to have paid maternity leave? Do you believe this should be law or not?
Click to expand...
We are 5 to 20 years behind the rest of the world and will remain this way as long as we have conservatives.
 
earthworm said:
We are 5 to 20 years behind the rest of the world and will remain this way as long as we have conservatives.
Click to expand...

If I had my way, the US would stay what you call "behind", which is better than the **** you call a progressive future. I'm happy and willing to keep this country firmly "behind". :cool:
 
chromium said:
Of course, but paid maternity leave encourages them to have more and more kids. "Pro family" in the sense it expands the family.
Click to expand...

Expands the family? People in the hood do that everyday, but I wouldn't call that high family family values either. Expanding the family and then dumping the kid on someone else to take care of while both parents go to work is not pro-family, or good family values.
 
The Man said:
Expands the family? People in the hood do that everyday, but I wouldn't call that high family family values either. Expanding the family and then dumping the kid on someone else to take care of while both parents go to work is not pro-family, or good family values.
Click to expand...

No, just those who take "be fruitful and multiply" as far as possible. They'd love to make every family like the Duggars. Paid maternity leave x20 kids sounds like a great way to make a living and screw the company she "works" for.

Parents who work and 'dump' the kids do it cause they have to. Perhaps they shouldn't have kids, instead of this mandatory paid leave. I'd rather require a parenting license. Even when they aren't at work, poor mothers who would need paid leave are so often crappy parents. I've seen it too often.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I stand to be corrected, but Canada is a member of the industrialized world and we don't have mandatory paid maternity leave, paid for by companies. We do have mandatory "parental" leave - mother or father can take it - 17 weeks I believe, but that might have increased by now - and employees who have sick leave or vacation benefits are entitled to use them and they are also entitled to collect unemployment insurance for time they take off - mother or father - if they don't have sick time/vacation time. In all cases, the employees job is to be protected and they are entitled to return to it or a similar or better position when they return.

There are, however, lots of companies who provide better than mandated paternity benefits, which is their right and good on them. Mandating businesses to fully pay employees who are off on maternity leave would, in my opinion, make it harder for women of child bearing age to make it into the upper levels of management, even more so than they may experience without it.
Click to expand...

Here is info on pregnancy and parental leave in Ontario:

Pregnancy and Parental Leave | Ministry of Labour

A woman can take 17 weeks pregnancy leave and 35 weeks parental leave, for a total of 52 weeks. As you said, it does not have to be paid and if it isn't, she can collect EI.

Fathers can also take 35 weeks parental leave, as can adoptive mothers and fathers.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
In Canada you have the 17 weeks and then the government pays one or both of the parents.
"On top of mandating maternity leave, the government offers paid leave for one or both parents through Canada's employment insurance plan. A pregnant employee or new mother can take a paid maternity leave of up to 15 weeks. " Maternity Leave Basics: Canada Vs. The U.S.
Click to expand...

It's 17 weeks pregnancy leave and 35 weeks parental leave. To receive EI benefits, you must qualify

Employment Insurance Maternity and Parental Benefits - Service Canada
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you agree with the President's recent statements that the US should join the rest of the industrialized world and have provided paid maternity leave? The President said that Congress should work on legislation requiring employers to have paid maternity leave? Do you believe this should be law or not?
Click to expand...

Nope, that should be up to the company and not the law of the land. If a woman wants to have a baby and get paid maternity leave, then she can save up her sick leave until she has enough days.
 
Perotista said:
Nope, that should be up to the company and not the law of the land. If a woman wants to have a baby and get paid maternity leave, then she can save up her sick leave until she has enough days.
Click to expand...

Most companies that provide paid maternity leave require you to be back on the job six weeks after your child is born, if you intend to stay on the payroll. Add to that the fact that most companies won't allow a woman to stay on the job until her due date, for safety reasons, and that is on the form that the doctor fills out that is given to the company. So we could be talking a minimum of two months off. Most women of child-bearing age are too young to have worked long enough to be entitled to that many days off, even including a week or two of vacation time - if she intends to return to work. Many do not, and instead take their chances on being rehired when they feel comfortable about returning to work. Sadly, in this economy, no wonder there are so many abortions, probably for economic reasons.

It seems the President has a lot of ideas of how a business should operate. which is strange, since he has no experience in that area. I don't how the government handles paid maternity leave, and what their rules are, but government has taxpayer money to play with, which businesses do not.

I'll be signing off in a few minutes to go watch the fireworks display in our area. Hope you had a great Holiday today. :thumbs: See you tomorrow.

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:
 
polgara said:
Most companies that provide paid maternity leave require you to be back on the job six weeks after your child is born, if you intend to stay on the payroll. Add to that the fact that most companies won't allow a woman to stay on the job until her due date, for safety reasons, and that is on the form that the doctor fills out that is given to the company. So we could be talking a minimum of two months off. Most women of child-bearing age are too young to have worked long enough to be entitled to that many days off, even including a week or two of vacation time - if she intends to return to work. Many do not, and instead take their chances on being rehired when they feel comfortable about returning to work. Sadly, in this economy, no wonder there are so many abortions, probably for economic reasons.

It seems the President has a lot of ideas of how a business should operate. which is strange, since he has no experience in that area. I don't how the government handles paid maternity leave, and what their rules are, but government has taxpayer money to play with, which businesses do not.

I'll be signing off in a few minutes to go watch the fireworks display in our area. Hope you had a great Holiday today. :thumbs: See you tomorrow.

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Enjoy the fireworks Pol,
 
Perotista said:
Enjoy the fireworks Pol,
Click to expand...

Pero, maybe I was just in the mood to see something out of the ordinary, but the fireworks were spectacular last evening! They were set to Souza marches and other patriotic music, and the crowd enjoyed every minute of it! :thumbs: At the grand finale, everyone stood up and cheered for the entire time! I think they could have heard us half way across the country - and the wonderful thing was that there was no partisanship, or race, or ethnicity differences - we all love our flag and our country! Very uplifting! If we could just get DC to understand, and show the devotion I saw the crowd demonstrate last night!
 
polgara said:
Pero, maybe I was just in the mood to see something out of the ordinary, but the fireworks were spectacular last evening! They were set to Souza marches and other patriotic music, and the crowd enjoyed every minute of it! :thumbs: At the grand finale, everyone stood up and cheered for the entire time! I think they could have heard us half way across the country - and the wonderful thing was that there was no partisanship, or race, or ethnicity differences - we all love our flag and our country! Very uplifting! If we could just get DC to understand, and show the devotion I saw the crowd demonstrate last night!
Click to expand...

Morning Pol, That sounds great. But I am afraid as long as politics is a game of divide and conquer, there will be no uplifting spirit in Washington. What is it Abe Lincoln said, "A house divided can not stand." That divided house fits Washington to a tee.
 
Perotista said:
Morning Pol, That sounds great. But I am afraid as long as politics is a game of divide and conquer, there will be no uplifting spirit in Washington. What is it Abe Lincoln said, "A house divided can not stand." That divided house fits Washington to a tee.
Click to expand...

Pero, I don't know how much clearer we can make it to the idiots in DC, on both sides of the aisle! We are sick and tired of the partisanship being shown. You and I, and lots of other people, remember the good old days when both sides compromised in order to get things done! It wasn't "my way or the highway" back then, and we were better off as a country. I fear that many people took BHO's statement that Republicans were the "enemy" literally, so we have this thinking controlling DC, to our continuing detriment. He justified and solidified the partisanship, and I blame him for doing so. He is supposed to be the POTUS for all the people, not just those who think like him! Very stupid move on his part, IMO. Neither side is always right and never wrong, in any situation! His insulting words, just to further his agenda, are affecting everything, and we have gridlock. Then he complains, and goes around Congress to do what he wants to do, and is being slapped down by the SCOTUS, on unanimous votes - which means even the Dems on the Court believe he is being unlawfully over-reaching! Unintended consequences, indeed! Suggestions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom