article about how maternity leave policies hurt working moms

[lissydee]

I am sure this is nothing new to most, but its a well written piece worth sharing.

www.newrepublic.com/article/120939/maternity-leave-policies-america-hurt-working-moms

[2chatter]

Enjoyed the article.
Still processing.
But I know I took a 40% pay cut to move into a company that offered a paid maternity leave and a flexible work environment and benefits (turning my back on what I REALLY wanted to do), and that part of the consideration of my husband's job search was paternity leave + flex time after he returned to work (ie no travel for 6-12 weeks and the ability to work from home more).

So part of it is - you cannot have your cake and eat it too in the US - it comes down to priorities and choices.

[pitta12]

I think the bigger issue is the one that is touched on briefly in this article, that US corporations were designed for a full-time working male with a stay-home wife to support all family activities and free him to focus all energy each and every work day solely on work. This is just not reality any more and corporations are not effectively addressing the fact that all workers - male or female - have obligations and important commitments outside the workplace.

[mama2a]

I think that it's easy to forget how challenging parenting really is. Some people in my office thought maternity leave was a "luxury benefit" and that when I returned to work 12 weeks later that I was rested and eager to go back to my old life pre-baby. In fact, I was pumping 3x/day, racing against the clock all day, in "mom mode" all day, and just plain exhausted. People at work had a hard time understanding why I was still needing time to adjust to parenting. That support isn't there....

[seamonster]

I'm really glad my company has introduced paid bonding leave for both mothers and fathers in the US. The change only came this year, but it's a huge step and I think it's better that it's a gender-neutral benefit. I do think most fathers at my company will take advantage of it, in addition to the mothers. There will be some people that will leave it on the table, but those are the same people likely to leave vacation on the table at the end of the year. The company keeps talking about wanting to attract and retain more women to the field, and this is actually doing something to help with that. Also, a much more positive benefit, work-life balance wise, than egg-freezing (which I think just encourages women to choose work over anything else).

[lioness13]

I'm new here on this board and this article pulled me in. So many really good points and so well written that it made me cry. I am lucky that my job passed a policy giving maternity leave (based on tenure) right after I got pregnant. I received 6 weeks partial paid and 6 weeks 100% paid. I feel for women forced to return to work sooner because they can't lose pay. When I got pregnant I thought I would be in that position. I hope more companies follow this trend.

[doodler]

Feb 5, 2015 12:23:36 GMT -5 pitta12 said:

I think the bigger issue is the one that is touched on briefly in this article, that US corporations were designed for a full-time working male with a stay-home wife to support all family activities and free him to focus all energy each and every work day solely on work. This is just not reality any more and corporations are not effectively addressing the fact that all workers - male or female - have obligations and important commitments outside the workplace.

This.  

Except that I work at a school where 95% of the staff are female. Not exactly corporate America.  I took 9 unpaid weeks when DS was born and it was a struggle.

[twinmomma]

Feb 6, 2015 14:36:59 GMT -5 doodler said:

Feb 5, 2015 12:23:36 GMT -5 pitta12 said:

I think the bigger issue is the one that is touched on briefly in this article, that US corporations were designed for a full-time working male with a stay-home wife to support all family activities and free him to focus all energy each and every work day solely on work. This is just not reality any more and corporations are not effectively addressing the fact that all workers - male or female - have obligations and important commitments outside the workplace.

This.  

Except that I work at a school where 95% of the staff are female. Not exactly corporate America.  I took 9 unpaid weeks when DS was born and it was a struggle.

Yup. My boss was "gracious enough" to provide the 12 weeks FMLA leave that's required, even though we don't hit the employee count that's legally required. We've had 4 people go on maternity leave and have a staff that's majority women, and there's zero talk of changing the policy at all. The company is run by two guys who had SAHM's as wives and I think they're just totally out of touch. 

[liziz]

I was really grateful to be able to take 18 weeks - 0% paid from my employer, unless you count the 2 weeks of vacation I had to take before my bonding time could start.
H and I work in the same office, and HR told us that even though technically dads can take the same 12 weeks, the expectation for new dads is no more than 3 weeks. H pushed it out to about a month, and was lucky enough to have enough vacation to do so.
Our company apparently also has in place a policy that limits the leave for care of any new child to 12 weeks total. For both parents. So shitty. (Our managers (all men, but all dads) were nice enough to let us extend our leave a bit.

[harperandco]

I work for a satellite office of a national law firm based in SD, CA. My SD co-workers get FMLA, I however, did/do not because we do not have enough employees in our particular office. It is absolute BS. When my daughter was born, I was able to take 5.5 weeks off (paid because I had it banked). I was allowed to work remotely for 3 more weeks. I think pitta12 hit the nail on the head. My company was started by 2 men, fathers and there is a female parter with 2 young children. Yet, we haven't made strides in the corporate world and changed our benefits to a more working-mother friendly corporation.

[seamonster]

Feb 9, 2015 16:29:44 GMT -5 harperandco said:

I work for a satellite office of a national law firm based in SD, CA. My SD co-workers get FMLA, I however, did/do not because we do not have enough employees in our particular office. It is absolute BS. When my daughter was born, I was able to take 5.5 weeks off (paid because I had it banked). I was allowed to work remotely for 3 more weeks. I think pitta12 hit the nail on the head. My company was started by 2 men, fathers and there is a female parter with 2 young children. Yet, we haven't made strides in the corporate world and changed our benefits to a more working-mother friendly corporation.

It doesn't matter how big your particular office is, but how big the company as a whole is. If there are at least 50 employees with the company, you are entitled to leave under FMLA. Even if there's just 3 people at your office and 47 in the other office. www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/fmla.htm  If it's smaller than 50 employees, the CA employees may be getting leave under CA state law.

[harperandco]

Feb 10, 2015 3:40:48 GMT -5 seamonster said:

Feb 9, 2015 16:29:44 GMT -5 harperandco said:

I work for a satellite office of a national law firm based in SD, CA. My SD co-workers get FMLA, I however, did/do not because we do not have enough employees in our particular office. It is absolute BS. When my daughter was born, I was able to take 5.5 weeks off (paid because I had it banked). I was allowed to work remotely for 3 more weeks. I think pitta12 hit the nail on the head. My company was started by 2 men, fathers and there is a female parter with 2 young children. Yet, we haven't made strides in the corporate world and changed our benefits to a more working-mother friendly corporation.

It doesn't matter how big your particular office is, but how big the company as a whole is. If there are at least 50 employees with the company, you are entitled to leave under FMLA. Even if there's just 3 people at your office and 47 in the other office. www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/fmla.htm  If it's smaller than 50 employees, the CA employees may be getting leave under CA state law.

Under FMLA, employees are eligible for leave if they have worked for their employer at least 12 months, at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, and work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles. Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours of service is determined according to FLSA principles for determining compensable hours or work. Our company has 500+ employees; however, our specific office only has 11 employees and we are located in an entirely different state.

[seamonster]

Feb 10, 2015 11:58:21 GMT -5 harperandco said:

Feb 10, 2015 3:40:48 GMT -5 seamonster said:

It doesn't matter how big your particular office is, but how big the company as a whole is. If there are at least 50 employees with the company, you are entitled to leave under FMLA. Even if there's just 3 people at your office and 47 in the other office. www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/fmla.htm  If it's smaller than 50 employees, the CA employees may be getting leave under CA state law.

Under FMLA, employees are eligible for leave if they have worked for their employer at least 12 months, at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, and work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles. Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours of service is determined according to FLSA principles for determining compensable hours or work. Our company has 500+ employees; however, our specific office only has 11 employees and we are located in an entirely different state.

You're right. I missed that part. It's horrible that that you're still not able to take the time off.

Sometimes I think part of the problem goes beyond that corporate jobs were designed for men with SAHWs, and gets into the territory of since other women were able to make due, you should too. 

[harperandco]

Feb 10, 2015 12:03:38 GMT -5 seamonster said:

Feb 10, 2015 11:58:21 GMT -5 harperandco said:

Under FMLA, employees are eligible for leave if they have worked for their employer at least 12 months, at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, and work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles. Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours of service is determined according to FLSA principles for determining compensable hours or work. Our company has 500+ employees; however, our specific office only has 11 employees and we are located in an entirely different state.

You're right. I missed that part. It's horrible that that you're still not able to take the time off.

Sometimes I think part of the problem goes beyond that corporate jobs were designed for men with SAHWs, and gets into the territory of since other women were able to make due, you should too. 

It sucks so much!  I will be fighting for leave for baby #2.

[sctiger]

Feb 10, 2015 12:03:38 GMT -5 seamonster said:

Feb 10, 2015 11:58:21 GMT -5 harperandco said:

Under FMLA, employees are eligible for leave if they have worked for their employer at least 12 months, at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, and work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles. Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours of service is determined according to FLSA principles for determining compensable hours or work. Our company has 500+ employees; however, our specific office only has 11 employees and we are located in an entirely different state.

You're right. I missed that part. It's horrible that that you're still not able to take the time off.

Sometimes I think part of the problem goes beyond that corporate jobs were designed for men with SAHWs, and gets into the territory of since other women were able to make due, you should too. 

I agree. I think many male leaders with sah wives don't understand what working moms go through, but when I read the comments on articles about improving maternity leave I see tons of women basically saying, Buck up and stop complaining, I only took 6 weeks and you can deal with it too and I don't want to pay for your leave. It's sad that they have no desire to try to improve things for women coming after them.

[pitta12]

It's not just working moms, though. I think having 2 parents in the workforce clearly impacts dads, too, as now you have 2 parents trying to be available to work for these long hours and take little to no time off and it's just not really realistic. Then companies keep asking us to do more and more for less and less reward every year, and oh by the way also pretend you don't have a family or a life of any kind outside the office, and this is a losing equation for everyone. Even people without kids have obligations to other family members who need extra help, etc. The attitude has always been, "well, that's business and that's how business is done," but there has to be a breaking point somewhere.

[pittpurple]

Feb 10, 2015 18:26:27 GMT -5 pitta12 said:

It's not just working moms, though. I think having 2 parents in the workforce clearly impacts dads, too, as now you have 2 parents trying to be available to work for these long hours and take little to no time off and it's just not really realistic. Then companies keep asking us to do more and more for less and less reward every year, and oh by the way also pretend you don't have a family or a life of any kind outside the office, and this is a losing equation for everyone. Even people without kids have obligations to other family members who need extra help, etc. The attitude has always been, "well, that's business and that's how business is done," but there has to be a breaking point somewhere.

We live overseas and have great parental/vacation policies (though people still complain as other countries have it better!). I am terrified of potentially moving back to the US one day. I honestly don't know how I would have coped with everything without having good maternity leave and lots of time off for my extra appointments. We pay much more in taxes of course but we actually end up ahead after factoring in health care costs and copays and what would have been unpaid time off work.

In very professional environments, it's definitely seen as being harder to get ahead as a woman of a certain age as the 6-12 month absences are hard to cover. But, they just introduced parental leave instead of maternity leave so parents can share the 12 months off. My friend's husband took the majority of it as she's the breadwinner and just showed up with the baby at feeding times, more complicated for sure but they made it work.