Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 412 posts

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#111

Post by simion314 »

bluecalm wrote: post #95
unavoidable wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surprisingly few people are actually trying to answer this question on this thread. The answer is straightforward: you either structure your organization so that there are enough overlapping responsibilities to account for parental leaves (e.g. good business practice of not making a fragile organization), or you hire a temporary employee explicitly on a 1 year "parental leave" contract. The labour market is quite goo…

It's surely doable in big organizations but small businesses it's an overwhelming cost even if the government pays the salary of the worker on a leave (the only way it can really work). Maybe the answer to that problem is that really important employees who make a lot of money shouldn't be hired as normal workers but as contractors. Something like: if you get 3x more average salary then you are important but you only…

>If I am looking for 3rd programmer in my 2 person small company I will not risk hiring a young woman

Men can get parental leave in European countries, so in this case your strategy is not working.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#112

Post by beat »

simonsarris wrote: post #11

> [heading] How do they manage in Canada? > In Canada, companies have had no option but to make 52-week parental leaves work, when requested, since 2000. The question Canadian companies ask isn’t “Can we do it?” but “How do we do it?” Okay, so... how do they do it? They never answer the question. If you have say, a CFO or a specialist mechanic (that you only need 1 of, but definitely need) and they take a year off, w…

The birth rate is dropping to at/below replacement across most of the world. Take Iran, for example. It has a lower birth rate than Europe. Not what you'd expect, but it happens to every nation that develops a modern economy. At a certain point, it makes more sense for young parents to concentrate their resources on one or two children, rather than hedge their bets against disease and famine and war by having many children - and more importantly, having a child at all is sufficiently expensive and difficult that many adults just opt out of it.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#113

Post by erentz »

dyarosla wrote: post #42
erentz wrote: post #8

To be somewhat fair this is still an amazing benefit: “It’s now capping parental leaves at six months and giving parents a taxable $20,000 stipend to defray the costs of childcare.” In the context that they are doing this while few other American organizations do it, and not that many other countries do something this generous.

From a parent’s perspective: money for time is not what one would call ‘amazing’- one of those two you can never get back. I, and I imagine many parents, would see it as a compromise more than anything. But- given the enthusiasm in the sibling comments here, it may also be a cultural thing. My opinion is that of a Canadian. Thinking that you don’t need the full first year with your child may be a big cultural differe…

I don’t think people are making a value judgement that parents shouldn’t have the ability to spend more time with their children, just that for the USA (and for that matter most western countries to boot), this is still a very generous offer that isn’t mandated by any law.

In Canada the time off is legislated making it a requirement for all business, and is what, 35 weeks to be shared between both parents, and consumed in the first 52 weeks?

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#114

Post by docker_up »

simonsarris wrote: post #11

> [heading] How do they manage in Canada? > In Canada, companies have had no option but to make 52-week parental leaves work, when requested, since 2000. The question Canadian companies ask isn’t “Can we do it?” but “How do we do it?” Okay, so... how do they do it? They never answer the question. If you have say, a CFO or a specialist mechanic (that you only need 1 of, but definitely need) and they take a year off, w…

Canada does it because there aren't very many high-performing companies in Canada. I'm saying this as an expat. Most of the top performing Canadians move down to the States.

The companies that exist in Canada are companies like banks, Rogers, Bell, etc, where you won't find too many high performers. I have a friend who has taken 2 1-year leaves, and it didn't impact her job because her job as an account manager isn't particularly hard to take over.

A high-performing company like the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation can't perform at the level that they want if their employees are taking 1 year leaves, and that's just a fact of life. It's the same as Netflix. They have a 1 year policy, but I doubt any engineer will take the full year, but kudos to them if they do.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#115

Post by celticninja »

bluecalm wrote: post #95
unavoidable wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surprisingly few people are actually trying to answer this question on this thread. The answer is straightforward: you either structure your organization so that there are enough overlapping responsibilities to account for parental leaves (e.g. good business practice of not making a fragile organization), or you hire a temporary employee explicitly on a 1 year "parental leave" contract. The labour market is quite goo…

It's surely doable in big organizations but small businesses it's an overwhelming cost even if the government pays the salary of the worker on a leave (the only way it can really work). Maybe the answer to that problem is that really important employees who make a lot of money shouldn't be hired as normal workers but as contractors. Something like: if you get 3x more average salary then you are important but you only…

Maternity/Paternity leave is the norm all over Europe and it works. The USA is not a special case, it would take a law to require it though because businesses are never going to add things like maternity leave with it being mandated by the government.

Your admission of sexism leads me to believe that your family consists of male children. If you had a daughter perhaps you would realise that "not giving a job to a young woman because she may decide to get pregnant" is pretty much the worst reason to refuse someone employment, regardless of the law, you are happy to discriminate against a person just because of their genitalia. That's a sad state of affairs for you, your company and your family.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#116

Post by AimForTheBushes »

sveme wrote: post #51
rb808 wrote: post #24

I once worked with a guy who had 4 children in 5 years. He took a lot of parental leave, sick days and often slacked off early. As soon as the last baby was stable he quit for a new job. Companies and teams that are too generous get shafted.

Anecdotes should not form the basis of lawmaking.

But they should be taken into consideration.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#117

Post by zaroth »

Guaranteeing a job opening (and presumably the same position, or at least the same salary) for a year is a huge ask.

I suppose there are two problems. One is paying partial or full salary during the leave, and the other is getting a job when you’re ready to return.

The first problem is easy to solve just like unemployment, except that in this case it’s paid based on voluntary leave. Since companies don’t make the decision, companies wouldn’t be penalized for having employees take the leave like they can be with unemployment though.

The second issue of finding a place to work when you’re ready to return is tricky. It’s absolutely unfair in certain situations for the company and particularly the specific team for someone to take a year leave and have to hold their spot. But I also understand you want to minimize friction of returning to work.

In many cases the person taking leave isn’t doing anything particularly specialized and it’s a complete non-issue. I don’t know how you might try to codify how specialized a position is other than a salary cap. For example, if you’re paid less than $X and the company has over 50 employees, your position is guaranteed. Over $X or 50 and under employees and you have a job search at the end of the paid leave.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#118

Post by NikolaNovak »

simonsarris wrote: post #11

> [heading] How do they manage in Canada? > In Canada, companies have had no option but to make 52-week parental leaves work, when requested, since 2000. The question Canadian companies ask isn’t “Can we do it?” but “How do we do it?” Okay, so... how do they do it? They never answer the question. If you have say, a CFO or a specialist mechanic (that you only need 1 of, but definitely need) and they take a year off, w…

I can only speak from personal observations as a Canadian; note that I am using female workers/maternity examples and pronouns to try to answer the specific question posed, especially since historically my observed experience has been predominantly with maternity leaves, but also note that in Canada men can increasingly take paternity leave instead/in addition, which I 101% support and further believe will further make this less of a concern/issue.

My wife is a store manager for a major international hardware store chain, and much of her senior leadership team up and down (assistant store managers working for her, as well as her district manager she reports to) are female as well, so in their neck of the woods at least there's no passive selection. Due to nature of pregnancy, maternity leave is something that lends itself to some heads-up, so as far as I have observed the company handles it through careful, productive and communicative planning. This may include contracted positions, but also internal temporary/trial opportunities - role only being available for a period of time is not necessarily a bad thing, if you know and plan for it. Additionally, while people will fall onto a curve and experience counts (so we're not all fully replaceable blocks or cogs), nevertheless you can build an organization that has documented procedures, overlap, and shared collaborative knowledge.

I absolutely have seen people who are "irreplaceable" (and have occasionally occupied such a position), but it's all too frequently just a gap, that is addressable if you're forced to address it and need to do so ahead of time.

Similarly in my line of work, both the functional and technical experts as well as middle managers or senior leadership, happen to have a majority of female team members, and while as IT/BT projectized organization we are less proceduralized than my wife's organization, again - you see it coming, and you prepare for it.

Bottom line - I really think the combination of seeing it coming and having to deal with it, makes it far less of an issue than it might seem from the other side :-/

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#119

Post by sampo »

hesdeadjim wrote: post #21
erentz wrote: post #8

To be somewhat fair this is still an amazing benefit: “It’s now capping parental leaves at six months and giving parents a taxable $20,000 stipend to defray the costs of childcare.” In the context that they are doing this while few other American organizations do it, and not that many other countries do something this generous.

Yea, the article title can practically considered clickbait when this is the resultant change in benefits. Neither my wife or I had a need to be home for an entire year with our child. Three months for me would've been perfect, six would've been a vacation, and six months plus $20k to cover my daycare expenses for the year would've been... well, words fail me.

> six would've been a vacation

I assume you were at home together with your wife? Or are you calling staying at home alone with a 6 months to 1 year old toddler a vacation?

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation backtracks on one-year parental leaves

#120

Post by throwaway5752 »

dyarosla wrote: post #63
fastbeef wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to say, the first day at work after 9 months of parental leave is... sublime. To be able to go to the bathroom and close the door is a pleasure you don’t know until you have to go without. As an aside, what happens to children in the US between 1 month until they start kindergarten (and at what age)?

Private daycare or nannies fill the gap.

Or family member provides daycare, or Mom quits her job (not to be gender biased, but it breaks that way because of breastfeeding). Private daycare for very young children can be tough and expensive, and nannies/au pairs can be more than the take home of a single parent in a household with two working parents.
Post reply on HN