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

Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

cdc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 174 posts

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#81

Post by mruts »

crankylinuxuser wrote: post #57
renholder wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upboat for rationalisation. Also, from the European perspective (and specifically speaking of the technology sector, as that's what I have first-hand experience with), taking sick leave to take care of a child at home isn't a thing, whatsoever. You would just send an email to your team saying that you're sorry but you're working from home because your kid is sick and that would be the end of it. No compulsion to take…

On the converse... I'm an American whom lives in Indiana. Let me share my experiences. I worked at Starbucks for 5 years. When I got sick, I showed up to work. I know I worked while having the flu, and making drinks for people. If we didn't show up, our hours for next week would be messed up badly and intentionally. We would go from 35 hours to 15 hours, or we'd be scheduled "clopens" - close at midnight, and open at…

Well would you prefer to have a crappy job or no job at all? Don’t labor under the assumption that government mandates don’t affect the decisions of businesses.

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#82

Post by jackconnor »

renholder wrote: post #15
School-Cotton wrote: post #11

The headline here is incredibly misleading. The CDC is not making the factual claim that "low-income parents send sick kids to school due to lack paid sick leave". The actual truth: a paper from the CDC finding an apparently quite weak link between poverty and rate of school absence due to sickness stuck that in as one of many somewhat plausible explanations, in a very speculative discussion section. To emphasize: th…

Upboat for rationalisation. Also, from the European perspective (and specifically speaking of the technology sector, as that's what I have first-hand experience with), taking sick leave to take care of a child at home isn't a thing, whatsoever. You would just send an email to your team saying that you're sorry but you're working from home because your kid is sick and that would be the end of it. No compulsion to take…

This is janitors and cashiers at McDonalds, there’s no “working from home” and i guarantee it’s the same in Europe. We’re not talking about IT jobs here dude.

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#83

Post by HarryHirsch »

mruts wrote: post #81
crankylinuxuser wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the converse... I'm an American whom lives in Indiana. Let me share my experiences. I worked at Starbucks for 5 years. When I got sick, I showed up to work. I know I worked while having the flu, and making drinks for people. If we didn't show up, our hours for next week would be messed up badly and intentionally. We would go from 35 hours to 15 hours, or we'd be scheduled "clopens" - close at midnight, and open at…

Well would you prefer to have a crappy job or no job at all? Don’t labor under the assumption that government mandates don’t affect the decisions of businesses.

I, for one, would prefer that sick people stay at home. Especially food service workers. It would improve public health.

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#84

Post by arrrg »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #14

Children are expensive. And it’s not about money. It’s about time and energy and effort and incessant tending and bonding. I honestly think people need counseling and planning before they start to think about starting a family. They need back up plans and contingency strategies. It used to be that we lived in small communal groups and non nuclear families. Usually matriarchal wherein the post menopausal grandmother p…

I do not understand why you are picking this framing. That makes no sense to me.

We can quibble about the veracity of the study and the chosen hypothesis for explanation, but what this is about is people feeling pressure from their workplace to not take sick leave when their child is sick.

And such workplaces are cruel and monstrous and should not ever exist and I see it as the state’s role to strongly and with harsh punishments enforce that to make this into a societal norm if it isn’t already the status quo. That’s at least my very bog-standard German view, where, while there obviously are problems, this actually is the status quo. So it can be done.

To me it seems completely clear that all people have to have unlimited sick leave and that obviously includes sick leave for when their children are sick.

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#85

Post by nilskidoo »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #83
mruts wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well would you prefer to have a crappy job or no job at all? Don’t labor under the assumption that government mandates don’t affect the decisions of businesses.

I, for one, would prefer that sick people stay at home. Especially food service workers. It would improve public health.

I think most people would agree, but then there are a lot of workers who simply cannot afford to take any time off, no matter how sick. I just witnessed this with my mom's nurse practitioner, who had to cut her own maternity leave short because the paid leave was not enough to cover her rent.

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#86

Post by UncleSlacky »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #52
saagarjha wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second amendment is not protection from crime; at best it’s protection from crime that presents an active danger to your safety.

>The second amendment is not protection from crime If you are made a victim of property crime (i.e. most nonviolent crime) there is no good solution if the property can't easily be returned. Social standards and possible punishment is what prevents that kind of crime and even it doesn't do a very good job. > at best it’s protection from crime that presents an active danger to your safety. Well that's more than you ca…

> If you are made a victim of property crime (i.e. most nonviolent crime) there is no good solution if the property can't easily be returned.

Do you not have home & contents insurance in the US?

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#87

Post by Escolte »

lqet wrote: post #73

I am European, and the comments in here talking about how this would never be a problem in Europe are a bit elitist. It may be true that you may work from home if you a software developer, but if you do shift work, for example, it may be very difficult (or impossible) to find a replacement for you if you realize that your 6-year has a cold 60 minutes before your shift starts. It may be very possible that your co-work…

Because here in Western Europe, our healthcare doesn't depend on your job/income.

Plus, I've found that on average Americans are more health anxious (for example, if I search in Google Spain in Spanish "I just accidently hit my head with a wall" the treatment results I'll get will be "if you feel fine afterwards, and you didn't black out or anything like that, it's okay" while if I do the same search on google.com/ncr in English the second result tells me to go to the hospital now and demand a CT scan of my brain to check for an internal hemorrhage) than Europeans are.

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#88

Post by crankylinuxuser »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #83
mruts wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well would you prefer to have a crappy job or no job at all? Don’t labor under the assumption that government mandates don’t affect the decisions of businesses.

I, for one, would prefer that sick people stay at home. Especially food service workers. It would improve public health.

There's a carrot and a stick for you:

Paid sick leave with a urgent care clinic available at no charge. Someone gets sick (esp with food service) and they work for you, they should provide that clinic at no charge, and you get a legit sick day.

The stick: the health dept should be able to come in and close that food service thing down right then and there if someone is obviously sick. And because it was negligence of the company, the company is still legally obligated to pay the wages of everyone they screwed over. Tipped staff will go by average weekly reported wages.

.... But that's wishful thinking. The NRA - National Restaurant Association pays more and is better connected than public health and respectful treatment. I mean, who really cares if a few sick workers spread influenza as hotspots in food service, and infect many more, and likely kill a few with compromised immune systems? /sarcastic

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#89

Post by Tepix »

renholder wrote: post #15
School-Cotton wrote: post #11

The headline here is incredibly misleading. The CDC is not making the factual claim that "low-income parents send sick kids to school due to lack paid sick leave". The actual truth: a paper from the CDC finding an apparently quite weak link between poverty and rate of school absence due to sickness stuck that in as one of many somewhat plausible explanations, in a very speculative discussion section. To emphasize: th…

Upboat for rationalisation. Also, from the European perspective (and specifically speaking of the technology sector, as that's what I have first-hand experience with), taking sick leave to take care of a child at home isn't a thing, whatsoever. You would just send an email to your team saying that you're sorry but you're working from home because your kid is sick and that would be the end of it. No compulsion to take…

In Germany if you child is sick you have a right to stay home and take care of it. No need to work from home either during that time (but you can of course choose to do so).

Who pays for this will depend on your employer. Many of them pay for a few days per year. If you need more days or if they don't pay, you can get "Kinderkrankengeld²" from your national health insurance (another 10 days per year).

---

² https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinderkrankengeld

Re: Associations Among School Absenteeism, G.I. and Respiratory Illness, and Income

#90

Post by Tepix »

jackconnor wrote: post #82
renholder wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upboat for rationalisation. Also, from the European perspective (and specifically speaking of the technology sector, as that's what I have first-hand experience with), taking sick leave to take care of a child at home isn't a thing, whatsoever. You would just send an email to your team saying that you're sorry but you're working from home because your kid is sick and that would be the end of it. No compulsion to take…

This is janitors and cashiers at McDonalds, there’s no “working from home” and i guarantee it’s the same in Europe. We’re not talking about IT jobs here dude.

McDonald's in Germany is unlikely to pay your wage when you stay at home to take care of your kids, but many other employers do.

Anyway, you still have a right to get Kinderkrankengeld for 10 days per year, paid by the national health insurance. Enjoy!

Post reply on HN