Engineer Says Software Firm Cut Her Maternity Leave Short After Her Baby Died

Post by PascLeRasc » Sun, Nov 03, 2019, 8:19 PM UTC

vecplane wrote: post #76

ttul wrote: post #8

I had a baby that died. It was an excruciating experience and nobody around us knew what to do or say. From personal experience I can say it should be treated as a grave mental health issue and companies should be forced to provide a great deal of leave to both parents. Whether leave is paid or unpaid, this should be treated in the same way as any disability or health related leave. IMHO it would be cheap for compani…

I can't imagine what it would be like, and I'm terribly sorry that this happened to you. BUT what's the limiting principle behind 'forcing' companies to provide 'a great deal of leave' for this? I certainly agree that it's reasonable for an employer to offer bereavement time for the loss of a close family member, but why should this be made into law?

Post by lazyasciiart » Sun, Nov 03, 2019, 8:22 PM UTC

curiousgal wrote: post #10

She got six weeks instead of eight. How dare they. She could've applied for more days based on her psychological state. Also how dare they not pay her commissions earned by her team while she was away. I think the tone is all wrong here. Economically, it makes sense to "discriminate" against pregnant women, so the discussion should be more "Here's why you shouldn't do it" and less "How dare you do it!". Just my $0.02…

Post by traderjane » Sun, Nov 03, 2019, 8:31 PM UTC

asveikau wrote: post #85

vecplane wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine what it would be like, and I'm terribly sorry that this happened to you. BUT what's the limiting principle behind 'forcing' companies to provide 'a great deal of leave' for this? I certainly agree that it's reasonable for an employer to offer bereavement time for the loss of a close family member, but why should this be made into law?

Because of cases like this article. Evidently this woman's employer does not have the insight to behave like decent human beings and needs to be forced. Your argument can be turned on just about any labor law. "It may be reasonable for a company to do this, but why should they be forced?" The answer is without reasonable minimum standards, some people will exploit their employees.

Post by dominotw » Sun, Nov 03, 2019, 8:32 PM UTC

xenihn wrote: post #37

ttul wrote: post #8

I had a baby that died. It was an excruciating experience and nobody around us knew what to do or say. From personal experience I can say it should be treated as a grave mental health issue and companies should be forced to provide a great deal of leave to both parents. Whether leave is paid or unpaid, this should be treated in the same way as any disability or health related leave. IMHO it would be cheap for compani…

>From personal experience I can say it should be treated as a grave mental health issue and companies should be forced to provide a great deal of leave to both parents. This shouldn't be limited to losing a newborn child. Losing a child at any stage of life is devastating.

Post by mattkrause » Sun, Nov 03, 2019, 8:33 PM UTC

walshemj wrote: post #84

r00fus wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would require taxation and there’s a segment of the population and most corporations who would fight that tooth and nail even if it only cost a small amount in aggregate.

Compared to the UK the social security system in the USA is fairly generous so if that is affordable so would be maternity leave.