Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19 • Hacker News Board

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#441

Post by nicoffeine » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #250

gus_massa wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had a 24 hours electricity outage last week. (Some problem with an electric wire in the whole block after a heavy rain). Should I buy an electricity generator just in case? I expect to be able to send the kids to school, perhaps at least a few hours per day. It is impossible now. An in case the school is not working, I can send them with one of the grandmas or the other. But we are currently in the peak of the pan…

Glad to hear you're taking responsibility for your life choices in this time of hardship. But... that's what you signed up for when you made the decision to have a child. I guess the question is: Do you believe that you should receive benefits above and beyond those of childless adults because of your life choices? That the act of becoming a parent is so sacred it should grant you benefits in otherwise unrelated area…

Everything you do depends on the services of other people, which depends on a somewhat stable birthrate. As you grow old and sick, the children of the people receiving "benefits above and beyond those of childless adults" is the only thing between you and a lonely, early grave. You honestly don't understand that?

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#442

Post by zem » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #4

I am a middle-aged adult with no children who's worked at tech firms for the past couple decades. To be honest, the "resentment" of those without children have for "benefits" those with children get strikes me as extremely selfish, immature and displaying a total lack of empathy. This is time off specifically to take care of children, something now that has become exceedingly more difficult in Covid times. What's nex…

honestly, i would not be at all surprised if there were people who resented a cancer patient for "not pulling their weight". american culture has a depressingly strong element of "your misfortunes and hardships are entirely your responsibility to bear; don't ask us to help with them".

edit: right here in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24413813

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#443

Post by CydeWeys » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

GuB-42 wrote: post #425

CydeWeys wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In modern society it's basically required that both parents work full-time jobs. It's not the 50s anymore; you can't support an entire household with children on one income. So you can't have the expectation that one of the parents give up a large chunk of their salary just to have kids. If you do structure society in this way then you get rapidly declining birth rates and very bad long-term population demographic pr…

Ok, it is not the 50s but why could people do it in the 50s and why can't we do it now? We are hearing "automation will destroy jobs" left and right and for some reason, we can't afford stay at home moms. The "universal child care" argument makes me feel uncomfortable. It one step short of a dystopia. One where women would surrender their child to a state sponsored center where child care specialists make them produc…

Real pay has been stagnant for at least the past 4 decades, while expenses (particularly housing, healthcare, childcare, and education) have skyrocketed. That's the reason the average family can't survive on one income now like it could in the 50s. Some possible solutions to these problems would include: Universal healthcare, universal childcare, and elimination of restrictions on building more housing (i.e. kill low density residential zoning entirely). Make those changes and it should again become possible to support a household on a single income.

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#444

Post by alisonkisk » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

jdm2212 wrote: post #339

nicbou wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then is it cool if I skip a few meetings to volunteer to help the homeless? We already heavily subsidise child-rearing through taxes and other benefits. As I said elsewhere, there are mechanisms for supporting parents already. If you tried to let any other charitable endeavour take over your work schedule, you wouldn't expect your compensation to remain unaffected. I'm not resentful at parents. It just seems complete…

> Then is it cool if I skip a few meetings to volunteer to help the homeless? That's the thing -- you won't actually go volunteer with the homeless. (Or at least, 99% of us wouldn't.) But parents actually have to change those diapers. If there's a little kid running around in the background of that Zoom call, someone is doing a lot of hard work to keep the kid alive. And unlike volunteering at the homeless shelter, t…

Did any of these companies offer to pay their single workers to work on Covid support systems or handle a shift at the grocery store?

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#445

Post by newen » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:48 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #408

ShroudedNight wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While giving every employee personal time may well be the right answer, I also believe that we should acknowledge that, at least up until recently, there was an on-going social contract that society had that provided parents with additional time as an on-going investment into the health of our social fabric, and that, in a sense, we have already benefited (at least in aggregate) from the dividend payed by the previou…

I think most societies around the world didn't and don't provide parents with any additional time. It just so happened the that most people had children and elders/women could raise them while the men kept working. Not to say that women didn't work, but whatever they did allowed them to keep an eye on kids, or relatives/neighbors did. Also, increasing the population is one of the most damaging things to the environme…

Ridiculous argument since, you know, the human race dies out if no one has kids.

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#446

Post by room500 » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #386

room500 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this sentiment. Farming is critical for society. However, we don't require everyone to pull on their overalls and work the land. Security is critical for society. However, we don't expect every person to pick up their machine gun and jump in a trench. Society is nowhere near a population level that is dangerously low. In fact, we are more concerned with overpopulation and overconsumption. If you ha…

Modern technology means that 2% of the citizens of a developed country can feed the rest. That's why nobody wants/needs the average J. to farm. Modern technology means that only a small percentage of citizens are enough to defend the rest. That's why nobody wants/needs the average J. to fight. If all of a sudden, say, 50% of the people having children now, in developed countries, would decide to not have children, we…

> If all of a sudden, say, 50% of the people having children now...

This is assuming that people are only having children out of a sense of duty. Do you think that 50% of parents are having children out of some sense of duty to society?

> 2. Your lifestyle is made possible by people that choose to have kids. Especially women, who sacrifice a lot for kids. At least be respectful to them.

I reread my comment a couple times and I don't see where I was disrespectful.

This is anecdotal, but I have never had a friend confide in me that they had a child for the social good of procreation. All of my friends have had children because they wanted to have children. My wife and I are planning on having a child because we want to have a child. If you told me that society didn't require me to have a child, I wouldn't care one bit.

So my question to you is "if there was no social need for a child, would you still have one?" If the answer is "yes," I don't see how you can claim that you are performing some heroic deed to mankind. And calling that out is not disrespectful.

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#447

Post by wh1t3n01s3 » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #4

I am a middle-aged adult with no children who's worked at tech firms for the past couple decades. To be honest, the "resentment" of those without children have for "benefits" those with children get strikes me as extremely selfish, immature and displaying a total lack of empathy. This is time off specifically to take care of children, something now that has become exceedingly more difficult in Covid times. What's nex…

Our society (and economy) is killing our planet. We are too many. Not to have kids is a choice of life, not the opposite. We are not endangered.

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#448

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #265

rootusrootus wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring the obvious downsides for a moment, I'd happily trade places with one of my childless coworkers right about now. This morning I went up and down the stairs at least ten times while trying to get my 7- and 9-year old kids successfully established in their first remote learning session, simultaneously participating in two consecutive Zoom meetings with coworkers, and figuring out how to solve a nagging issue i…

> I'd happily trade places with one of my childless coworkers right about now. Yes, some things come with downsides. I'm sure a lot of people would also want to trade places with you during the happy times you have with your kids. But you can't usually get the benefits without the downsides.

[deleted]

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#449

Post by thegayngler » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:50 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #4

I am a middle-aged adult with no children who's worked at tech firms for the past couple decades. To be honest, the "resentment" of those without children have for "benefits" those with children get strikes me as extremely selfish, immature and displaying a total lack of empathy. This is time off specifically to take care of children, something now that has become exceedingly more difficult in Covid times. What's nex…

I know this is going to be a really unpopular take.

I tend to be more libertarian on this. I think the government and tech should get out of the business of prioritizing and promoting a specific family structure using tax code and other benefits. Let people decide if they want to have kids and deal with the fallout accordingly.

We already have people we can't adequately support now but you have the government and tech companies incentivizing people financially to have families even when they can't afford it.

IMO it is selfish to force other people to finance your family even when there is already plenty of resources to pay for your own family.

These "benefits" the families are getting leave very little resources for the most vulnerable people in society.

I just think it's generally selfish and irresponsible to have kids if you need the government structures to finance your lifestyle through the tax code and other government institutions.

I see people making far and away more money than me but they pay a lower tax rate than me because they have kids and I don't. That's not only selfish on their part but also unfair.

If the US had an adequate social safety net that includes UBI, Housing and Healthcare this might all be moot.

Re: Tech firms face growing resentment of parent employees during Covid-19

#450

Post by alisonkisk » Tue, Sep 08, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

smeeth wrote: post #361

nicbou wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument is made again and again in this thread, and it never got addressed. 1. There are already functional mechanisms for contribution. A single, childless person is already contributing more through their taxes. The government already heavily subsidises child-rearing. 2. Child-rearing is given an arbitrary pass that other equally charitable actions wouldn't get. A single, childless person couldn't let his com…

>The government already heavily subsidises child-rearing. Ah yes, the lofty government subsidy of x > Child-rearing is given an arbitrary pass that other equally charitable actions wouldn't get. Raising a child is spending 20-40 hrs a week for 18 years and a boatload of money to create another person in the workforce who will spend ~40 years generating GDP and paying taxes. Considering GDP per capita in the USA is ~$…

You forgot the $10k/yr public/charter school tuition.

Those people making $62K are getting paid for their work, not donating it.