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

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

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by pojzon »

majormajor wrote: post #215
pojzon wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and receive significantly reduced pay. That depends on the country you work in. In Poland you get 80% of normal pay which tbh is a really good deal.

That's not a "really good deal." Do 20% of your normal expenses magically go away? And if you have to spend any extra money of your own for care or related things (maybe none of your old clothes fit anymore!) it gets worse. Plus, you know, there's the HORRIBLY ILL part of it.

My expenses dont go away, but I dont have to work in the same time either. Time is money, so for 8h/day I get 80% of pay and still have those 8h..

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

#982

Post by bdavisx »

Waterluvian wrote: post #664
mike_d wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is called life. There is no vacation when you have a sick spouse, or bought a new house, or are in a car accident. Your job shouldn't be your break, regardless of your situation. My wife is at a FAANG company currently covering for 4 people who all get double digit weeks off because they chose to have children. Does she get any time off for literally working 18 hour days 7 days a week? No of course not.

> have a sick spouse or bought a new house, or are in a car accident. This made me laugh a little because they’re such bad examples unless you’re American. Universal healthcare and sane house prices make these specifically the times you can and should slow down.

The US isn't the only country with insane housing prices - and they are only insane in portions of the country. Look @ buying a house in London or Amsterdam for example.

Although US healthcare is fd though (@ work, not sure if the full f word would trigger something :)

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

#984

Post by Zenbit_UX »

gandutraveler wrote: post #896
jdm2212 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone has to provide the goods and services you'll consume when you're old. Those people are today's kids, whose parents are doing you a big favor at considerable expense to themselves. Raising children isn't like smoking, a hobby, a side hustle, or other miscellaneous personal obligations. It's more like military service and jury duty -- an essential service that some people perform to ensure that society as we kn…

How many parents think about having kids because its an essential service ensure continuance of society? I would say none? It's a personal and selfish choice for their own family. I'm not saying that it doesn't benefit the society. But there are govt schemes like child tax credits etc. which are meant to control the population. Yes parents should be given the time off. But do all parents need the time off? What if yo…

Not only does it not benefit society but if I flew only on private jets for the rest of my life my carbon impact would still be less than a parent's. Producing a first world clone is the single worst thing you can do to the planet.

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

#985

Post by Zenbit_UX »

mc32 wrote: post #45
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 agree. Parents are making sacrifices which benefit society as a whole. Those children the parents are taking care of now will be the ones who will provide for the one complaining now via taxes as well as services rendered to them. If anything, companies should be providing more childcare so that more women (as well as some men) will have less of a burden balancing career and caregiving. I see these people as being…

You're on quite a high horse there, why don't you step down so we can discuss facts?

> I agree. Parents are making sacrifices which benefit society as a whole.

The exact opposite is true. Bringing a first world child into this world is the single worse thing you can do to our planet.

I'm making to sacrifice to not have a child for the planet, parents are not. They're in fact making an incredibly selfish decision to clone themselves despite all evidence showing their children will live through terrible conditions and may deal with famine, water shortages, mass migrations, and overpopulation.

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

#986

Post by tomcam »

rootusrootus wrote: post #960
tomcam wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This morning I went up and down the stairs at least ten times Not trying to be arch or disrespectful here, but I view these moments as an opportunity to get a quick cardio work on happening. (I work at home and I've had to make these trips for decades due to handicapped family members.)

Ha, I don't disagree! Getting some stairs in is good for my health. My point was more about how disruptive it is to try and juggle activities happening simultaneously all over the house. My office is upstairs, my kids do schoolwork at the dining table downstairs. We're working out a schedule where my wife and I will alternate between our offices and taking our laptops down to sit at the dining table next to the kids,…

Oh man, I feel you. My clever solution has been large houses and kids who are used to a work-at-home dad... but yeah

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

#987

Post by lione »

notacoward wrote: post #912
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Long working hours and oncall requirements..." are not benefits and they are only increasing now for childless people, while the parents get multiple weeks of free vacation. You've engaged in a slight of hand here by describing the demands of a job that are somewhat easier for the childless to meet, and then turning around and treating these demands like they're "...policies that favor the childless...".

How is a demand that is easier for the childless to meet, even if only slightly, not a policy that favors the childless? That's not sleight of hand. It's just English.

Because a demand isn't a favor? A demand to someone implies a loss on their part, of time or effort or value. It doesn't matter how easy it is for them to do. If I say that ice cream vendors must give out their ice cream for free, it's not a policy that favors them just because they can more easily meet the demand then someone without an ice cream business.

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

#988

Post by [deleted] »

Aeolun wrote: post #525
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…

One of the many reasons I have had kids is as a service to humanity. It’s definitely fun, but way too many people just cannot be bothered so someone has to. I kind of want our race/country/planet to continue existing even if I can’t.

[deleted]

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

#989

Post by notacoward »

lione wrote: post #987
notacoward wrote: post #912

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is a demand that is easier for the childless to meet, even if only slightly, not a policy that favors the childless? That's not sleight of hand. It's just English.

Because a demand isn't a favor? A demand to someone implies a loss on their part, of time or effort or value. It doesn't matter how easy it is for them to do. If I say that ice cream vendors must give out their ice cream for free, it's not a policy that favors them just because they can more easily meet the demand then someone without an ice cream business.

You're being very slippery with different meanings of "demand" here. I have no interest in engaging with such sophistry, as I'm sure honest readers already knew what I meant.
Post reply on HN