Posted on 07/19/2007 7:14:23 AM PDT by RogerWilko
Federal employees, like other American workers, are entitled to up to 12 weeks of leave after the birth of a child. It's just not paid leave.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers is working to change that, though. And at least one of the group's members believes that legislation to establish a paid parental leave policy for federal employees has a serious shot at passing this Congress.
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, has rolled out two bills that would provide at least eight weeks of paid maternity leave for civil servants, and paternity benefits as well.
One bill (S. 80) would provide at least eight weeks of paid leave for a mother after childbirth, while requiring a minimum of one week of paid leave for fathers and adoptive parents.
A broader bill (S. 1681), which would apply to both public and private sector employees, would permit the eight weeks of paid leave to women and men for the birth or adoption of a child, care for a critically ill child, spouse or parent, or for personal recovery from a serious illness.
"Roughly half of federal employees are female, and to recruit and retain the most talented women, the federal government must find a way to offer this assistance," said Liz Connell, a legislative assistant and senior health adviser for Stevens, at a legislative breakfast Wednesday sponsored by the nonprofit volunteer advocacy group Federally Employed Women.
While it may seem that paid leave legislation is nothing new, Connell said the issue has gradually drawn bipartisan backing. "Its chance of becoming a reality is greater than ever," she said. "If we continue to build support on both sides of the aisle, we'll have the chance to pass paid leave legislation this Congress."
According to the Work, Family and Equity Index, released by researchers from Harvard and McGill universities, the United States lags behind 163 other countries that guarantee paid maternal leave and 45 countries that provide paid paternal leave. Additionally, 37 countries already ensure paid leave for the care of an ill child.
On top of Stevens' legislation, the Office of Personnel Management appears to be jumping on board with an idea to provide employees with short-term disability benefits, which would include paid maternity leave.
OPM's new position is a far cry from where it stood in 2001, when it issued to agencies a study that found the federal government's leave policies and programs compared favorably with benefits offered in the private sector. But after discovering that the government's lack of paid leave was hindering its ability to recruit women of childbearing age, OPM has started to seek a remedy. OPM Director Linda Springer said in May that the proposed benefit could be offered through insurance, making it easier to swallow for budget-minded legislators.
Meanwhile, Connell said that Stevens has high hopes for the legislative branch as well. Currently, there are variations in policies on Capitol Hill, since each congressional member is responsible for instituting his or her own policy, Connell said.
She added, however, that since Stevens took office in 1968, every woman on his staff has been entitled to 12 weeks of paid maternity leave with the option of temporarily working part-time schedules beyond that.
"Stevens believes that federal employees deserve better," Connell said. "They deserve consistency and a guarantee that time off will be available when it is needed most -- when they start a new family."
I'm not sure how I feel about the leave for taking care of a critically ill person, or if you're recovering from a serious illness, but I say NO for the maternity leave!
There's NO REASON a Federal employee should get more time off with what's already given. A NEW Federal employee gets 13 days of vacation, 13 days of sick leave (that accrues and you never lose), and 10 paid holidays a year.
If you have between 3-15 years of service, you get 19.5 days of vacation, and 26 days after 15 years (Sick leave stays the same).
All someone would have to do, even a NEW employee, is plan ahead for 2 years and you'd have 52 days to use!! That's OVER 10 weeks of PAID leave!
In addition, you'd STILL get your 10 paid holidays, so it's not like you'd have to go to work for 2 years without a break! If they don't like that... Wait 5 years until you get more time in and more leave accrued.
They even have a leave donation program for people that have exhausted all their own leave and want to go on leave welfare (must be deemed medically necessary)!
The road to socialism in the U.S. continues to march forward! It's being proposed by a Republican /sarc to boot!
With "R's" like this, who needs "D's"?
It is EXTREMELY disruptive.
What's worse, the male goldbricks in the office are beginning to take "parental leave" - so for 12 weeks they expect somebody else in the office to do their work for them -- and they aren't even the ones who are bearing the baby!
It is EXTREMELY disruptive.
What's worse, the male goldbricks in the office are beginning to take "parental leave" - so for 12 weeks they expect somebody else in the office to do their work for them -- and they aren't even the ones who are bearing the baby!
There's the problem right there. The Republicans ought to be pushing for limited government and ought to be saying "No" with one voice.
Instead, we work with the Leftists and reach a compromise (likely to be 80% of what the Leftists asked for in the first place). When have the Leftists ever worked with us? Drilling in ANWAR? Well, OK you nice Republicans, let's compromise ... [yeah, that'll be the day!]
Wouldn’t be necessary if the government would stop taxing us at such high rates. Used to be that one of the parents could stay home if they wanted to and the family would get by just fine.
Here's why it NEEDS to done!
They NEED to catch up to the other countries with crappy economies and productivity! So this is a GOOD way to get it moving in that direction.
The government 'recruiting'? The government 'competing'? That's a novel concept!
When the alternative minimum tax money comes in after next year, they should be able to afford it.
When the alternative minimum tax money comes in after next year, they should be able to afford it.
I used to work in a steel factory. A lay off was coming and a girl I worked with wanted to get laid off. She told the foreman that if he did not lay her off, she was going to get pregnant. Her ‘husband’ was in jail but that was no impediment to her. She went on maternity leave, which paid more than the lay off.
They dream up these unrealistic policies in fantasy land, and the only way employers will have to protect themselves is to not hire people of child bearing age. I know the feds are completely dispensible and unnecessary, but there are employees that are essential.
“”Roughly half of federal employees are female, and to recruit and retain the most talented women, the federal government must find a way to offer this assistance,” said Liz Connell,”
Yep, recruiting someone demanding equal pay for 17% less work is always a winning formula!
Yep, recruiting someone demanding equal pay for 17% less work is always a winning formula!
In some of the agencies I've worked for, you wouldn't believe some of the "talented" women I've seen employed the name of diversity! Can you say... "High-paid welfare"!?
I KNEW you could! (Mister Roger's impersonation)
I’m also a Fed (30 years) and I’m not in favor of this.
When I had my little ones, I had to use accrued leave, or
pay back “borrowed/advanced” leave. We didn’t even have leave donor back then.
But truthfully, we have a great many males retiring with well over 1000 (some over 3000) hours of sick leave which adds on to their years of service to increase their retirement annuity (not under the new retirement system. I don’t think I’ve EVER seen a female retire with that much because she had to use sick leave for childbirth and caring for sick children and elderly parents.
So in that sense, it would help level things out between the sexes.
We’ve had a couple of men request paternity leave, but not much. Truthfully, I think most men don’t much want to be around the house with a newborn. My husband didn’t.
“Used to be that one of the parents could stay home if they wanted to and the family would get by just fine.”
Actually, they still can.
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, has rolled out two bills that would provide at least eight weeks of paid maternity leave for civil servants, and paternity benefits as well.Stevens is a Major League Assh*l*.
And if any 'R' should have lost it was this arrogant mutt and if he wasn't up last time I pray he goes down next time. It's jerks like HIM who the people are pi$$ed at.
American workers, are entitled to up to 12 weeks of leave after the birth of a child.”
It is EXTREMELY disruptive.
What’s worse, the male goldbricks in the office are beginning to take “parental leave” - so for 12 weeks they expect somebody else in the office to do their work for them — and they aren’t even the ones who are bearing the baby!”
I have worked since I was 17 y/o.
I worked in a number of jobs, but mostly office positions.
I have seen up close and personal what happened when one of the “ladies” on staff got pregnant and still wanted her “job”.
She took off for every conceived trip to the “doctor” she could schedule- on the health plan which impacted all of us.
She had her baby and then wanted her job back with holding seniority. No one had replaced her for any number of weeks, which meant that if the rest of us could do ALL the work, we really didn’t need her, and her wages could have been spread among those of use who didn’t leave to have “babies”.
She then got extra time off to take the new baby to the doctor, etc.
The long and short of it all is this:
The new “mom” got extra attention and priviledges the rest of us never got. Every job that had a deadline was loaded on the rest of us, and she never got put at the bottom of the list for promotions, etc.
Am I bitter? Darn right I am. I finally quit a well-known employer and it took 2 1/2 persons to replace most of what I did, and some of the reports I did haven’t been done since. But every “mom” who kept getting pregnant never got put to the end of the line.
Have been self-employed for over 30 years. Now I don’t have to listen to the BS.
This provision will bankrupt small businesses.
If I were still carrying 15+ clients today, I would tell them to no longer hire any new employees, and to downsize their current staff and make less Gross income to have fewer hassles.
I am tired of “legislation” telling me how to run MY business. I never had a client who had a government entity as a “partner” with capitalization, just in the “sharing of the income”.
I guess the 12 weeks off wasn't good enough for those socialists. Now they want you and everyone elso to pay for other people's decision to have a kid!
If you want a kid, plan ahead, save your money and pay your own way! Why should everyone else have to pay for their time off!?
See... Step by step... First we'll get 12 weeks off for everyone, then after they get used to that idea, we'll make them have to pay them while they're off too!
Then we can get FREE HEALTHCARE for EVERYONE!! WHHHEEEE!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.