4 ms·
> it seems like people who choose not to have kids should receive similar benefits. They do. In Microsofts case they recieve 12 weeks for parental leave, with
by mhurron 11y ago
> it seems like people who choose not to have kids should receive similar benefits.
They do. In Microsofts case they recieve 12 weeks for parental leave, with mothers getting an additional 8 weeks. All Microsoft employees get that.
That some choose not to exercise those benifits does not mean they do not have them.
- ghaff 11y agoYou're being deliberately obtuse. They're being given a benefit that they have no intention of using which, at some level, is less personally valuable than a hypothetical alternative company-wide benefits package. Nothing against this plan personally but, like all benefit plans, it makes certain assumptions about typical preferences. (e.g. all other things being equal, a generic sabbatical plan that everyone could use would presumably be less generous than one applying only to a subset.)
- mhurron 11y agoNo I'm not being obtuse, I am being very serious. Every employee is given the same benefits package, they can use it or not. If someone elects not to use the 401k matching should they get the cash equviant? Your position is they should because they chose not to exercise the agreed upon package. Or if someone gets into an accident and health insurance covers $100k of his medical bills, it's only fair that you, who was not in an accident, get $100k in cash because they got a benefit you didn't. Every Microsoft employee gets the same benefits package. It is already fair. You personally may not hold parts of that package very important but that only influences how much weight that part of the compensation has when choosing other oportunities. Also, Microsoft has a sabbatical policy, it's a separate thing. But you haven't let facts get in your way up until now, so why start.