4 ms·

Absolutely, I don't think that parental leave will impact someone's decision to have kids. However, giving a benefit to people who have kids without giving that

Absolutely, I don't think that parental leave will impact someone's decision to have kids. However, giving a benefit to people who have kids without giving that same benefit to people without kids is not that different from the company saying that they want their employees to have kids. It won't actually change behavior, but it still stands out to me as a pretty opinionated stance from the employer about what behavior they want from their employees. Parental leave is a good way to keep people with kids happy. Why shouldn't we also keep people without kids happy? Everyone deserves time to pursue passions outside of work. Some people are passionate about their families. Other people are passionate about other things. I think employers shouldn't have an opinion on which is more valid, and they should support both.

darkmighty 11y ago
If it doesn't change behavior it's not incentivizing, that simple.
exacube 11y ago
> However, giving a benefit to people who have kids without giving that same benefit to people without kids is not that different from the company saying that they want their employees to have kids. /want/ their employees to have kids means that they desire it to some degree. I am sure MS doesn't desire it, but rather indifferent. But they do desire to be a more humanitarian company and want their employees to be happier. > Why shouldn't we also keep people without kids happy? Everyone deserves time to pursue passions outside of work. Some people are passionate about their families. Are you trying to say that because people with children have parental leave, people without children should have equivalent leaves too? That sounds a little ridiculous to me.
- aianus 11y ago
  > Are you trying to say that because people with children have parental leave, people without children should have equivalent leaves too? That sounds a little ridiculous to me. How so? They probably work harder (for the employer) than the ones with children but deserve less PTO?
vbit 11y ago
An employer may offer free sushi and beer on Fridays. Does it mean they encourage fish and alcohol consumption? What about employees who don't consume either due to health or religious reasons, or just plain preference? Do they now deserve make-up compensation? As a parent I never come in late and stay for dinner. This means the dinner service is an employer cost that I get no benefit from. Clearly the single people are the primary reason for this unnecessary cost to the company. I also don't drink soda and I'm not sure why my employer encourages this behavior by spending so much money on free soda everywhere. Lets nix that too! Maybe you see what I'm getting at. The employer is just trying to accommodate and please people with various life choices for good retention and hiring rates. There's no reason that they absolutely shouldn't offer something to kid-free people only, it's just that they don't currently, probably because they don't think it will help much.
- aianus 11y ago
  You're talking about things that cost almost nothing compared an entire year's free salary.

darkmighty 11y ago

If it doesn't change behavior it's not incentivizing, that simple.

exacube 11y ago

> However, giving a benefit to people who have kids without giving that same benefit to people without kids is not that different from the company saying that they want their employees to have kids. /want/ their employees to have kids means that they desire it to some degree. I am sure MS doesn't desire it, but rather indifferent. But they do desire to be a more humanitarian company and want their employees to be happier. > Why shouldn't we also keep people without kids happy? Everyone deserves time to pursue passions outside of work. Some people are passionate about their families. Are you trying to say that because people with children have parental leave, people without children should have equivalent leaves too? That sounds a little ridiculous to me.

aianus 11y ago
> Are you trying to say that because people with children have parental leave, people without children should have equivalent leaves too? That sounds a little ridiculous to me. How so? They probably work harder (for the employer) than the ones with children but deserve less PTO?

vbit 11y ago

An employer may offer free sushi and beer on Fridays. Does it mean they encourage fish and alcohol consumption? What about employees who don't consume either due to health or religious reasons, or just plain preference? Do they now deserve make-up compensation? As a parent I never come in late and stay for dinner. This means the dinner service is an employer cost that I get no benefit from. Clearly the single people are the primary reason for this unnecessary cost to the company. I also don't drink soda and I'm not sure why my employer encourages this behavior by spending so much money on free soda everywhere. Lets nix that too! Maybe you see what I'm getting at. The employer is just trying to accommodate and please people with various life choices for good retention and hiring rates. There's no reason that they absolutely shouldn't offer something to kid-free people only, it's just that they don't currently, probably because they don't think it will help much.

aianus 11y ago
You're talking about things that cost almost nothing compared an entire year's free salary.