6 ms·

>After returning from a year long maternity leave I found it difficult to juggle my new life as a mom working in the confines of a 9-5, I also came to the reali

>After returning from a year long maternity leave I found it difficult to juggle my new life as a mom working in the confines of a 9-5, I also came to the realization that the corporate life just wasn’t for me and became very unhappy. I was tired of faking it and really just wanted to follow my forever dream of doing my own thing and being my own boss. So, I did what anyone would do in that situation and got pregnant again ;) ... Knowing I had another year-long maternity leave on the horizon, I started brainstorming e-comm business ideas. This doesn't sound good, basically kickstarting a company on another company's money.

giarc 8y ago
Maternity leave benefits in Canada are paid by the federal government through Employment Insurance (EI) program. New parents get 12-18 months of EI payments. Your employer is only required to hold a position for you, they are not obligated to pay your wage.
- emilfihlman 8y ago
  Ah, that's good to know because in Finland, your employer does pay it.
  - a_brawling_boo 8y ago
    Hey, serious question from an American. How does this policy not cause massive hiring discrimination against young women, especially recently married women? I asked my Canadian relatives this question, and their answers basically boiled down to 'well that would be illegal'. But from what I can tell enforcing anti discrimination in hiring is next to impossible, especially if you interview and hire even a slightly more qualified candidate.
    - giarc 8y ago
      I would argue that it's not the law that's preventing discrimination, it's the fact that nearly 50% of the workforce is made up of women, thereby excluding a huge category is detrimental to your business. You wouldn't be a very good manager if you decided not to hire women because one day they might take a year off. Additionally, many managers are probably also parents themselves and understand the importance of maternity leave and understand it's part of having a workforce. Plus, in my department, we actually see the benefit of maternity leaves. We get to hire a new person for a year that can bring new insight and experience into the role. If they are good, we try to find a place for them, if they are bad, the year expires and they go off without any fanfare.
    - didibus 8y ago
      This is totally a wild guess, but I think a small part of it is just the cultural values. It seems most people are for such leave, including the people who hire.
    - stef25 8y ago
      A candidate may get pregnant between the ages of 20 - 40. About half the people in my social circle with kids aren't married and almost all had their kid(s) after 35. This is quite a definite trend here in W-Europe. Here in Belgium maternity leave is actually quite short, but you have the option to extend it for many months albeit at a reduced pay (provided by the govt). Not everyone can afford to extend it. Dads can also get paternity leave, up until the kid is 12yrs old. Gender roles are changing a lot, paradoxically me as the father / chauffeur of the family is the one who has to leave by 5:30PM every day to get to day care on time while my partner doesn't have that limitation on her working hours.
    - emilfihlman 8y ago
      I believe quite contrary to the other responses you have received, it's not about kindness really, but mostly a function of where it would affect people the most and how those companies operate and are formed: through a very small circle of friends who know each other and because such companies are in minority such discrimination would be quite invisible whereas Big Corps(tm) can just eat such costs quite easily and they are held to the standard of hiring more. Smaller companies (that require higher education or good thinking skills) also probably get people who care about their career more at that point, getting kids at a young age is pretty low education thing to do (just as a statistics on who gets kids and when) and those people work in very gender separated fields usually.
    - patmcc 8y ago
      A few things seems to help, although there certainly still is some discrimination (in certain jobs especially). 1) All your competitors have to follow the law too, so it's just another cost of doing business. 2) Women are having children later, generally, so employers will see a 25-year-old and think "eh, I probably have 5 years at least". 3) Men are starting to take more parental leave, and the law is mostly gender-neutral (there is some amount of leave specifically for mothers who have given birth, but most can be taken by either parent). In fact, both parents can take the leave and have their jobs protected, although you can't double-dip on the paid benefits. I took three weeks off at my daughter's birth and 3 months when she was ~9 months old. 4) Maternity leave coverage is a great way to try out an employee for a year - hire Jim to cover for Jane, if you like him keep him on after the year, if not he disappears. (Part of this is Canada is more resistant to the contractor/employee trend than the US). 5) The people doing the hiring are likely to either have children or will in the future, so they feel like it's a reasonable/good policy. Nothing blows my mind as much as hearing Americans talking about maternity benefit. I was listening to a podcast and one person said "we were lucky to have such good maternity benefits, I didn't have to go back to work for 6 weeks" and I was floored.
- Scoundreller 8y ago
  I wouldn’t say it’s funded by the federal government, but through EI premiums paid by employees and employers. It’s a very regressive funding model paid by a flat income and payroll “tax” on earnings between $3500 and $50000. Last I heard, it takes in billions more than it pays out.
bluedino 8y ago
>> This doesn't sound good, basically kickstarting a company on another company's money. Can I work on my startup idea when I take 2 weeks vacation in the summer? What's the difference?
- immad 8y ago
  50 weeks?
- emilfihlman 8y ago
  How about: -Vacation time is not paid time while maternity leave is time the employer has to pay for. -If working does accumulate vacation time (meaning it is paid) it's a fixed perk that the employer can take into account and knows when hiring you -You must still always negotiate when you are going to take that vacation, you can't just start at a new job and instantly take paid vacation time. -2 Weeks != Maternity leave
  - ccozan 8y ago
    Vacation time not paid?? Probably US.
    - skinnymuch 8y ago
      2 week vacations are almost always paid in the US.
  - allannienhuis 8y ago
    "maternity leave is time the employer has to pay for" Not in Canada. Maternity leave is funded through the federal Employment Insurance program. The only obligation the employer has is to hold the job for a certain period of time.
    - Scoundreller 8y ago
      There are employers that top up, to varying degrees, what EI pays out (maximum benefit is ~$500/week, and taxable).
mc32 8y ago
It’s not against the rules. I don’t see the problem. But even better, she’s growing the economy and everyone wins. You gotta like people with grit and tenacity to strive all while playing by the rules.
- emilfihlman 8y ago
  Of course it's not the against the rules. I'm criticising the system for enabling such action while punishing the employer.
- fridaysoff 8y ago
  Thank you!

giarc 8y ago

Maternity leave benefits in Canada are paid by the federal government through Employment Insurance (EI) program. New parents get 12-18 months of EI payments. Your employer is only required to hold a position for you, they are not obligated to pay your wage.

emilfihlman 8y ago
Ah, that's good to know because in Finland, your employer does pay it.
- a_brawling_boo 8y ago
  Hey, serious question from an American. How does this policy not cause massive hiring discrimination against young women, especially recently married women? I asked my Canadian relatives this question, and their answers basically boiled down to 'well that would be illegal'. But from what I can tell enforcing anti discrimination in hiring is next to impossible, especially if you interview and hire even a slightly more qualified candidate.
  - giarc 8y ago
    I would argue that it's not the law that's preventing discrimination, it's the fact that nearly 50% of the workforce is made up of women, thereby excluding a huge category is detrimental to your business. You wouldn't be a very good manager if you decided not to hire women because one day they might take a year off. Additionally, many managers are probably also parents themselves and understand the importance of maternity leave and understand it's part of having a workforce. Plus, in my department, we actually see the benefit of maternity leaves. We get to hire a new person for a year that can bring new insight and experience into the role. If they are good, we try to find a place for them, if they are bad, the year expires and they go off without any fanfare.
  - didibus 8y ago
    This is totally a wild guess, but I think a small part of it is just the cultural values. It seems most people are for such leave, including the people who hire.
  - stef25 8y ago
    A candidate may get pregnant between the ages of 20 - 40. About half the people in my social circle with kids aren't married and almost all had their kid(s) after 35. This is quite a definite trend here in W-Europe. Here in Belgium maternity leave is actually quite short, but you have the option to extend it for many months albeit at a reduced pay (provided by the govt). Not everyone can afford to extend it. Dads can also get paternity leave, up until the kid is 12yrs old. Gender roles are changing a lot, paradoxically me as the father / chauffeur of the family is the one who has to leave by 5:30PM every day to get to day care on time while my partner doesn't have that limitation on her working hours.
  - emilfihlman 8y ago
    I believe quite contrary to the other responses you have received, it's not about kindness really, but mostly a function of where it would affect people the most and how those companies operate and are formed: through a very small circle of friends who know each other and because such companies are in minority such discrimination would be quite invisible whereas Big Corps(tm) can just eat such costs quite easily and they are held to the standard of hiring more. Smaller companies (that require higher education or good thinking skills) also probably get people who care about their career more at that point, getting kids at a young age is pretty low education thing to do (just as a statistics on who gets kids and when) and those people work in very gender separated fields usually.
  - patmcc 8y ago
    A few things seems to help, although there certainly still is some discrimination (in certain jobs especially). 1) All your competitors have to follow the law too, so it's just another cost of doing business. 2) Women are having children later, generally, so employers will see a 25-year-old and think "eh, I probably have 5 years at least". 3) Men are starting to take more parental leave, and the law is mostly gender-neutral (there is some amount of leave specifically for mothers who have given birth, but most can be taken by either parent). In fact, both parents can take the leave and have their jobs protected, although you can't double-dip on the paid benefits. I took three weeks off at my daughter's birth and 3 months when she was ~9 months old. 4) Maternity leave coverage is a great way to try out an employee for a year - hire Jim to cover for Jane, if you like him keep him on after the year, if not he disappears. (Part of this is Canada is more resistant to the contractor/employee trend than the US). 5) The people doing the hiring are likely to either have children or will in the future, so they feel like it's a reasonable/good policy. Nothing blows my mind as much as hearing Americans talking about maternity benefit. I was listening to a podcast and one person said "we were lucky to have such good maternity benefits, I didn't have to go back to work for 6 weeks" and I was floored.
Scoundreller 8y ago
I wouldn’t say it’s funded by the federal government, but through EI premiums paid by employees and employers. It’s a very regressive funding model paid by a flat income and payroll “tax” on earnings between $3500 and $50000. Last I heard, it takes in billions more than it pays out.

bluedino 8y ago

>> This doesn't sound good, basically kickstarting a company on another company's money. Can I work on my startup idea when I take 2 weeks vacation in the summer? What's the difference?

immad 8y ago
50 weeks?
emilfihlman 8y ago
How about: -Vacation time is not paid time while maternity leave is time the employer has to pay for. -If working does accumulate vacation time (meaning it is paid) it's a fixed perk that the employer can take into account and knows when hiring you -You must still always negotiate when you are going to take that vacation, you can't just start at a new job and instantly take paid vacation time. -2 Weeks != Maternity leave
- ccozan 8y ago
  Vacation time not paid?? Probably US.
  - skinnymuch 8y ago
    2 week vacations are almost always paid in the US.
- allannienhuis 8y ago
  "maternity leave is time the employer has to pay for" Not in Canada. Maternity leave is funded through the federal Employment Insurance program. The only obligation the employer has is to hold the job for a certain period of time.
  - Scoundreller 8y ago
    There are employers that top up, to varying degrees, what EI pays out (maximum benefit is ~$500/week, and taxable).

mc32 8y ago

It’s not against the rules. I don’t see the problem. But even better, she’s growing the economy and everyone wins. You gotta like people with grit and tenacity to strive all while playing by the rules.

emilfihlman 8y ago
Of course it's not the against the rules. I'm criticising the system for enabling such action while punishing the employer.
fridaysoff 8y ago
Thank you!