8 ms·

Paternity leave at startups: designing a policy for new parents

47 points by jenthoven 8y ago

blagie 8y ago
I look for policies like this to see how I'm likely to be treated by a company in general. Even more critical are terms of employment. Over the past few decades, companies often went from a healthy relationship (long-term employment, companies own IP in the domain of employment created on work hours) to a rather unhealthy one (3-year stints combined with abusive terms -- overreaching non-disclosures, non-competes, IP ownership, etc., digging deeply into my personal life). Then there's background checks. These went from reasonable due diligence (I got my degree and worked where I claimed) to digging into past salaries and using those in negotiations (salaries get shared through data brokers like Equifax, often in violation of state laws), looking at credit records, etc. There are policies around emergencies -- what happens if a relative dies and similar? And there's the practical: How often do employees get legally threatened or sued on the way out? I've now had this happen to several friends; it's surprisingly common. In all cases, they settled on the company's terms (which were always without merits) since litigation would have cost years of life and hundreds of thousands of dollars. A job is kind of like a marriage. Even if they don't effect you directly, these are pretty good indicators of whether you're getting into a healthy or abusive long-term relationship.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  > I look for policies like this to see how I'm likely to be treated by a company in general. Policies like this are no assurance that you'll be treated well by a company. It's still roulette. Maybe they care, maybe they can't get talent in the door.
- pjc50 8y ago
  > sued on the way out Extraordinary - on what alleged grounds?
  - blagie 8y ago
    In one case, an employee was going to work for a startup developing a new (completely novel) product in the same industry as former company. There was a non-compete clause in the employment contract. It was cheaper to wait a year before joining the startup than to litigate. I know both companies, and the claim of competition was tangential at best. In another case, an employee hadn't signed the current employment agreement which was far more overreaching than the terms of employment they originally agreed to (but which were needed for the organization to pursue its new -- somewhat sleazy -- business model). The organization fabricated criminal allegations and told the employee they would press charges if the employee didn't sign away their rights. That's criminal extortion, but if such threats are verbal, it's not something you can really prove. Best case outcome for employee was a (very public) mud throwing match against an organization with an extensive PR/press department. A lawyer took that one pro bono, but I think that cost that employee 3-6 months of their life, and in the end, they gave up on their next startup too (which was, again, in the same industry as their former employer, and difficult to do with new terms). Both were big organizations (ones you would have heard of, and one of which is held in extremely high esteem as an 'ethical' organization). Both settlements involved signing away rights to talk about those settlements.
acranox 8y ago
I don’t think I’ve seen this “primary” and “secondary” caregiver distinction before. Seems like bullshit to me.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- fatnoah 8y ago
  Salesforce does this. I had a co-worker that took 6 months off for the birth of his child. The distinction effectively means anyone can take the time off. In the case the dad takes time off to be with the child, he becomes the primary caregiver by definition.
crasch4 8y ago
Kudos to Kapwing for being attentive to their employee's family and emotional lives. However, it's irritating that parents receive perks at the expense of single and childfree employees (who don't get weeks of time off for _their_ families, and who are expected to cover for the parents on leave). IMHO, all employees should get the same amount of time off, regardless of whether or not they have children.
- loriverkutya 8y ago
  I guess your humble opinion would change if you had a child.
  - Balero 8y ago
    So if he was to benefit from it, his opinion would change? Its' obvious it is likely it would.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      Would OP be envious of someone's leave while they were battling cancer? Benefits exist because we have collectively decided they increase quality of life. Not everyone will have children, but that are necessary for a vibrant, healthy economy (in the long term) and to provide societal continuance. Therefore, the benefit provided to parents is valuable, both to the parents and to society.
- sevensor 8y ago
  > who don't get weeks of time off for _their_ families, and who are expected to cover for the parents on leave I'd be all for policies that supported caring for an ailing spouse or parent also. But let me tell you, taking care of a new baby is about as far from "time off" as it's possible to get. It's hard, stressful work, and if you discourage paternity leave or imply that it's equivalent to vacation time, you're implying that it's womens' work.
  - Balero 8y ago
jankotek 8y ago
So this "perk" does not even meet legal minimum for large companies. Just hire remotely if you want to attract top talent.
simulate 8y ago
This is generous of Kapwing. It's worth noting that, outside the United States and a very small number of other countries, parental leave is usually publicly funded through taxes and administered through social security. Companies can then augment these social security payments. For example, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey all fund parental leave through social security. Others as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave
dominotw 8y ago
This is form of discrimination against older workers who get no paid leave to care for their ageing parents. I went through hell 5 yrs ago where I was on a death march project and had family situation involving a parent. I will not support any of this until they change this into a 'life situation' leave instead of parent leave.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  Why not support this as a step along this route instead of treating it as a zero-sum game?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- bendmorris 8y ago
  We're all in this together. You can support parental leave and also advocate for other types of family leave. Not only are they not mutually exclusive, stronger parental leave norms will probably make other types of leave more acceptable.
  - dominotw 8y ago
    > We're all in this together. Exactly my point too. We should all come together and make it fair for older workers( esp older women) who often are tasked with caring for a parent(s). I've been a parent too and caring for parent situations are often way more arduous and tend to get worse. Accepting parent leave without giving a break to any other situation is just 'fuck you i got mine' case.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  Older people are allowed to have kids as well, and so are just as eligible for paternity/maternity leave. Even if women are past the age of child bearing, they can adopt children and be eligible for maternity leave. For your situation - were you not eligible for the FMLA?
  - poulsbohemian 8y ago
surfsvammel 8y ago
Wow. This reminds me why I am happily living in Sweden. Government pays me and my partner for 480 days off for every child. To split as we see fit more or less. My employer (startup with 16 employees) tops up what the government pays me such that end up having 90% of my normal salary.
- trowawee 8y ago
  Yeah, American policies around this are incredibly bad. Even the nominally "good" ones are pretty terrible compared to other developed nations.
  - chooseaname 8y ago
    Because Americans think if you have a need for this type of government support, well you just haven't worked hard enough and you're "part of the problem" (whatever that means).
adiusmus 8y ago
I shudder to think what would happen in some places if a father actually took paternity leave for a newborn. Probably get fired or downranked in some way with long term advancement consequences. Hopefully more directors do research on the matter. Maybe it could help with that “skills shortage” they are so often complaining about.
k3fernan 8y ago
Is there any value in having different paternity vs. maternity leave or primary vs. secondary caregiver? Wouldn't something like X weeks paid for anyone parenting/birthing/adopting. (i.e. a paid family leave) be a simpler design? You could expand this over time to include caregiving for elderly people etc. And it could support various family types (i.e single parents, adoptions, same-sex couples, surrogates etc.) Genuinely asking because it seems weird not to have just a simple inclusive policy.
dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago
It's one of these huge gaps between the USA and Europe (the other two being free or near free university education and medical care). Seriously, how worse can it be? Oh yes, it can: holidays! From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_b...: > Some employers offer no vacation at all. The average number of paid vacation days offered by private employers is 10 days after 1 year of service, 14 days after 5 years, 17 days after 10 years, and 20 days after 20 years.
thekashifmalik 8y ago
This is great! I wonder if we can generalize this to a 'life-choice/situation' based time-off policy. Not all employees want kids and it's weird that companies can choose to sponsor/accommodate the choice of having kids but not the contrary. And it's not just for the single/DINK life; some people have elderly parents that need assistance and that can take a lot of time.

47 points by jenthoven 8y ago

I look for policies like this to see how I'm likely to be treated by a company in general. Even more critical are terms of employment. Over the past few decades, companies often went from a healthy relationship (long-term employment, companies own IP in the domain of employment created on work hours) to a rather unhealthy one (3-year stints combined with abusive terms -- overreaching non-disclosures, non-competes, IP ownership, etc., digging deeply into my personal life). Then there's background checks. These went from reasonable due diligence (I got my degree and worked where I claimed) to digging into past salaries and using those in negotiations (salaries get shared through data brokers like Equifax, often in violation of state laws), looking at credit records, etc. There are policies around emergencies -- what happens if a relative dies and similar? And there's the practical: How often do employees get legally threatened or sued on the way out? I've now had this happen to several friends; it's surprisingly common. In all cases, they settled on the company's terms (which were always without merits) since litigation would have cost years of life and hundreds of thousands of dollars. A job is kind of like a marriage. Even if they don't effect you directly, these are pretty good indicators of whether you're getting into a healthy or abusive long-term relationship.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
> I look for policies like this to see how I'm likely to be treated by a company in general. Policies like this are no assurance that you'll be treated well by a company. It's still roulette. Maybe they care, maybe they can't get talent in the door.
pjc50 8y ago
> sued on the way out Extraordinary - on what alleged grounds?
- blagie 8y ago
  In one case, an employee was going to work for a startup developing a new (completely novel) product in the same industry as former company. There was a non-compete clause in the employment contract. It was cheaper to wait a year before joining the startup than to litigate. I know both companies, and the claim of competition was tangential at best. In another case, an employee hadn't signed the current employment agreement which was far more overreaching than the terms of employment they originally agreed to (but which were needed for the organization to pursue its new -- somewhat sleazy -- business model). The organization fabricated criminal allegations and told the employee they would press charges if the employee didn't sign away their rights. That's criminal extortion, but if such threats are verbal, it's not something you can really prove. Best case outcome for employee was a (very public) mud throwing match against an organization with an extensive PR/press department. A lawyer took that one pro bono, but I think that cost that employee 3-6 months of their life, and in the end, they gave up on their next startup too (which was, again, in the same industry as their former employer, and difficult to do with new terms). Both were big organizations (ones you would have heard of, and one of which is held in extremely high esteem as an 'ethical' organization). Both settlements involved signing away rights to talk about those settlements.

acranox 8y ago

I don’t think I’ve seen this “primary” and “secondary” caregiver distinction before. Seems like bullshit to me.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
fatnoah 8y ago
Salesforce does this. I had a co-worker that took 6 months off for the birth of his child. The distinction effectively means anyone can take the time off. In the case the dad takes time off to be with the child, he becomes the primary caregiver by definition.

crasch4 8y ago

Kudos to Kapwing for being attentive to their employee's family and emotional lives. However, it's irritating that parents receive perks at the expense of single and childfree employees (who don't get weeks of time off for _their_ families, and who are expected to cover for the parents on leave). IMHO, all employees should get the same amount of time off, regardless of whether or not they have children.

loriverkutya 8y ago
I guess your humble opinion would change if you had a child.
- Balero 8y ago
  So if he was to benefit from it, his opinion would change? Its' obvious it is likely it would.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Would OP be envious of someone's leave while they were battling cancer? Benefits exist because we have collectively decided they increase quality of life. Not everyone will have children, but that are necessary for a vibrant, healthy economy (in the long term) and to provide societal continuance. Therefore, the benefit provided to parents is valuable, both to the parents and to society.
sevensor 8y ago
> who don't get weeks of time off for _their_ families, and who are expected to cover for the parents on leave I'd be all for policies that supported caring for an ailing spouse or parent also. But let me tell you, taking care of a new baby is about as far from "time off" as it's possible to get. It's hard, stressful work, and if you discourage paternity leave or imply that it's equivalent to vacation time, you're implying that it's womens' work.
- Balero 8y ago

jankotek 8y ago

So this "perk" does not even meet legal minimum for large companies. Just hire remotely if you want to attract top talent.

simulate 8y ago

This is generous of Kapwing. It's worth noting that, outside the United States and a very small number of other countries, parental leave is usually publicly funded through taxes and administered through social security. Companies can then augment these social security payments. For example, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey all fund parental leave through social security. Others as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave

dominotw 8y ago

This is form of discrimination against older workers who get no paid leave to care for their ageing parents. I went through hell 5 yrs ago where I was on a death march project and had family situation involving a parent. I will not support any of this until they change this into a 'life situation' leave instead of parent leave.

cimmanom 8y ago
Why not support this as a step along this route instead of treating it as a zero-sum game?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
bendmorris 8y ago
We're all in this together. You can support parental leave and also advocate for other types of family leave. Not only are they not mutually exclusive, stronger parental leave norms will probably make other types of leave more acceptable.
- dominotw 8y ago
  > We're all in this together. Exactly my point too. We should all come together and make it fair for older workers( esp older women) who often are tasked with caring for a parent(s). I've been a parent too and caring for parent situations are often way more arduous and tend to get worse. Accepting parent leave without giving a break to any other situation is just 'fuck you i got mine' case.
oh_sigh 8y ago
Older people are allowed to have kids as well, and so are just as eligible for paternity/maternity leave. Even if women are past the age of child bearing, they can adopt children and be eligible for maternity leave. For your situation - were you not eligible for the FMLA?
- poulsbohemian 8y ago

surfsvammel 8y ago

Wow. This reminds me why I am happily living in Sweden. Government pays me and my partner for 480 days off for every child. To split as we see fit more or less. My employer (startup with 16 employees) tops up what the government pays me such that end up having 90% of my normal salary.

trowawee 8y ago
Yeah, American policies around this are incredibly bad. Even the nominally "good" ones are pretty terrible compared to other developed nations.
- chooseaname 8y ago
  Because Americans think if you have a need for this type of government support, well you just haven't worked hard enough and you're "part of the problem" (whatever that means).

adiusmus 8y ago

I shudder to think what would happen in some places if a father actually took paternity leave for a newborn. Probably get fired or downranked in some way with long term advancement consequences. Hopefully more directors do research on the matter. Maybe it could help with that “skills shortage” they are so often complaining about.

k3fernan 8y ago

Is there any value in having different paternity vs. maternity leave or primary vs. secondary caregiver? Wouldn't something like X weeks paid for anyone parenting/birthing/adopting. (i.e. a paid family leave) be a simpler design? You could expand this over time to include caregiving for elderly people etc. And it could support various family types (i.e single parents, adoptions, same-sex couples, surrogates etc.) Genuinely asking because it seems weird not to have just a simple inclusive policy.

dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago

It's one of these huge gaps between the USA and Europe (the other two being free or near free university education and medical care). Seriously, how worse can it be? Oh yes, it can: holidays! From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_b...: > Some employers offer no vacation at all. The average number of paid vacation days offered by private employers is 10 days after 1 year of service, 14 days after 5 years, 17 days after 10 years, and 20 days after 20 years.

thekashifmalik 8y ago

This is great! I wonder if we can generalize this to a 'life-choice/situation' based time-off policy. Not all employees want kids and it's weird that companies can choose to sponsor/accommodate the choice of having kids but not the contrary. And it's not just for the single/DINK life; some people have elderly parents that need assistance and that can take a lot of time.