3 ms·

The market won't always be this tight...and frankly, people don't realize how expensive it is for companies to essentially subsidize child care through paid lea

The market won't always be this tight...and frankly, people don't realize how expensive it is for companies to essentially subsidize child care through paid leave and stipends.

jmspring 8y ago
There used to be a time when there was an unwritten contract between employer and employee - growth options, learning, leave packages, etc - in return for long term tenure at the company. That has basically gone the way of the dodo in most companies.
- ngngngng 8y ago
  Because long term tenure doesn't get companies enough of a return. If a company wants me to stay long term, I need regular raises above the rate of inflation, parental leave, everything you listed. It's so much cheaper to spend the $10k or so it costs to replace me every year or two and not worry about the other things.
m0zg 8y ago
The market is this tight in part because birth rate is dropping like a rock. It's dropping like a rock because having a child is either unaffordable or too much pain in the ass to deal with. The companies will have to see a bit beyond their next quarterly revenues to see reason in having a sane labor market in the future. I'd also like to see large tech companies (which constantly complain about the "shortage of talent") pitch in on the education/training side of things, without externalizing those costs to the taxpayer and worker.
- partiallypro 8y ago
  I don't disagree that governments should be incentivizing reproduction (at least that is my position) the problem is that in this particular instance, the Gates Foundation was not having their cost offset by government and they were just losing workers for a year at a time on their own tab. Yes, Gates is a very rich man, but in the end that really takes away from their charitable work for people that need things a lot more than an extra 6 months. For other companies it takes away even more, and in some cases can outright drive them out of business or cause companies to just hire less women.
  - m0zg 8y ago
    What's the problem with letting them work part-time from home while they're rearing their newborn? Maybe show up at the office with their newborn once a week to catch up in person. I don't get it. It's not like the work typically conducted at such foundations requires them to be in the office 100% of the time.
    - saint_fiasco 8y ago
      The problem is that in many places that would be illegal.
- x220 8y ago
  >It's dropping like a rock because having a child is either unaffordable or too much pain in the ass to deal with Why is it that everyone leaves the invention of the birth control pill out of this conversation? It is likely more significant (in its effects on the world) than the invention of nuclear weapons.
  - kelnos 8y ago
    Because people are choosing not to have children, or to have fewer children than they have in the past. Sure, better birth control methods make it easier to realize those choices, but... so what? The alternative is we end up with many more unwanted children, which I hope we agree isn't a good outcome either.
dv_dt 8y ago
If a civilization finds that systematically supporting the creation of the next generation of citizens is just too expensive, it won't find itself a civilization for much longer.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  Civilizations currently finds themselves basically over-run with people at the moment and getting “worse” every decade. I don’t think we’re headed towards any kind of insufficiency.
  - dv_dt 8y ago
    I just find it ironic that the people on the right screaming in fear of immigration, are also allied with the ones causing a huge concentration of wealth, driving poor economics, and lower fertility of people already settled in first world nations. I'm ok with our nation as a melting pot, I think we end up stronger for it in the mix, but when you combine demographics with Ebenezer Scrooge capitalism it ends up with groups in nations on the tail of economic expansion are the ones who end up with expanded population.
- Retra 8y ago
  Children will exist and be part of your civilization regardless of how much you spend on them. You'll be a civilization, just not a very good one.

The market won't always be this tight...and frankly, people don't realize how expensive it is for companies to essentially subsidize child care through paid leave and stipends.

jmspring 8y ago

There used to be a time when there was an unwritten contract between employer and employee - growth options, learning, leave packages, etc - in return for long term tenure at the company. That has basically gone the way of the dodo in most companies.

ngngngng 8y ago
Because long term tenure doesn't get companies enough of a return. If a company wants me to stay long term, I need regular raises above the rate of inflation, parental leave, everything you listed. It's so much cheaper to spend the $10k or so it costs to replace me every year or two and not worry about the other things.

m0zg 8y ago

The market is this tight in part because birth rate is dropping like a rock. It's dropping like a rock because having a child is either unaffordable or too much pain in the ass to deal with. The companies will have to see a bit beyond their next quarterly revenues to see reason in having a sane labor market in the future. I'd also like to see large tech companies (which constantly complain about the "shortage of talent") pitch in on the education/training side of things, without externalizing those costs to the taxpayer and worker.

partiallypro 8y ago
I don't disagree that governments should be incentivizing reproduction (at least that is my position) the problem is that in this particular instance, the Gates Foundation was not having their cost offset by government and they were just losing workers for a year at a time on their own tab. Yes, Gates is a very rich man, but in the end that really takes away from their charitable work for people that need things a lot more than an extra 6 months. For other companies it takes away even more, and in some cases can outright drive them out of business or cause companies to just hire less women.
- m0zg 8y ago
  What's the problem with letting them work part-time from home while they're rearing their newborn? Maybe show up at the office with their newborn once a week to catch up in person. I don't get it. It's not like the work typically conducted at such foundations requires them to be in the office 100% of the time.
  - saint_fiasco 8y ago
    The problem is that in many places that would be illegal.
x220 8y ago
>It's dropping like a rock because having a child is either unaffordable or too much pain in the ass to deal with Why is it that everyone leaves the invention of the birth control pill out of this conversation? It is likely more significant (in its effects on the world) than the invention of nuclear weapons.
- kelnos 8y ago
  Because people are choosing not to have children, or to have fewer children than they have in the past. Sure, better birth control methods make it easier to realize those choices, but... so what? The alternative is we end up with many more unwanted children, which I hope we agree isn't a good outcome either.

dv_dt 8y ago

If a civilization finds that systematically supporting the creation of the next generation of citizens is just too expensive, it won't find itself a civilization for much longer.

sokoloff 8y ago
Civilizations currently finds themselves basically over-run with people at the moment and getting “worse” every decade. I don’t think we’re headed towards any kind of insufficiency.
- dv_dt 8y ago
  I just find it ironic that the people on the right screaming in fear of immigration, are also allied with the ones causing a huge concentration of wealth, driving poor economics, and lower fertility of people already settled in first world nations. I'm ok with our nation as a melting pot, I think we end up stronger for it in the mix, but when you combine demographics with Ebenezer Scrooge capitalism it ends up with groups in nations on the tail of economic expansion are the ones who end up with expanded population.
Retra 8y ago
Children will exist and be part of your civilization regardless of how much you spend on them. You'll be a civilization, just not a very good one.