4 ms·

Average total tenure at companies is around 2.8 years for people between 25-34 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.bls.gov/news.re

by cm2012 8y ago

Average total tenure at companies is around 2.8 years for people between 25-34 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/tenure.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi7ourz7YngAhXwUt8KHWRtCzgQFjADegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw15P5oks9e6CjAJqrih6vsV&cshid=1548451107850 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...). If you have 1 year off for parental leave, and probably months before and after to hand off work and take it back up, that would be almost half the job tenure on parental leave efforts. That's rough for the company and the employee.

adventured 8y ago
Paid parental leave should accrue over time. That solves the issue in a way that is reasonably fair to the employee and business. An employee with no interest in having children should also accrue parental leave, which can be cashed in in some manner. That keeps the system from being unfairly biased against people with no interest in having children. The only alternative is to socialize the matter fully. Take the average salary from the prior N years and the government then pays for the parental leave out of taxes. That would also require all workers to pay into the system. One issue would be how to make it fair for people that never draw against that system. It would also take about five minutes before the first stories started showing up about how people earning $300,000 per year were being paid large sums by the government for parental leave. I suppose there could be an attempt to scale it based on pay as a percentage of income. Entitlement systems are always fraught with edge cases though. Both of my parents died before they were able to draw social security, despite paying into the system for a combined ~70-80 years. That money was stolen from them by a flawed system.
- martin_bech 8y ago
  thats simply stupid. So ppl should get children at 50, when they have acruued parental leave? People should get parental leave when they need it..
  - adventured 8y ago
    > thats simply stupid. Is that really all you have to offer? > So ppl should get children at 50, when they have acruued parental leave The very obvious flaw in your "thats simply stupid" conclusion is incorrectly speculating on how fast I think parental leave should accrue. Why would it take decades to accrue? N months per year, then cap it at a reasonable maximum until or unless it's used, with the accrued time/value persisting (which could have benefits for grandparents, people that adopt at older ages, and so on).
    - martin_bech 8y ago
      I think its funny that ppl (mostly Americans), try and invent complicated new ways of doing things like this, instead of using how 90% of the civilised world does it. Accrued Paid Paternity Leave, wouldnt work because of these reasons. What if you get pregnant "by accident"? What if you want to change jobs/company? What if you get fired? The rest of the world, solves this by having the leave not directly paid for by the employer, but by a fund. This also means that female employees, are more or less "risk free" for employers, as the leave, is not a direct expense. This fund is paid into, by all employers, for about 43USD pr quarter pr Employee. (Danish figures). That small amount means 28 weeks of fully paid paternity leave for all. (After that, you get a smaller amount, based on sallary but capped)
- chiefalchemist 8y ago
  > "That keeps the system from being unfairly biased against people with no interest in having children." In theory yes. However, if past politics as it relates to tax reg are any indication then it seems unlikely. Both marriage and children have an incentive at the federal level. Great for getting votes, but hardly fair and equal at the societal level.
- Aunche 8y ago
  > Both of my parents died before they were able to draw social security, despite paying into the system for a combined ~70-80 years. I'm sorry about your parents, but that's how the system was intended to work. There are very few people who can save like they'll live to 120. Their livelihoods are going to be subsidized by who don't live as long under any system.
martin_bech 8y ago
Thats why the civilised world does it, using taxes, or similar vehicles. In Denmark Corporations pay a fee of about 43USD pr. quarter, pr. Employee, and then the found and the government, pay the paid leave for any employee. There are many versions of parental leave in Denmark, but everyone has it from people working at mcdonalds to ceos.

by cm2012 8y ago

adventured 8y ago

Paid parental leave should accrue over time. That solves the issue in a way that is reasonably fair to the employee and business. An employee with no interest in having children should also accrue parental leave, which can be cashed in in some manner. That keeps the system from being unfairly biased against people with no interest in having children. The only alternative is to socialize the matter fully. Take the average salary from the prior N years and the government then pays for the parental leave out of taxes. That would also require all workers to pay into the system. One issue would be how to make it fair for people that never draw against that system. It would also take about five minutes before the first stories started showing up about how people earning $300,000 per year were being paid large sums by the government for parental leave. I suppose there could be an attempt to scale it based on pay as a percentage of income. Entitlement systems are always fraught with edge cases though. Both of my parents died before they were able to draw social security, despite paying into the system for a combined ~70-80 years. That money was stolen from them by a flawed system.

martin_bech 8y ago
thats simply stupid. So ppl should get children at 50, when they have acruued parental leave? People should get parental leave when they need it..
- adventured 8y ago
  > thats simply stupid. Is that really all you have to offer? > So ppl should get children at 50, when they have acruued parental leave The very obvious flaw in your "thats simply stupid" conclusion is incorrectly speculating on how fast I think parental leave should accrue. Why would it take decades to accrue? N months per year, then cap it at a reasonable maximum until or unless it's used, with the accrued time/value persisting (which could have benefits for grandparents, people that adopt at older ages, and so on).
  - martin_bech 8y ago
    I think its funny that ppl (mostly Americans), try and invent complicated new ways of doing things like this, instead of using how 90% of the civilised world does it. Accrued Paid Paternity Leave, wouldnt work because of these reasons. What if you get pregnant "by accident"? What if you want to change jobs/company? What if you get fired? The rest of the world, solves this by having the leave not directly paid for by the employer, but by a fund. This also means that female employees, are more or less "risk free" for employers, as the leave, is not a direct expense. This fund is paid into, by all employers, for about 43USD pr quarter pr Employee. (Danish figures). That small amount means 28 weeks of fully paid paternity leave for all. (After that, you get a smaller amount, based on sallary but capped)
chiefalchemist 8y ago
> "That keeps the system from being unfairly biased against people with no interest in having children." In theory yes. However, if past politics as it relates to tax reg are any indication then it seems unlikely. Both marriage and children have an incentive at the federal level. Great for getting votes, but hardly fair and equal at the societal level.
Aunche 8y ago
> Both of my parents died before they were able to draw social security, despite paying into the system for a combined ~70-80 years. I'm sorry about your parents, but that's how the system was intended to work. There are very few people who can save like they'll live to 120. Their livelihoods are going to be subsidized by who don't live as long under any system.

martin_bech 8y ago

Thats why the civilised world does it, using taxes, or similar vehicles. In Denmark Corporations pay a fee of about 43USD pr. quarter, pr. Employee, and then the found and the government, pay the paid leave for any employee. There are many versions of parental leave in Denmark, but everyone has it from people working at mcdonalds to ceos.