8 ms·

Germany has this and is awesome. 14 months paid leave to distribute among the two parents.

by sudoaza 7y ago

dudul 7y ago
Doesn't look like the same thing though. Here it's clearly talking about non-transferable time.
- krzyk 7y ago
  Yeah, looks different. On the other hand, Sweden has something similar. Dads get 6 month non-trasferable paid leave.
belinder 7y ago
14 months or weeks?
- epaga 7y ago
  It's months. Amazing for employees and terrifying for employers. Someone I know took a new job somewhere, only to let them know a week or so after being there that his wife was about to have their child and he was going to be gone for the next 14 months. They were not going to be able to fire him without repercussions. He was not required to let them know during the interview.
  - rglullis 7y ago
    The company is not the one paying for that, so it is not as bad for the company as you are saying. Chill.
    - gfs78 7y ago
      but they still need to get his job done
      - kraigie 7y ago
        Hence temps. Or they can redistribute the salary as overtime. If there are enough interested workers.
        iso1631 7y ago
        They just employed someone for a full time job because they needed to spend €x on someone to do Y work Now they don't have to pay that money, which is fine, but they then need to find someone on a 14 month contract that will do it for the same salary as the person they just employed. Then at the end of it they are left with paying an overlap from the contractor to someone new
        rglullis 7y ago
        First, a little nitpicking: one of the parents can take at most 12 months off, so there is no "14 month contract". Second, the whole thing can be way more complex. In Germany a mother has her job secured for the moment she announces to be pregnant to until the child is 3 years old. So one could decide that will take the Elterngeld for 12 months but actually just go back to work 18 months, and the employer has no way of stopping it. Third and final point: NONE OF THIS MATTERS! Trying to find the "fairness" in this is nothing but some incredibly naive exercise. Like most things in life, salaries are not determined by the amount of value produced but rather by market value of labor. Risks when dealing with labor force should be already priced in.
        iso1631 7y ago
        Sure, and the policy is good, but there is still an impact on the company. Most situations that will be a large company which can easily cope, but in small companies struggling to survive is can have an locally detrimental effect (despite the company benefiting from the policy as a whole)
        rglullis 7y ago
        What makes you think that the small companies are struggling to survive? And from all of the policies in Germany that exist to "protect" the employees (minimum wage, employer share of pension contribution, health insurance, etc) what makes you think that this particular policy deserves such special concern?
  - aantix 7y ago
    How does anything get done? If it were a three person company, one person is now gone for 14 months and legally can’t be replaced? A nightmare for the other two employees.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - michaelt 7y ago
      You can hire a replacement on a 14-month contract. If your company can deal with an employee getting hit by a bus / winning the lottery and quitting, then it can deal with an employee taking maternity/paternity leave.
      - codingmess 7y ago
        You can't assume nor demand every company can deal with an employee getting hit by a bus. Not every company is a big corporation. Example: our childcare facility employs two people, and replacements are VERY difficult to find at the moment.
        Lev1a 7y ago
        Noone is demanding that. If the company can't get it done without the person taking parental leave they simply have to sink or swim. Like with any other law regulating worker benefits and worker safety. But companies know that starting out and have to plan and act accordingly. That's the cost of doing business.
        codingmess 7y ago
        It's only the "cost of doing business" because of man made arbitrary laws. It doesn't have to be the cost of doing business. Why do you claim "noone is demanding that", when in the next sentence you just shrug it off as "they'll just have to sink, whatever". If the alternative for the business is to go out of business, it is "demanding". Businesses are not at fault for their employees getting pregnant, so why should they have to shoulder the risk? If society wants to protect mothers, society should pay up, not the individual businesses. Are you saying people shouldn't run childcare facilities? Or only huge childcare facilities are allowed, which certainly wasn't the intention of the laws for maternal leave?
  - muricayeah 7y ago
    >only to let them know a week or so after being there Don't these fall under "experimentation/probation" period, where you can fire without reason?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rglullis 7y ago
  14 months, but it is a little bit more complicated than what OP implies. The mother gets 14 weeks (6 weeks before due date, 8 after) that is the "proper" leave and is mandatory for the mother. After that, one or both parents can choose to take a leave where the government pays you 2/3 of your net salary, capped at 2000 EUR. If only one parent takes then it is limited to 12 month and it is extend to 14 months in case both parents decided to take it.
wincy 7y ago
I’m curious what what happen if someone wanted to have ten kids and abused this system, and the mother didn’t work. At a gut I feel like I’d be less likely to have kids, not more, if I felt like I was burdening other people by accepting benefits like this. I have no worries as an American having as many kids as I want because I make a good salary, can afford them, and won’t take more than a weeks, maybe two weeks time off, as my wife, despite being just as qualified for software engineering as me, wants to stay at home and raise children. Heck, I won’t even be “overburdening” the school system as my wife is home schooling them, despite living in a “good” school district. Being charitable I’d hazard the point of this is to encourage population growth, but I suspect it’s playing out more like “have two kids and that’s as many as you should have”, and any more would introduce strong social pressure to stop. Maybe it’ll work out that lots more Finns will be born, I’m curious to see how it goes in twenty years.
- oblio 7y ago
  > I’m curious what what happen if someone wanted to have ten kids and abused this system, and the mother didn’t work. The easy solution would be to have this set up for the desired number of children. 1-3 children: 100% of the benefits, >3: 20% or something similar.
- matteuan 7y ago
  "abused the system"? Fertility rate in Germany is 1.50 at the moment. Every new child will be a precious asset to sustain the future pension system.
  - kraigie 7y ago
    Freedom of movement means you can look at the EU rate. Immigration moves people about quite well.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  Having both parents be economically unproductive for an extended period of time is clearly not a tenable arrangement in the long term. But the long term, in this case, is measured in tens of generations. In the short term, most developed societies are more than wealthy enough to shoulder such a burden. People would still probably get looked at weird for having tons of kids, but that already happens anyway.
ryanmercer 7y ago
(edit: why is this -2? I was asking a serious question!) >14 months paid leave Certainly you meant weeks... FMLA only covers 12 weeks of unpaid leave here in the United States.
- codingmess 7y ago
  Nope - it really is about 20000€ the government gives to families.
  - ryanmercer 7y ago
    Wow, threads on here constantly make me wish I lived in Germany as it sounds like German has really awesome employment protection too.
    - codingmess 7y ago
      In my opinion, the best protection is to have valuable skills. I personally see no good reason for employment protection. I live in Germany, however, as a freelancer I get no protection at all. Why do some people deserve it, and others don't? What makes an "employee"? I can understand having to "insure" against the risk of becoming too specialized. Like if you work for one company for years or decades, it might be difficult to find employment elsewhere. However, that insurance should be factored into the contracts "employees" are willing to accept. Likewise as a freelancer, I have to ask for a certain minimum amount of money to cover my risks. Even for employees the protection might have downsides. They are stuck with inefficient coworkers who can't be fired.If you are young, you'll have to leave before people who are older. And employees might stick to jobs where they are not doing their best for too long. And overall, creation of business is hampered, which hurts everybody. Just some thoughts.
  - rglullis 7y ago
    "gives" after taking almost double in taxes. And I will surely have more years paying tons of taxes than paternity leaves. Forgive them, Milton, for they don't know what they are saying.
RookyNumbas 7y ago
Do we know yet if it has it resulted in an decrease in the gender pay gap and other effects?
- blub 7y ago
  It hasn't, or at least the media's whining about the gap as much as everywhere else.

Germany has this and is awesome. 14 months paid leave to distribute among the two parents.

dudul 7y ago

Doesn't look like the same thing though. Here it's clearly talking about non-transferable time.

krzyk 7y ago
Yeah, looks different. On the other hand, Sweden has something similar. Dads get 6 month non-trasferable paid leave.

belinder 7y ago

14 months or weeks?

epaga 7y ago
It's months. Amazing for employees and terrifying for employers. Someone I know took a new job somewhere, only to let them know a week or so after being there that his wife was about to have their child and he was going to be gone for the next 14 months. They were not going to be able to fire him without repercussions. He was not required to let them know during the interview.
- rglullis 7y ago
  The company is not the one paying for that, so it is not as bad for the company as you are saying. Chill.
  - gfs78 7y ago
    but they still need to get his job done
    - kraigie 7y ago
      Hence temps. Or they can redistribute the salary as overtime. If there are enough interested workers.
      - iso1631 7y ago
        They just employed someone for a full time job because they needed to spend €x on someone to do Y work Now they don't have to pay that money, which is fine, but they then need to find someone on a 14 month contract that will do it for the same salary as the person they just employed. Then at the end of it they are left with paying an overlap from the contractor to someone new
        rglullis 7y ago
        First, a little nitpicking: one of the parents can take at most 12 months off, so there is no "14 month contract". Second, the whole thing can be way more complex. In Germany a mother has her job secured for the moment she announces to be pregnant to until the child is 3 years old. So one could decide that will take the Elterngeld for 12 months but actually just go back to work 18 months, and the employer has no way of stopping it. Third and final point: NONE OF THIS MATTERS! Trying to find the "fairness" in this is nothing but some incredibly naive exercise. Like most things in life, salaries are not determined by the amount of value produced but rather by market value of labor. Risks when dealing with labor force should be already priced in.
        iso1631 7y ago
        Sure, and the policy is good, but there is still an impact on the company. Most situations that will be a large company which can easily cope, but in small companies struggling to survive is can have an locally detrimental effect (despite the company benefiting from the policy as a whole)
        rglullis 7y ago
        What makes you think that the small companies are struggling to survive? And from all of the policies in Germany that exist to "protect" the employees (minimum wage, employer share of pension contribution, health insurance, etc) what makes you think that this particular policy deserves such special concern?
- aantix 7y ago
  How does anything get done? If it were a three person company, one person is now gone for 14 months and legally can’t be replaced? A nightmare for the other two employees.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - michaelt 7y ago
    You can hire a replacement on a 14-month contract. If your company can deal with an employee getting hit by a bus / winning the lottery and quitting, then it can deal with an employee taking maternity/paternity leave.
    - codingmess 7y ago
      You can't assume nor demand every company can deal with an employee getting hit by a bus. Not every company is a big corporation. Example: our childcare facility employs two people, and replacements are VERY difficult to find at the moment.
      - Lev1a 7y ago
        Noone is demanding that. If the company can't get it done without the person taking parental leave they simply have to sink or swim. Like with any other law regulating worker benefits and worker safety. But companies know that starting out and have to plan and act accordingly. That's the cost of doing business.
        codingmess 7y ago
        It's only the "cost of doing business" because of man made arbitrary laws. It doesn't have to be the cost of doing business. Why do you claim "noone is demanding that", when in the next sentence you just shrug it off as "they'll just have to sink, whatever". If the alternative for the business is to go out of business, it is "demanding". Businesses are not at fault for their employees getting pregnant, so why should they have to shoulder the risk? If society wants to protect mothers, society should pay up, not the individual businesses. Are you saying people shouldn't run childcare facilities? Or only huge childcare facilities are allowed, which certainly wasn't the intention of the laws for maternal leave?
- muricayeah 7y ago
  >only to let them know a week or so after being there Don't these fall under "experimentation/probation" period, where you can fire without reason?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rglullis 7y ago
14 months, but it is a little bit more complicated than what OP implies. The mother gets 14 weeks (6 weeks before due date, 8 after) that is the "proper" leave and is mandatory for the mother. After that, one or both parents can choose to take a leave where the government pays you 2/3 of your net salary, capped at 2000 EUR. If only one parent takes then it is limited to 12 month and it is extend to 14 months in case both parents decided to take it.

wincy 7y ago

I’m curious what what happen if someone wanted to have ten kids and abused this system, and the mother didn’t work. At a gut I feel like I’d be less likely to have kids, not more, if I felt like I was burdening other people by accepting benefits like this. I have no worries as an American having as many kids as I want because I make a good salary, can afford them, and won’t take more than a weeks, maybe two weeks time off, as my wife, despite being just as qualified for software engineering as me, wants to stay at home and raise children. Heck, I won’t even be “overburdening” the school system as my wife is home schooling them, despite living in a “good” school district. Being charitable I’d hazard the point of this is to encourage population growth, but I suspect it’s playing out more like “have two kids and that’s as many as you should have”, and any more would introduce strong social pressure to stop. Maybe it’ll work out that lots more Finns will be born, I’m curious to see how it goes in twenty years.

oblio 7y ago
> I’m curious what what happen if someone wanted to have ten kids and abused this system, and the mother didn’t work. The easy solution would be to have this set up for the desired number of children. 1-3 children: 100% of the benefits, >3: 20% or something similar.
matteuan 7y ago
"abused the system"? Fertility rate in Germany is 1.50 at the moment. Every new child will be a precious asset to sustain the future pension system.
- kraigie 7y ago
  Freedom of movement means you can look at the EU rate. Immigration moves people about quite well.
toasterlovin 7y ago
Having both parents be economically unproductive for an extended period of time is clearly not a tenable arrangement in the long term. But the long term, in this case, is measured in tens of generations. In the short term, most developed societies are more than wealthy enough to shoulder such a burden. People would still probably get looked at weird for having tons of kids, but that already happens anyway.

ryanmercer 7y ago

(edit: why is this -2? I was asking a serious question!) >14 months paid leave Certainly you meant weeks... FMLA only covers 12 weeks of unpaid leave here in the United States.

codingmess 7y ago
Nope - it really is about 20000€ the government gives to families.
- ryanmercer 7y ago
  Wow, threads on here constantly make me wish I lived in Germany as it sounds like German has really awesome employment protection too.
  - codingmess 7y ago
    In my opinion, the best protection is to have valuable skills. I personally see no good reason for employment protection. I live in Germany, however, as a freelancer I get no protection at all. Why do some people deserve it, and others don't? What makes an "employee"? I can understand having to "insure" against the risk of becoming too specialized. Like if you work for one company for years or decades, it might be difficult to find employment elsewhere. However, that insurance should be factored into the contracts "employees" are willing to accept. Likewise as a freelancer, I have to ask for a certain minimum amount of money to cover my risks. Even for employees the protection might have downsides. They are stuck with inefficient coworkers who can't be fired.If you are young, you'll have to leave before people who are older. And employees might stick to jobs where they are not doing their best for too long. And overall, creation of business is hampered, which hurts everybody. Just some thoughts.
- rglullis 7y ago
  "gives" after taking almost double in taxes. And I will surely have more years paying tons of taxes than paternity leaves. Forgive them, Milton, for they don't know what they are saying.

RookyNumbas 7y ago

Do we know yet if it has it resulted in an decrease in the gender pay gap and other effects?

blub 7y ago
It hasn't, or at least the media's whining about the gap as much as everywhere else.