4 ms·

My two cent : we got the whole ''parental leave'' thing wrong because we make business pay and the individual pay the costs. Big firm might have plenty of resso

My two cent : we got the whole ''parental leave'' thing wrong because we make business pay and the individual pay the costs. Big firm might have plenty of ressources to deal with it and 'not appear sexist', but a startup or small business will not. It should be a government program to help both the individual and his employer.

krrrh 6y ago
In Canada it was introduced as part of the Employment Insurance system. I think that’s a good way to look at it and spread the costs across the workforce. It doesn’t replace your full wages (I think it’s 55%, though some employers top it up with private insurance), but the parents basically get a year of wage support to divide between the two of them. Your employer also has to hire you back.
- jplr8922 6y ago
  Hm I beg to disagree. Canadian business owner I speak with in privacy do not like the system. Many employers will try to infer and avoid a ''pregnancy risk'' by any legal mean possible. Why? A small business does not have time or ressources to deal with the constent team restructuration that a new baby causes. It does not matters how competent you are if you need a 6 month learning curve, then be replaced by a temporary contract, then be re-hired in 1 year. Saying otherwise is just SJW wishful thinking. I'm not against paid leave or work-family balance. But the current canadian system simply assumes that its cost does not exist because they are distributed, without thinking of the consequences. Its just bad populist policy, and make sexism the most economic choice for a lot of decision makers. My proposal : why can't we pay women for the work they actually do? Childcare and all that? Why can't we put ''raising a family'' as part of your linkedin profile? Dealing with babies certainly prepare you to deal with toxic coworkers.

4 ms·

My two cent : we got the whole ''parental leave'' thing wrong because we make business pay and the individual pay the costs. Big firm might have plenty of resso

by jplr8922 6y ago

krrrh 6y ago
In Canada it was introduced as part of the Employment Insurance system. I think that’s a good way to look at it and spread the costs across the workforce. It doesn’t replace your full wages (I think it’s 55%, though some employers top it up with private insurance), but the parents basically get a year of wage support to divide between the two of them. Your employer also has to hire you back.
- jplr8922 6y ago
  Hm I beg to disagree. Canadian business owner I speak with in privacy do not like the system. Many employers will try to infer and avoid a ''pregnancy risk'' by any legal mean possible. Why? A small business does not have time or ressources to deal with the constent team restructuration that a new baby causes. It does not matters how competent you are if you need a 6 month learning curve, then be replaced by a temporary contract, then be re-hired in 1 year. Saying otherwise is just SJW wishful thinking. I'm not against paid leave or work-family balance. But the current canadian system simply assumes that its cost does not exist because they are distributed, without thinking of the consequences. Its just bad populist policy, and make sexism the most economic choice for a lot of decision makers. My proposal : why can't we pay women for the work they actually do? Childcare and all that? Why can't we put ''raising a family'' as part of your linkedin profile? Dealing with babies certainly prepare you to deal with toxic coworkers.