37 ms·

Paternity leave: The hidden barriers keeping men at work

135 points by e2e4 5y ago

pram 5y ago
I had twin girls in Oct 2019 and I took 3 months paid leave. If I didn’t do it full time during their infancy, my wife and I certainly would have been divorced or maybe dead. It was easily more work than my regular job lol
- spijdar 5y ago
  Ah, twins! I can barely imagine, just had one girl in Jan 2020 (right in time for the pandemic...) and took a few months of (sadly, unpaid) leave. It really was like a full-time job for two. Congrats btw!
- pmkiwi 5y ago
  Respect man!
- rightbyte 5y ago
  Do you estimate there are any scale benefits or is it about twice the work? Honest question. The worst part most be more interruptions of the sleep, or do they wake up at the same time during the nights?
jchrisa 5y ago
I was an early stage founder and took the full time off to set an example for the company culture. On my first day back I was fundraising again and a few weeks later we brought the new baby to the developer camp we hosted. Company is doing great although I left years ago.
- enriquto 5y ago
  > I was an early stage founder and took the full time off to set an example for the company culture. How many of your employees actually did the same thing? (I'm not asking if they were encouraged to do so, I'm asking how many of your employees did take full paternity leave when they fathered children). That would be a more relevant information about the company.
growup12345 5y ago
The main thesis of Morgenroth is that men and women are equal in terms of their ability to be communal… but are they? No evidence offered, just some philosophical symmetry “it has to be” argument is concocted. I don’t buy it: in western countries you are protected by law if you want to take parental leave, so if men want to do it they should do it regardless of what “society” thinks. The law gives them the power to do so, hence who cares about the hypothetical existence of these “deep prejudices”: even if it is as bad as they say, it’s not like anyone can fire them. But you might miss out on your career: and that is logical… if you go away for 5 months, then your colleague who is ultra competitive and childless and was waiting for his chance will just snatch up your position and when you are back you will find yourself sidelined. I see zero issues with this: you prioritised family, hence where your career will go from that point shouldn’t matter to you at all. Are people supposed to modify business objectives due to personal choices? If people do believe the answer is yes, we are entering the land of such deeply ingrained entitlement that to me that is the real problem. No one owes you anything in life: if you think otherwise, you are set for a disaster.
- jbay808 5y ago
  > men and women are equal in terms of their ability to be communal… but are they? Even if the two populations aren't equal on average, undoubtedly some men are more communal, and some women are less so. You can't do comparisons on populations as though they were individuals! But with a stereotype that becomes a norm, even especially-communal men, married to especially-non-communal women, will be pressured into not taking parental leave because people think the wife should do it. That pressure could include, for example, harsher career consequences than a woman would face for taking parental leave. And that's neither good nor fair. So stereotypes are dangerous, even when they're accurate. (Which this one might not even be!)
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- MikeTheGreat 5y ago
  > you prioritised family, hence where your career will go from that point shouldn’t matter to you at all Hold on - this doesn't follow. It's entirely possible that you value both your family and your career. It would be good to talk with people who are actually in this situation in order to verify the assumptions you've listed.
politelemon 5y ago
In my anecdata at my workplace: I'm glad to say that taking 6 months shared parental leave is now seen as the norm. In every case the parent, in their return has come back and said that they feel more fulfilled (but of course very tired) . A downside follows shortly after, they discover the cost of childcare in the UK. It's almost the price of rent! And sadly some of my colleagues have left the country shortly after having a second child, citing the costs. Flip side, we are slightly surprised if we come across men who aren't taking advantage of shared parental. It's very rare now but those who don't are unspokenly seen as "traditional".
hinoki 5y ago
Does anyone know how/when this has changed in tech? Every new father I know takes the leave, and if they aren’t taking the maximum, people ask when they will take the rest. I met someone who took leave for their first three months at Amazon, because the baby was born just before their start date. I’ve only been working for a little over 10 years, and I can’t imagine this has always been the case.
- gopalv 5y ago
  > Does anyone know how/when this has changed in tech? I think the first-wave of modern startup land is having kids themselves - the change in most companies seem start with the founder - like Zuckerberg taking time off (the last generation feel like the opposite, with folks like Marissa Mayer having a nursery in the office). That said, in my close circle, I was the only one who took the whole 3 months off work while being on a H1B visa. There are folks who have the option, but did not take it because they are really worried about replacing themselves at work in an active fashion for a whole quarter. On the career ladder path, there's a fair amount of ugly politics which goes along with this as well, with the same people who encouraged you to take time off also trying to disassemble your team for parts while you are out. Because of that, I like the idea of taking paternity leave just like maternity leave (it's not the same, no baby was trying to extract my blood sugar). It balances the inequalities of having children to be more fair between parents, but highlights the inequalities of being a parent (vs not having kids).
wirthjason 5y ago
My job offered 4 months of of paternity leave with pay. And an optional 2 extra months off without pay. So you could think of it as 6 months at 2/3rds pay. It didn’t have to be taken at one time either. There was a small restriction that you had to start the leave within 1 year of the baby’s first birthday. The company also offered it for people adopting, so it applied for all people regardless of gender or lifestyle. You could only apply for it 3 times though. So no having 10 kids to escape working. :P I took two months off when our baby was first born. Then I took 4 months off when the baby was about 9 months so we could spend New Years in Japan with my wife’s mother. While abroad on leave the pandemic hit, flights we canceled and we got stranded. Upon returning everyone was working remote so we stayed in Japan for about a year. I’m so grateful for that time. We spent the mornings watching morning kids shows, paying with grandma, going to the park, etc. My daughter speaks Japanese as a first languages and has advanced in so many ways because of that time off. I’ve heard stories of very senior people being pressured to take less time. The logic being: If you’re gone for 6 months and everything functions just fine, are you really that important? My advice from those people was the company puts it there for a reason, take your time, you earned it, everyone is jealous.
- barbazoo 5y ago
  I was graciously allowed to take 4 weeks paid right at birth and I'll take another 4 weeks paid when he's 1 year old. I'm already so looking forward to it. In the beginning it was all about figuring everything out and surviving together. The next one is hopefully going to be more of a bonding and getting to know each other opportunity. Again, super happy about that. And I feel grateful that that's what working in tech allows me.
- dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
  > The logic being: If you’re gone for 6 months and everything functions just fine, are you really that important? Well, yes, I think that's the crux of it. If you work in a place you like then - if you're smart - you'll not only work well, but also make sure everybody knows you're an valuable asset and without you things could go awry. It kind of conflicts with your disappearing for a few months.
pmkiwi 5y ago
In NZ, my wife took 6 months of parental leave (with a huge drop of salary...) and I took 2 weeks* (one unpaid and one paid by my company). So yeah, I did not take anything else because our mortgage is not going to repay itself and the pragmatic move was that I continue working. Note*: in NZ, the partner is allowed 2 week unpaid if you are in your current job for more than 12 months, 1 week if you are in your job between 6 and 12, and 0 if you just join a new company. And it does not matter if you have been paying taxes and working several years before that. Silly system really. At the same time, I WFH the full time so I was there for almost everything and my kid started to have full nights straight away so it was not that bad :).
dbt00 5y ago
My kids are 20 and 16 and I got 2 weeks of parental leave. I'm happy to see it's getting better.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mrmincent 5y ago
My workplace updated their leave policy from 2 weeks to 3 months back in April, and in May my wife and I welcomed a new baby boy. I’ve taken the whole 3 months and it feels like one of the best choices I’ve ever made. Getting to spend so much time with him has been incredibly rewarding, I have so much confidence when dealing with anything that pops up, and I’ve been able to support my wife in recovery from a fairly traumatic birth. We’ve already decided that if we have another kid I’ll take 3 months off just the same, even if it has to be unpaid. If you have the opportunity to take the time, absolutely do it.
sircastor 5y ago
I’m reading the comments here and I’m flabbergasted. My work offered me one week of paternity leave. That was it. My child was born several weeks early and I can’t comprehend who came up with 5 days and thought “what a great benefit”
- wongarsu 5y ago
  5 days sounds more like someone thought "what's the absolute minimum we can get away with without making them quit"
- sfgweilr4f 5y ago
  Not to put too fine a point on it: an idiot. As per the definition: a foolish or stupid person. Imagine if you will, a society that didn't want to go extinct. A society that had discovered that birth rates were falling and that paternity leave was just one of many straightforward government sanctioned initiatives that could tip the balance. Now imagine an individual or group that thought 5 days was enough. Yeah. About that.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- hellbannedguy 5y ago
  What country?
- liberalbias998 5y ago
  This has changed a lot over recent decades (in the UK.) My eldest son is nearly 30. When we were expecting him, his mother was suddenly `managed out` of her job in IT working on GCOS7 systems; no problems whatsoever until she was pregnant. When I told my boss (again in IT) I needed to plan in a weeks annual leave, he was clear that he was pissed off and fed up about it, because we were busy doing some technology transition. Three decades later; I cheerfully cover for colleagues taking a couple of weeks of extra paid paternity leave. My own archaic view about paternity leave is that it is designed for female equality; which I believe is a good thing.
- 5y ago
conductr 5y ago
> academics found that for heterosexual married couples, the father taking any paternity leave after the birth of a child can also cause the divorce risk to drop for up to six years after the birth. I’d challenge the word “cause” here. My guess is it’s just a leading indicator signaling the dad is engaged in/places high priority on the family which extends to the marriage.
- charia 5y ago
  Yeah, and for a father to take paternity leave suggests the father's job and family's financial situation are doing reasonably well. Financial stability plays a huge factor in keeping couples together.
- dtech 5y ago
  True, but causation isn't a stretch. The father bonding with the child and getting experienced with childcare could be a destressor for the marriage.
  - richardwhiuk 5y ago
    It's a leap.
    - vmception 5y ago
      A quantum leap
      - kbelder 5y ago
        Do you mean the smallest leap possible, or do you mean a sudden transformative leap?
    - op00to 5y ago
      Are you married with children? Share your experience rather than dismissing it out of hand with no explanation.
  - 5y ago
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
When all of these (IMO, highly predictable) articles come out about paternity and maternity leave, I wish they would also highlight that these leave policies just show the gaping inequalities in the workforce, especially in the US where leave is not mandated. I mean, the only reason the tech giants are able to offer such generous leave is because their businesses are almost unfathomably profitable, with limited competition, and because they are big enough that the work of any individual worker will not be missed that much. But why do virtually zero, say, small businesses like restaurants, cleaners, mechanics, etc. offer leave policies remotely like this? Because these businesses actually need all their workers to actually work, and when they don't, the business actually stops functioning. If we really believe that parental leave and parental bonds are beneficial for society, then society should pay for it, instead of hoisting the cost onto companies, where only the richest companies are able to do so.
- metters 5y ago
  In the USA, the cost of paternity leave have to be fully paid by the company? I thought it would be paid by both together (government and employer) at least. My paternity leave was fully paid by the government, but it was capped. Moreover the amount of paid months is limited and I had to share them with my wife.
  - sofixa 5y ago
    AFAIK (not American) paid maternal or paternal leave isn't mandatory by labour laws/regulations, so yeah, it's up to the employer to offer it and pay for it. Logically, only the huge and very well off companies in competitive ( for employment) branches will do so because the others have little incentive to "waste" money on the matter.
    - metters 5y ago
      Thanks for the insight. It makes sense for small companies then to not offer paid parental leave, as they really cannot afford that most of the time (thinking of cafes, restaurants, small shops at the corner, etc.)
nextlevelwizard 5y ago
Taking 5 months off is pretty much same as changing a company or at very least the internal department/team. A lot happens in 5 months and from my experience no one who comes back from maternity or paternity leave stays with our company for long. I think this is because people think that they are coming back to whatever team and position they left, but that position has been refilled in that time and when they come back they are seated in which ever team has room. Which usually means completely new colleagues and usually new project as well. At which point they realize that they might as well just look for another job and often leave within the next 6 months. It is easy to see why this kind of thing can have affect on your carreer development. Especially when people who have kids and take timeoff tend to have multiple kids and thus multple paternity leaves. If you take 10 months off work your carreer development drags behind 10 months and everytime you change your employer unless you can trade up your title you will be resetting whatever progress you've made towards the next job title (you might catch up faster to the same point you were in at the new job, but the progress still gets reset). I don't think there is anything that can be done about this. This is how human brains work. Think about our ancestors. Someone goes away for long time and comes back. We might be glad that they are back, but they've missed out from the struggles and successes of that time, so we are less likely to promote them to the next leader of our group than someone who has been there while they were absent.
- developer93 5y ago
  And this x100 is one reason I don't want kids as a woman.
- m4x 5y ago
  One way to address this is to have roles filled by secondment. That way the same position (on the same team) re-opens for the parent when they return. Additionally, the person who fills the secondment (and is usually a more junior member of the company) gets an opportunity to train for a more senior role and usually ends up as a top choice when that team needs to hire. In my experience teams are usually continually hiring, so the person on secondment can often go straight into a permanent role on the team when the parent returns.
xlii 5y ago
I do not believe that at any point paternity leave will work for men. I do understand push and how it’s beneficial to woman and to children, but in my opinion the whole idea ignores men, how they feel about it and how men function in society in general. On paper everything looks great: Mother gets an opportunity to get back to her career, children gets some bonding time with father that might benefit for years to come and father gets insight in the life of the child and caring for his family. Reality, however, for many men is different. Often men's only friends are at work. Taking paternity leave not only detaches father from his friends but also creates a gap in father's group. If they have problem to whom they will come? Absent-at-work father will slowly get pushed out of the social group only because groups naturally seek opportunity to fill the void. Men aren't good at expressing emotions and everyone agrees that on paper paternity leave looks good. So what happens is that "oh yeah, relationship naturally deteriorated, and Tom really helped us with this project" but in reality it didn't and Tom hadn't. It's social dynamic that changed. Father knows what's up, his workgroup know what's up and yet no one will say "You know what, we missed you, you didn't even call us, so we were angry and decided Tom is our new friend and screw you". Yet while men don't really talk about emotions they can feel social dynamics and so it takes usually 1 or 2 fathers in workgroup and observation how social dynamics change around them after they come back. It's not ostracism, it's just when you're leaving your group for couple of months you cannot expect that they'll welcome you back even if you decided to leave them for a very sound reason. Second thing is that men aren't really wired to take for the child. They don't get the same hormones woman and because of that experience of caring for the child is by default vastly different[*]. Men's bodies don't help them preserve the specie by releasing a number of happiness hormones as mothers body do. For men it's quite often the chore without positive feedback. And of course no one will ever complain about it as strong men are responsible and caring so it's not right thing to do, but I have yet to hear a man in my circle who will describe it as magical experience [1]. We live in an age where some fathers already took paternity leave and their children are teenagers and not adults and even those parents don't speak out outside of the "parenting improvement circles". There are of course, many other factors, like the concept of breadwinner, strength of the partner relation etc., etc., but all of that combined makes me not believing it will ever take off on the big scale. Anecdotal note: I spent 18 months taking care of my child during day while their mother worked and then for 1 year I was working in the evenings. [1]: As with social dynamics there are always some outliers, response spectrums, variables and knobs so if that's you (and I do believe that HN hosts quite a lot of outliers on various topics) please take that into consideration :-)
jve 5y ago
I'm full month at work after having "1 year" of paternity leave (actually was working 40hrs per month), government paid. Luckily, didn't feel any of those issues article lists there. Nor from others, nor myself. CEO said something along the lines: of course we like when people work, but your decision. As almost everyone was almost work from home, some even didn't notice :)
ArnoVW 5y ago
When people tell me that paternity leave is bad for your career, I always tell them that being a dad has made me a better manager. And I've noticed the same transformation in others. More empathy, ability to relativise, balance. This of course nothing for the fact that bad employers may not see it that way.
lnsru 5y ago
The Germany is offering generous 12+2 months paid leave. The only problem is that during that time the parental money (Elterngeld) is limited up to 1800€. It’s like one third of the former salary, so that’s perfect hidden barrier and I seriously hate this. I am jealous about hearing friends and relatives being offered 1-3 months fully paid leave by their American employers. Having mortgage and baby a parental leave is impossible and couple paid months at home with family would be super cool.
- pmkiwi 5y ago
  Yeah same story in NZ. You can take a decent parental but the payout is limited ($500 NZD/pw). Of course, you need a cap but you might end up leaving quite a lot on the table. And on top of that, your value of your annual also depreciates ("You work only half a year full salary, so your annual leave is now 1/2 its origina value")...
  - dzhiurgis 5y ago
    It's pretty absurd if you take account of paying upwards 39% of your income and then getting back basically 15%.
waspight 5y ago
In sweden you get an instant 10 days leave after birth, and then about 400 days more to split as you want between the parents. You get about 80% of your salary during this time, up to some breakpoint.
- IshKebab 5y ago
  That's the sensible way to do it.
  - dzhiurgis 5y ago
    Yes, but I doubt breakpoint is high enough to even cover your rent... That's at least the case in NZ - and if you are on tech salary you'll be loosing like 90% of your income.
- belorn 5y ago
  In practice that mean that men get about 1 day for every 4 days women get, which is a bit low compared to other work in gender equality. If I remember right, in Denmark you can't split the days and so men has a much more equal parental leave compared to Sweden.
- kbelder 5y ago
  I think that means the wife takes the vast majority of leave in almost every case. That's fine, though, if that's the parent's choice. I think I like this policy.
krullix 5y ago
I recently become a father and I'm aiming to take some months of parental leave at least. Of the 480 days of paid leave you get in Sweden, goverment insurance give you up to around 3000USD a month for the first 390 days of Leave. My employeer then offer a benefit to cover the rest so that I get 90% of my usual salary, which is pretty common. A key here is that one does not need to take all days at once. You can choose to work half time etc. for some years if you prefer and use half-days of parental Leave, making them last twice as long. It's also pretty common to save days to use them in conjunction with vacation each year up to the child reach 12 years of age (100 days can be save after child reacheas 4 years of age). This means you can extend the vacation from 1 months to 2-3 months a year instead and the the full summer to hang out with your kid. Very nice. Both parents are even allowed to be on parental leave simultaneously for 1 months in case you want to go on a longer trip together.
- pmkiwi 5y ago
  Sounds awesome! Time to move to Sweden haha :)
  - krullix 5y ago
    You're welcome:) The drawback is that goverment takes around 65% tax cut (income tax + employment tax) on any incomes of emplyement above 6000USD a month. The only way to get rich in Sweden is through capital gains. There taxes as still very low :)
IshKebab 5y ago
> Ricardo Duque says that this [men not taking Shared Parental Leave] might be partly a result of fathers simply not knowing their rights. I've taken SPL twice, and while people not knowing about it might be a problem, the real issue is that it is insanely complicated. I have a PhD and still struggled to understand the forms you have to fill in. I imagine most people would just give up. The article also doesn't consider that there are definitely genetic factors that make women more interested in babies. I have experienced none of the supposed shaming or career effects, but I still don't want to do paternity leave for more than a few months.
biasedbrain 5y ago
I suppose the article doesn't mention the real reason: that it is the privilege of mothers to spend time with their children, because they invested and risked more to have them (or simply because having the womb gives them the better negotiation position). While a small percentage of mothers can not relate well to their kids and prefer to get back to work asap, the reality is that most mothers prefer to spend time with their kids. Who should get to spend time with the kids? The person who spent 10 seconds injecting their semen into the womb, or the person who toiled for 9 months letting the child grow in their womb, often risking their life to do so? In many cases, the discussion does not even make sense. It is even more ridiculous when feminist men pride themselves for taking "the burden" off their wives. All they did is take away their natural privilege. This also becomes even less surprising if one looks outside of the academic box and realizes that most people don't have exiting creative jobs where they change the world, but mostly mundane stuff like being supermarket cashiers, or, at best, nurses - which is a nice job, but should women really leave their kids so that the can change the diapers of strangers instead? Feminism want us to believe that taking care of kids is a burden that men unfairly push to women while they go off to have fun at work. And huge parts of society have swallowed it. Here in Europe, many governments think they have to force men to take paternity leave, to further equality. They think men don't want to spend time with their kids because of role models or whatsoever. The reality is probably in most cases that the the issue is mostly financial. Even with paid paternity leave, there usually is less money on the table than with full time work, specially since women tend to choose less well paid careers (another privilege - they don't have to provide for the family, so they can afford to trade income for convenience and social status). I think it is great if fathers can take paternity leave and recommend everybody to try to do it. but there are actual real world issues preventing it, not just memes ("societal expectations").
- number6 5y ago
  I am on parental leave right now together with my wife. Financially it's OK- we had some time to prepare. The most basic issue is breastfeeding. A newborn wants to drink about every two hours. My wife just can't leave the house if she wants to breastfeed. Bottled up milk is an option when the child is about 4 months old. At this stage the bond between them both is so thick, that they are basically inseparable. As man you basically spend a whole year to catch up. So even with enough money and leeway from my employer to take parental leave there are still issues why childcare is mainly the part of the mothers. I guess most of the feminists don't have children. Oh and try to have two children. Guess what: it does not scale well! And it takes more than two persons to even raise one child. I would encourage you all to try it yourself. It is really rewarding to be a parent and also so exhausting - even with all the privileges in the world.
parineum 5y ago
I had a conversation with my cousin a bit ago talking about the gender pay gap being a bit misleading because of the .7/1 ratio not taking into account previous experience and hours worked. To the extent that sexism is the cause of that gap, it's actually a good business decision to not rely on young women for leadership roles due to the realities of biology. Since there is no changing biology, my proposed solution is to make paternal leave mandatory. I think it's counterintuitive at first blush to help women by forcing men not to work but that absence is exactly what puts young women behind the eightball at the beginning of their careers and they play catch-up for the rest of their lives.
- adrianN 5y ago
  Make leave mandatory even for people who don't have children, or you're selecting for childless people of either gender. Sometime between 20 and 40 you have to take half a year off.
  - dzhiurgis 5y ago
    Taking time off to grow newborn is not same as taking time off in Bali
  - lorenzhs 5y ago
    Nah, the idea is not that it's the leave that sets any single woman's career back, it's that the expectation of the leave being taken by women causes them to not be hired/promoted/... before having children that the OP is concerned with if I understood them correctly. If suddenly all parents were to take leave, regardless of gender, then discriminating young people by gender would no longer make economical sense. There should definitely also be mandated minimum vacation days in my opinion (where I live, four weeks of paid leave per year are the legal minimum for full-time jobs), but that's quite unrelated to the issue at hand.
- fighterpilot 5y ago
  Then what about the gap that will now emerge between men who have kids and have been forced to take leave, and the people who have not had kids? Is that a gap that doesn't matter simply because it doesn't show up in gendered statistics but is instead hidden? I am extremely against enforced handicaps on people as a way to achieve equality. I can't think of precedent where this has led to anything positive (I'm reminded of the Harrison Bergeron short story as a write this). If the man (or woman) can afford childcare, then why should the government force them out of the workforce, exactly who is benefiting from this handicap?
deathtrader666 5y ago
Along with the US, India is another large country with no mandated paternity leave for employees in the private sector. My current employer allowed for a measly TWO days. https://bel-india.com/what-is-the-state-of-paternity-leave-in-india/#Private_Sector_Employees_and_Paternity_Leave https://bel-india.com/what-is-the-state-of-paternity-leave-i...
mikkelam 5y ago
I'm personally gonna share it 50% and looking super forward to it. There's a reason most kids prefer their mothers over their fathers. They were there for them. I want to be there for my kids.
dzhiurgis 5y ago
I get weird stares when I'm out somewhere with my daughter and going to restaurant also is very different treatment from when my partner is around. Basic requests are furiously denied vs people smiling...
starefossen 5y ago
With all of my children I have had 4 months of paid paternity leave from when they were about a year old. I live in Norway so this is covered by our social welfare system. For me this has been some of the best time of my life becoming much closer with all of my children then I believe I would have otherwise. Being the primary caregiver for a significant amount of time made us more equal when it came to parenting later on to the point where there are really no difference between who can do what. This have given us more flexibility and reduced stress in every day life and it is easier to let the other one take over if you need a break. During the pandemic lockdown we alternated who had the children and who where at work.
oliwarner 5y ago
Career progression is the most insidious and overlooked barrier here. Unless you take an equal amount of time off —ie the partner takes more time than the mother— the partner's career will progress more in that time, earning more money by the time they come back to work. This means it less likely that the partner will take equal time off next time, skewing the amounts even further. Iterate this loop a few times and you open up a real gulf in take-home pay. So much so that it becomes an unignorable factor in decisions about childcare and schooling that can end up with mothers taking years out of full-time employment. All because their partner worked more the first time. And that's all running on the unrealistic assumption that women don't get [illegally] passed over for promotion just because they have a functioning uterus. Why would you promote Janet over Jim if it's likely that she's going to take 6-18 months off to start a family, and maybe never return? That can upset the scales well before a baby enters the scene. --- On a personal note, we have two children and I've long earned less than their mother so we're lucky that we don't have to consider this stuff in these terms. She's taken time off and while it's hurt her against her colleagues, our balance is much fairer than many relationships. And I feel privileged to have had such significant input to my children's education and upbringing.
globular-toast 5y ago
Having children at 42. Wow. Do you think these people consider that their children will still be living with them when they're in their 60s?
thefz 5y ago
Any time this argument is discussed, I state my point of view, and get downvoted to hell. But let's do it again. Prefacing that I live in a country that has a very long maternal and somewhat average paternal care, and a very good welfare state: I am well against parental leave being paid out with public money, which also mean by my taxes. The reasons are that I don't care about other people's kids; it is unfair to those who don't have children; it's a game very well exploitable, and exploited, I see it around a lot; it forces a whole lot of additional work to the employer and oftentimes to other employees.
- vmception 5y ago
  You would be okay with it being paid for by the private sector and having the same result? Or, you think not having public money involved would also fix the result? Not clear what the public money part has to do with your observations
- cool_dude85 5y ago
  >The reasons are that I don't care about other people's kids Isn't this kind of one of government's fundamental roles? I don't care about the road 2000 miles away from me in front of some random guy's house. He doesn't care about the road in front of my house. Neither of us will ever drive on the other's road. And both roads get built.
  - thefz 5y ago
    Well I have a say on how public money is spent, and my idea is that public money for personal lifestyle choices is wrong.
    - op00to 5y ago
      This is a nonsense statement.
    - handoflixue 5y ago
      Driving is a personal lifestyle choice, but you said you support roads (or at least "infrastructure"). I'm not sure how you can possibly support "education" if you don't support "having kids" in the first place - do you only mean college? And claiming that health care doesn't involve subsidizing dozens of bad personal choices is obviously absurd: why should your taxes pay for someone else's smoking habit, or choice to engage in a dangerous career like "cab driver"?
habosa 5y ago
It's great that so many companies (including mine) are offering more leave for parents but I don't think the incentives can ever be correct as long as this is a private company benefit. Companies will want to appear generous by giving the leave, but secretly hope you don't use it. Parental leave should be guaranteed by the government and funded via payroll (or similar) taxes. It should not depend on who you work for. A company obviously would prefer you stay at work. Going further, it's probably best for the company if you don't have kids at all. One less thing to pull you away from work. The government is in the opposite position. Governments need population growth. Having a child is, for most people, the biggest impact you have on the economy. You just produced another productive worker/consumer! But right now the incentives are all messed up. My wife is a freelancer. When we start thinking about kids the rational thing for her to do would be to apply for full-time work at a company with generous maternity leave before having the kid. That's not really fair to the company, but it's the rational economic choice.
- cnity 5y ago
  I feel warm to this idea, so I mean this question genuinely: if the paternal leave is funded by taxes, does it still match salary? If so, it will not be easy to convince poorer voters to vote for a policy that gives more money to the rich than the poor. If not, the incentives will still be imbalanced but in another way: lower paid employees will be more likely to accept the leave than higher paid employees.
  - dudul 5y ago
    Can it be similar to unemployment? A percentage of the salary with a potential cap? Higher paid employees pay more taxes (just like they pay more for unemployment insurance) so it shouldn't be a problem.
  - benhurmarcel 5y ago
    Where I live we get 4 months of paternal leave, and you're fully paid by social security during that time, at your normal salary. In the end the social contributions are proportional to your salary when you work, it's not unfair to have this particular benefit match your salary too.
artpi 5y ago
I'm on the leave right now! I am writing this comment with my baby daughter on my lap, and it’s not easy - sorry for the typos (oh boy, do babies love grabbing the phone). Automattic (The company I work for) offers six months of paid parental leave regardless of gender. Both my wife and I work there, and she just finished her parental leave. I decided to take the full six months right after. I have to admit to some reservations because I am a team lead, so I was worried it would hurt my career, or the work that we’re doing (and I’m pretty proud of) won’t be there anymore when I’m back. But then my baby daughter is the most important thing in my life, and this is the only opportunity to spend so much time with her. I did some mental accounting, and here’s why I think going on parental leave is good for everybody: - Antifragility: it’s the same case as with sabbaticals. Nobody should be irreplaceable, and forcing the company to be without kohl’s decision-makers for extended periods reduces the bus count factor. I had to put a lot of work to make the system more robust and documented so it won’t break in my absence. - The inevitable parental leave forced me to delegate much more than I would be otherwise comfortable with. After all - my team would stay without me for a long time so I had to make sure I’m not a blocker. - When you’re an individual contributor seeing your "superior" postpone or cut short the parental leave or a sabbatical sends a clear signal that you shouldn’t be taking one either. I was thinking of cutting my parental leave short to for example four months, but that would send a signal that that’s not important. I don’t wanna set an example of a bullshit hustle culture. - The imminent parental leave made me focus on high leverage long-term important work vs short-term day-to-day business. That focus has actually been a force multiplier for everything I did. When you have unbounded time due to Parkinson’s law the stuff you have to do will fill it up. If you have limited time to do something you will be much more productive. If you need something done, ask a busy person. - I also don’t want to contribute to the world where the freaking work is more important than a child. Despite all those great reasons I still had some reservations before taking before six months off. I had a nagging feeling on the back of my head that I may be should cut this a little short, despite EVERYBODY (including my lead, HR, and CEO in the DMs) convincing me to take as much as I need, so I see how hard of a decision can it be for somebody less supported. I am two weeks in and I am very happy that they took the whole time. I've written about my plans for this time here: https://piszek.com/2021/07/10/parental-leave/ https://piszek.com/2021/07/10/parental-leave/
da_big_ghey 5y ago
> non-birthing parents what means this here? sterility?
- Multicomp 5y ago
  It's the newest term for biological fathers. Birthing parents corresponds to biological mothers.
  - da_big_ghey 5y ago
    why are we now with a "new term", and why bbc has chosen this, not mother/father?
    - medvezhenok 5y ago
      Presumably to be inclusive to same-sex couples (where both or one parent can be non-birthing) and non-traditional marital arrangements.
jefftk 5y ago
Ninety percent of those surveyed reported their employer offered less than 12 weeks of paternity leave, but almost two-thirds said that they planned to take less than half of that. Fifty-eight percent admitted that they were afraid that taking even six weeks of paternity leave would set their careers back. This phrasing of these statistics makes no sense. If the employer offers a small amount of leave, and then people take a small amount of leave, and are worried that if they want to take more it will be harmful for their career, all of these statistics go together. The article is phrasing it as if instead 90% of employers do offer 12+ weeks of leave.
djohnston 5y ago
As someone who doesn't have kids is it immature for me to wonder why I don't get some time off for not procreating? The world and its collapsing ecosystems don't need more people, and I feel like I have to spend extra time of my youth paying for other peoples' choices to have kids. Where is my non-paternity leave?
- dudul 5y ago
  Do you also think that its unfair when sick people get sick days while you're not sick and get nothing? Or when people who lose someone get a few bereavement days and you get nothing?
  - djohnston 5y ago
    No, because unlike the two examples you've given having children is a conscious decision with negative externalities. I also get sick leave and bereavement time..
    - quantumBerry 5y ago
      >a conscious decision with negative externalities. So bereavement should be declined if the dead made a conscious decision for suicide, and sick days should be banned if the person say made a conscious decision to take care of a family member with a communicable disease? I would argue parental leave is only unfair against those who are simultaneously infertile and legally barred from adopting. If both of these don't apply to you then your position is intractable.
      - djohnston 5y ago
        On bereavement, no, you didn't make any decision and the decision of the deceased is out of scope. On taking care of a sick family member, no, your family member didn't choose to be ill. These are both straw man arguments IMO.
        5y ago
iammisc 5y ago
Long paternity leaves encourage people to have less children. When you have to take months off at a time for each kid, then parents are encouraged to have fewer so as not to be that guy (or gal) at work who's just having babies. As someone who wants lots of kids, taking off a year for each one is just unfeasible, and would lead me to never working. It's no wonder the birth rate is declining. Mother's and father's are different. We do men a huge disservice by telling them they're going to be super needed at home for months. Barring exceptional circumstances, most men will need to be home for a few weeks at most.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  That doesn’t pass the sniff test. America started having fewer kids before long parental leave was the norm. It might be true for you, but it doesn’t seem causal as a society. I think much more plausible is the reverse: having fewer kids makes long parental leave ideal. If you’re only going to have one or two kids, you’d prefer to take time off and invest in nurturing them. This isn’t possible if you’ve had four or five, since you won’t have the time.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Except, this is not just about America. By and large, countries with more parental leave have lower birth rates. America has less parental leave and has a relatively higher birth rate.
    - joshuaissac 5y ago
      Or perhaps the introduction of paternity leave is a reaction to lower birth rates?
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        And changing values around what children are for. The idea that children are things to be cherished and invested in (emotionally and economically) is a relatively new idea. Historically children were economic producers for the household, rather than an economic sink.
sershe 5y ago
I don't understand why paternity leave is even a thing, anywhere. Having children in the first world is an environmentally destructive hobby, as selfish as any other. Sure, go for it, I don't mind - but why should we subsidize it? I'd love to spend 3-6 months with pay coding my dream videogame or climbing mountains, but the fact that I can't is not a societal problem. Why should child-rearing be any different?
mensetmanusman 5y ago
About to take 4 weeks next Monday…

135 points by e2e4 5y ago

pram 5y ago

I had twin girls in Oct 2019 and I took 3 months paid leave. If I didn’t do it full time during their infancy, my wife and I certainly would have been divorced or maybe dead. It was easily more work than my regular job lol

spijdar 5y ago
Ah, twins! I can barely imagine, just had one girl in Jan 2020 (right in time for the pandemic...) and took a few months of (sadly, unpaid) leave. It really was like a full-time job for two. Congrats btw!
pmkiwi 5y ago
Respect man!
rightbyte 5y ago
Do you estimate there are any scale benefits or is it about twice the work? Honest question. The worst part most be more interruptions of the sleep, or do they wake up at the same time during the nights?

jchrisa 5y ago

I was an early stage founder and took the full time off to set an example for the company culture. On my first day back I was fundraising again and a few weeks later we brought the new baby to the developer camp we hosted. Company is doing great although I left years ago.

enriquto 5y ago
> I was an early stage founder and took the full time off to set an example for the company culture. How many of your employees actually did the same thing? (I'm not asking if they were encouraged to do so, I'm asking how many of your employees did take full paternity leave when they fathered children). That would be a more relevant information about the company.

growup12345 5y ago

The main thesis of Morgenroth is that men and women are equal in terms of their ability to be communal… but are they? No evidence offered, just some philosophical symmetry “it has to be” argument is concocted. I don’t buy it: in western countries you are protected by law if you want to take parental leave, so if men want to do it they should do it regardless of what “society” thinks. The law gives them the power to do so, hence who cares about the hypothetical existence of these “deep prejudices”: even if it is as bad as they say, it’s not like anyone can fire them. But you might miss out on your career: and that is logical… if you go away for 5 months, then your colleague who is ultra competitive and childless and was waiting for his chance will just snatch up your position and when you are back you will find yourself sidelined. I see zero issues with this: you prioritised family, hence where your career will go from that point shouldn’t matter to you at all. Are people supposed to modify business objectives due to personal choices? If people do believe the answer is yes, we are entering the land of such deeply ingrained entitlement that to me that is the real problem. No one owes you anything in life: if you think otherwise, you are set for a disaster.

jbay808 5y ago
> men and women are equal in terms of their ability to be communal… but are they? Even if the two populations aren't equal on average, undoubtedly some men are more communal, and some women are less so. You can't do comparisons on populations as though they were individuals! But with a stereotype that becomes a norm, even especially-communal men, married to especially-non-communal women, will be pressured into not taking parental leave because people think the wife should do it. That pressure could include, for example, harsher career consequences than a woman would face for taking parental leave. And that's neither good nor fair. So stereotypes are dangerous, even when they're accurate. (Which this one might not even be!)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
MikeTheGreat 5y ago
> you prioritised family, hence where your career will go from that point shouldn’t matter to you at all Hold on - this doesn't follow. It's entirely possible that you value both your family and your career. It would be good to talk with people who are actually in this situation in order to verify the assumptions you've listed.

politelemon 5y ago

In my anecdata at my workplace: I'm glad to say that taking 6 months shared parental leave is now seen as the norm. In every case the parent, in their return has come back and said that they feel more fulfilled (but of course very tired) . A downside follows shortly after, they discover the cost of childcare in the UK. It's almost the price of rent! And sadly some of my colleagues have left the country shortly after having a second child, citing the costs. Flip side, we are slightly surprised if we come across men who aren't taking advantage of shared parental. It's very rare now but those who don't are unspokenly seen as "traditional".

hinoki 5y ago

Does anyone know how/when this has changed in tech? Every new father I know takes the leave, and if they aren’t taking the maximum, people ask when they will take the rest. I met someone who took leave for their first three months at Amazon, because the baby was born just before their start date. I’ve only been working for a little over 10 years, and I can’t imagine this has always been the case.

gopalv 5y ago
> Does anyone know how/when this has changed in tech? I think the first-wave of modern startup land is having kids themselves - the change in most companies seem start with the founder - like Zuckerberg taking time off (the last generation feel like the opposite, with folks like Marissa Mayer having a nursery in the office). That said, in my close circle, I was the only one who took the whole 3 months off work while being on a H1B visa. There are folks who have the option, but did not take it because they are really worried about replacing themselves at work in an active fashion for a whole quarter. On the career ladder path, there's a fair amount of ugly politics which goes along with this as well, with the same people who encouraged you to take time off also trying to disassemble your team for parts while you are out. Because of that, I like the idea of taking paternity leave just like maternity leave (it's not the same, no baby was trying to extract my blood sugar). It balances the inequalities of having children to be more fair between parents, but highlights the inequalities of being a parent (vs not having kids).

wirthjason 5y ago

My job offered 4 months of of paternity leave with pay. And an optional 2 extra months off without pay. So you could think of it as 6 months at 2/3rds pay. It didn’t have to be taken at one time either. There was a small restriction that you had to start the leave within 1 year of the baby’s first birthday. The company also offered it for people adopting, so it applied for all people regardless of gender or lifestyle. You could only apply for it 3 times though. So no having 10 kids to escape working. :P I took two months off when our baby was first born. Then I took 4 months off when the baby was about 9 months so we could spend New Years in Japan with my wife’s mother. While abroad on leave the pandemic hit, flights we canceled and we got stranded. Upon returning everyone was working remote so we stayed in Japan for about a year. I’m so grateful for that time. We spent the mornings watching morning kids shows, paying with grandma, going to the park, etc. My daughter speaks Japanese as a first languages and has advanced in so many ways because of that time off. I’ve heard stories of very senior people being pressured to take less time. The logic being: If you’re gone for 6 months and everything functions just fine, are you really that important? My advice from those people was the company puts it there for a reason, take your time, you earned it, everyone is jealous.

barbazoo 5y ago
I was graciously allowed to take 4 weeks paid right at birth and I'll take another 4 weeks paid when he's 1 year old. I'm already so looking forward to it. In the beginning it was all about figuring everything out and surviving together. The next one is hopefully going to be more of a bonding and getting to know each other opportunity. Again, super happy about that. And I feel grateful that that's what working in tech allows me.
dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
> The logic being: If you’re gone for 6 months and everything functions just fine, are you really that important? Well, yes, I think that's the crux of it. If you work in a place you like then - if you're smart - you'll not only work well, but also make sure everybody knows you're an valuable asset and without you things could go awry. It kind of conflicts with your disappearing for a few months.

pmkiwi 5y ago

In NZ, my wife took 6 months of parental leave (with a huge drop of salary...) and I took 2 weeks* (one unpaid and one paid by my company). So yeah, I did not take anything else because our mortgage is not going to repay itself and the pragmatic move was that I continue working. Note*: in NZ, the partner is allowed 2 week unpaid if you are in your current job for more than 12 months, 1 week if you are in your job between 6 and 12, and 0 if you just join a new company. And it does not matter if you have been paying taxes and working several years before that. Silly system really. At the same time, I WFH the full time so I was there for almost everything and my kid started to have full nights straight away so it was not that bad :).

dbt00 5y ago

My kids are 20 and 16 and I got 2 weeks of parental leave. I'm happy to see it's getting better.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mrmincent 5y ago

My workplace updated their leave policy from 2 weeks to 3 months back in April, and in May my wife and I welcomed a new baby boy. I’ve taken the whole 3 months and it feels like one of the best choices I’ve ever made. Getting to spend so much time with him has been incredibly rewarding, I have so much confidence when dealing with anything that pops up, and I’ve been able to support my wife in recovery from a fairly traumatic birth. We’ve already decided that if we have another kid I’ll take 3 months off just the same, even if it has to be unpaid. If you have the opportunity to take the time, absolutely do it.

sircastor 5y ago

I’m reading the comments here and I’m flabbergasted. My work offered me one week of paternity leave. That was it. My child was born several weeks early and I can’t comprehend who came up with 5 days and thought “what a great benefit”

wongarsu 5y ago
5 days sounds more like someone thought "what's the absolute minimum we can get away with without making them quit"
sfgweilr4f 5y ago
Not to put too fine a point on it: an idiot. As per the definition: a foolish or stupid person. Imagine if you will, a society that didn't want to go extinct. A society that had discovered that birth rates were falling and that paternity leave was just one of many straightforward government sanctioned initiatives that could tip the balance. Now imagine an individual or group that thought 5 days was enough. Yeah. About that.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
hellbannedguy 5y ago
What country?
liberalbias998 5y ago
This has changed a lot over recent decades (in the UK.) My eldest son is nearly 30. When we were expecting him, his mother was suddenly `managed out` of her job in IT working on GCOS7 systems; no problems whatsoever until she was pregnant. When I told my boss (again in IT) I needed to plan in a weeks annual leave, he was clear that he was pissed off and fed up about it, because we were busy doing some technology transition. Three decades later; I cheerfully cover for colleagues taking a couple of weeks of extra paid paternity leave. My own archaic view about paternity leave is that it is designed for female equality; which I believe is a good thing.
5y ago

conductr 5y ago

> academics found that for heterosexual married couples, the father taking any paternity leave after the birth of a child can also cause the divorce risk to drop for up to six years after the birth. I’d challenge the word “cause” here. My guess is it’s just a leading indicator signaling the dad is engaged in/places high priority on the family which extends to the marriage.

charia 5y ago
Yeah, and for a father to take paternity leave suggests the father's job and family's financial situation are doing reasonably well. Financial stability plays a huge factor in keeping couples together.
dtech 5y ago
True, but causation isn't a stretch. The father bonding with the child and getting experienced with childcare could be a destressor for the marriage.
- richardwhiuk 5y ago
  It's a leap.
  - vmception 5y ago
    A quantum leap
    - kbelder 5y ago
      Do you mean the smallest leap possible, or do you mean a sudden transformative leap?
  - op00to 5y ago
    Are you married with children? Share your experience rather than dismissing it out of hand with no explanation.
- 5y ago

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

When all of these (IMO, highly predictable) articles come out about paternity and maternity leave, I wish they would also highlight that these leave policies just show the gaping inequalities in the workforce, especially in the US where leave is not mandated. I mean, the only reason the tech giants are able to offer such generous leave is because their businesses are almost unfathomably profitable, with limited competition, and because they are big enough that the work of any individual worker will not be missed that much. But why do virtually zero, say, small businesses like restaurants, cleaners, mechanics, etc. offer leave policies remotely like this? Because these businesses actually need all their workers to actually work, and when they don't, the business actually stops functioning. If we really believe that parental leave and parental bonds are beneficial for society, then society should pay for it, instead of hoisting the cost onto companies, where only the richest companies are able to do so.

metters 5y ago
In the USA, the cost of paternity leave have to be fully paid by the company? I thought it would be paid by both together (government and employer) at least. My paternity leave was fully paid by the government, but it was capped. Moreover the amount of paid months is limited and I had to share them with my wife.
- sofixa 5y ago
  AFAIK (not American) paid maternal or paternal leave isn't mandatory by labour laws/regulations, so yeah, it's up to the employer to offer it and pay for it. Logically, only the huge and very well off companies in competitive ( for employment) branches will do so because the others have little incentive to "waste" money on the matter.
  - metters 5y ago
    Thanks for the insight. It makes sense for small companies then to not offer paid parental leave, as they really cannot afford that most of the time (thinking of cafes, restaurants, small shops at the corner, etc.)

nextlevelwizard 5y ago

Taking 5 months off is pretty much same as changing a company or at very least the internal department/team. A lot happens in 5 months and from my experience no one who comes back from maternity or paternity leave stays with our company for long. I think this is because people think that they are coming back to whatever team and position they left, but that position has been refilled in that time and when they come back they are seated in which ever team has room. Which usually means completely new colleagues and usually new project as well. At which point they realize that they might as well just look for another job and often leave within the next 6 months. It is easy to see why this kind of thing can have affect on your carreer development. Especially when people who have kids and take timeoff tend to have multiple kids and thus multple paternity leaves. If you take 10 months off work your carreer development drags behind 10 months and everytime you change your employer unless you can trade up your title you will be resetting whatever progress you've made towards the next job title (you might catch up faster to the same point you were in at the new job, but the progress still gets reset). I don't think there is anything that can be done about this. This is how human brains work. Think about our ancestors. Someone goes away for long time and comes back. We might be glad that they are back, but they've missed out from the struggles and successes of that time, so we are less likely to promote them to the next leader of our group than someone who has been there while they were absent.

developer93 5y ago
And this x100 is one reason I don't want kids as a woman.
m4x 5y ago
One way to address this is to have roles filled by secondment. That way the same position (on the same team) re-opens for the parent when they return. Additionally, the person who fills the secondment (and is usually a more junior member of the company) gets an opportunity to train for a more senior role and usually ends up as a top choice when that team needs to hire. In my experience teams are usually continually hiring, so the person on secondment can often go straight into a permanent role on the team when the parent returns.

xlii 5y ago

I do not believe that at any point paternity leave will work for men. I do understand push and how it’s beneficial to woman and to children, but in my opinion the whole idea ignores men, how they feel about it and how men function in society in general. On paper everything looks great: Mother gets an opportunity to get back to her career, children gets some bonding time with father that might benefit for years to come and father gets insight in the life of the child and caring for his family. Reality, however, for many men is different. Often men's only friends are at work. Taking paternity leave not only detaches father from his friends but also creates a gap in father's group. If they have problem to whom they will come? Absent-at-work father will slowly get pushed out of the social group only because groups naturally seek opportunity to fill the void. Men aren't good at expressing emotions and everyone agrees that on paper paternity leave looks good. So what happens is that "oh yeah, relationship naturally deteriorated, and Tom really helped us with this project" but in reality it didn't and Tom hadn't. It's social dynamic that changed. Father knows what's up, his workgroup know what's up and yet no one will say "You know what, we missed you, you didn't even call us, so we were angry and decided Tom is our new friend and screw you". Yet while men don't really talk about emotions they can feel social dynamics and so it takes usually 1 or 2 fathers in workgroup and observation how social dynamics change around them after they come back. It's not ostracism, it's just when you're leaving your group for couple of months you cannot expect that they'll welcome you back even if you decided to leave them for a very sound reason. Second thing is that men aren't really wired to take for the child. They don't get the same hormones woman and because of that experience of caring for the child is by default vastly different[*]. Men's bodies don't help them preserve the specie by releasing a number of happiness hormones as mothers body do. For men it's quite often the chore without positive feedback. And of course no one will ever complain about it as strong men are responsible and caring so it's not right thing to do, but I have yet to hear a man in my circle who will describe it as magical experience [1]. We live in an age where some fathers already took paternity leave and their children are teenagers and not adults and even those parents don't speak out outside of the "parenting improvement circles". There are of course, many other factors, like the concept of breadwinner, strength of the partner relation etc., etc., but all of that combined makes me not believing it will ever take off on the big scale. Anecdotal note: I spent 18 months taking care of my child during day while their mother worked and then for 1 year I was working in the evenings. [1]: As with social dynamics there are always some outliers, response spectrums, variables and knobs so if that's you (and I do believe that HN hosts quite a lot of outliers on various topics) please take that into consideration :-)

jve 5y ago

I'm full month at work after having "1 year" of paternity leave (actually was working 40hrs per month), government paid. Luckily, didn't feel any of those issues article lists there. Nor from others, nor myself. CEO said something along the lines: of course we like when people work, but your decision. As almost everyone was almost work from home, some even didn't notice :)

ArnoVW 5y ago

When people tell me that paternity leave is bad for your career, I always tell them that being a dad has made me a better manager. And I've noticed the same transformation in others. More empathy, ability to relativise, balance. This of course nothing for the fact that bad employers may not see it that way.

lnsru 5y ago

The Germany is offering generous 12+2 months paid leave. The only problem is that during that time the parental money (Elterngeld) is limited up to 1800€. It’s like one third of the former salary, so that’s perfect hidden barrier and I seriously hate this. I am jealous about hearing friends and relatives being offered 1-3 months fully paid leave by their American employers. Having mortgage and baby a parental leave is impossible and couple paid months at home with family would be super cool.

pmkiwi 5y ago
Yeah same story in NZ. You can take a decent parental but the payout is limited ($500 NZD/pw). Of course, you need a cap but you might end up leaving quite a lot on the table. And on top of that, your value of your annual also depreciates ("You work only half a year full salary, so your annual leave is now 1/2 its origina value")...
- dzhiurgis 5y ago
  It's pretty absurd if you take account of paying upwards 39% of your income and then getting back basically 15%.

waspight 5y ago

In sweden you get an instant 10 days leave after birth, and then about 400 days more to split as you want between the parents. You get about 80% of your salary during this time, up to some breakpoint.

IshKebab 5y ago
That's the sensible way to do it.
- dzhiurgis 5y ago
  Yes, but I doubt breakpoint is high enough to even cover your rent... That's at least the case in NZ - and if you are on tech salary you'll be loosing like 90% of your income.
belorn 5y ago
In practice that mean that men get about 1 day for every 4 days women get, which is a bit low compared to other work in gender equality. If I remember right, in Denmark you can't split the days and so men has a much more equal parental leave compared to Sweden.
kbelder 5y ago
I think that means the wife takes the vast majority of leave in almost every case. That's fine, though, if that's the parent's choice. I think I like this policy.

krullix 5y ago

I recently become a father and I'm aiming to take some months of parental leave at least. Of the 480 days of paid leave you get in Sweden, goverment insurance give you up to around 3000USD a month for the first 390 days of Leave. My employeer then offer a benefit to cover the rest so that I get 90% of my usual salary, which is pretty common. A key here is that one does not need to take all days at once. You can choose to work half time etc. for some years if you prefer and use half-days of parental Leave, making them last twice as long. It's also pretty common to save days to use them in conjunction with vacation each year up to the child reach 12 years of age (100 days can be save after child reacheas 4 years of age). This means you can extend the vacation from 1 months to 2-3 months a year instead and the the full summer to hang out with your kid. Very nice. Both parents are even allowed to be on parental leave simultaneously for 1 months in case you want to go on a longer trip together.

pmkiwi 5y ago
Sounds awesome! Time to move to Sweden haha :)
- krullix 5y ago
  You're welcome:) The drawback is that goverment takes around 65% tax cut (income tax + employment tax) on any incomes of emplyement above 6000USD a month. The only way to get rich in Sweden is through capital gains. There taxes as still very low :)

IshKebab 5y ago

> Ricardo Duque says that this [men not taking Shared Parental Leave] might be partly a result of fathers simply not knowing their rights. I've taken SPL twice, and while people not knowing about it might be a problem, the real issue is that it is insanely complicated. I have a PhD and still struggled to understand the forms you have to fill in. I imagine most people would just give up. The article also doesn't consider that there are definitely genetic factors that make women more interested in babies. I have experienced none of the supposed shaming or career effects, but I still don't want to do paternity leave for more than a few months.

biasedbrain 5y ago

I suppose the article doesn't mention the real reason: that it is the privilege of mothers to spend time with their children, because they invested and risked more to have them (or simply because having the womb gives them the better negotiation position). While a small percentage of mothers can not relate well to their kids and prefer to get back to work asap, the reality is that most mothers prefer to spend time with their kids. Who should get to spend time with the kids? The person who spent 10 seconds injecting their semen into the womb, or the person who toiled for 9 months letting the child grow in their womb, often risking their life to do so? In many cases, the discussion does not even make sense. It is even more ridiculous when feminist men pride themselves for taking "the burden" off their wives. All they did is take away their natural privilege. This also becomes even less surprising if one looks outside of the academic box and realizes that most people don't have exiting creative jobs where they change the world, but mostly mundane stuff like being supermarket cashiers, or, at best, nurses - which is a nice job, but should women really leave their kids so that the can change the diapers of strangers instead? Feminism want us to believe that taking care of kids is a burden that men unfairly push to women while they go off to have fun at work. And huge parts of society have swallowed it. Here in Europe, many governments think they have to force men to take paternity leave, to further equality. They think men don't want to spend time with their kids because of role models or whatsoever. The reality is probably in most cases that the the issue is mostly financial. Even with paid paternity leave, there usually is less money on the table than with full time work, specially since women tend to choose less well paid careers (another privilege - they don't have to provide for the family, so they can afford to trade income for convenience and social status). I think it is great if fathers can take paternity leave and recommend everybody to try to do it. but there are actual real world issues preventing it, not just memes ("societal expectations").

number6 5y ago
I am on parental leave right now together with my wife. Financially it's OK- we had some time to prepare. The most basic issue is breastfeeding. A newborn wants to drink about every two hours. My wife just can't leave the house if she wants to breastfeed. Bottled up milk is an option when the child is about 4 months old. At this stage the bond between them both is so thick, that they are basically inseparable. As man you basically spend a whole year to catch up. So even with enough money and leeway from my employer to take parental leave there are still issues why childcare is mainly the part of the mothers. I guess most of the feminists don't have children. Oh and try to have two children. Guess what: it does not scale well! And it takes more than two persons to even raise one child. I would encourage you all to try it yourself. It is really rewarding to be a parent and also so exhausting - even with all the privileges in the world.

parineum 5y ago

I had a conversation with my cousin a bit ago talking about the gender pay gap being a bit misleading because of the .7/1 ratio not taking into account previous experience and hours worked. To the extent that sexism is the cause of that gap, it's actually a good business decision to not rely on young women for leadership roles due to the realities of biology. Since there is no changing biology, my proposed solution is to make paternal leave mandatory. I think it's counterintuitive at first blush to help women by forcing men not to work but that absence is exactly what puts young women behind the eightball at the beginning of their careers and they play catch-up for the rest of their lives.

adrianN 5y ago
Make leave mandatory even for people who don't have children, or you're selecting for childless people of either gender. Sometime between 20 and 40 you have to take half a year off.
- dzhiurgis 5y ago
  Taking time off to grow newborn is not same as taking time off in Bali
- lorenzhs 5y ago
  Nah, the idea is not that it's the leave that sets any single woman's career back, it's that the expectation of the leave being taken by women causes them to not be hired/promoted/... before having children that the OP is concerned with if I understood them correctly. If suddenly all parents were to take leave, regardless of gender, then discriminating young people by gender would no longer make economical sense. There should definitely also be mandated minimum vacation days in my opinion (where I live, four weeks of paid leave per year are the legal minimum for full-time jobs), but that's quite unrelated to the issue at hand.
fighterpilot 5y ago
Then what about the gap that will now emerge between men who have kids and have been forced to take leave, and the people who have not had kids? Is that a gap that doesn't matter simply because it doesn't show up in gendered statistics but is instead hidden? I am extremely against enforced handicaps on people as a way to achieve equality. I can't think of precedent where this has led to anything positive (I'm reminded of the Harrison Bergeron short story as a write this). If the man (or woman) can afford childcare, then why should the government force them out of the workforce, exactly who is benefiting from this handicap?

deathtrader666 5y ago

Along with the US, India is another large country with no mandated paternity leave for employees in the private sector. My current employer allowed for a measly TWO days. https://bel-india.com/what-is-the-state-of-paternity-leave-in-india/#Private_Sector_Employees_and_Paternity_Leave https://bel-india.com/what-is-the-state-of-paternity-leave-i...

mikkelam 5y ago

I'm personally gonna share it 50% and looking super forward to it. There's a reason most kids prefer their mothers over their fathers. They were there for them. I want to be there for my kids.

dzhiurgis 5y ago

I get weird stares when I'm out somewhere with my daughter and going to restaurant also is very different treatment from when my partner is around. Basic requests are furiously denied vs people smiling...

starefossen 5y ago

With all of my children I have had 4 months of paid paternity leave from when they were about a year old. I live in Norway so this is covered by our social welfare system. For me this has been some of the best time of my life becoming much closer with all of my children then I believe I would have otherwise. Being the primary caregiver for a significant amount of time made us more equal when it came to parenting later on to the point where there are really no difference between who can do what. This have given us more flexibility and reduced stress in every day life and it is easier to let the other one take over if you need a break. During the pandemic lockdown we alternated who had the children and who where at work.

oliwarner 5y ago

Career progression is the most insidious and overlooked barrier here. Unless you take an equal amount of time off —ie the partner takes more time than the mother— the partner's career will progress more in that time, earning more money by the time they come back to work. This means it less likely that the partner will take equal time off next time, skewing the amounts even further. Iterate this loop a few times and you open up a real gulf in take-home pay. So much so that it becomes an unignorable factor in decisions about childcare and schooling that can end up with mothers taking years out of full-time employment. All because their partner worked more the first time. And that's all running on the unrealistic assumption that women don't get [illegally] passed over for promotion just because they have a functioning uterus. Why would you promote Janet over Jim if it's likely that she's going to take 6-18 months off to start a family, and maybe never return? That can upset the scales well before a baby enters the scene. --- On a personal note, we have two children and I've long earned less than their mother so we're lucky that we don't have to consider this stuff in these terms. She's taken time off and while it's hurt her against her colleagues, our balance is much fairer than many relationships. And I feel privileged to have had such significant input to my children's education and upbringing.

globular-toast 5y ago

Having children at 42. Wow. Do you think these people consider that their children will still be living with them when they're in their 60s?

thefz 5y ago

Any time this argument is discussed, I state my point of view, and get downvoted to hell. But let's do it again. Prefacing that I live in a country that has a very long maternal and somewhat average paternal care, and a very good welfare state: I am well against parental leave being paid out with public money, which also mean by my taxes. The reasons are that I don't care about other people's kids; it is unfair to those who don't have children; it's a game very well exploitable, and exploited, I see it around a lot; it forces a whole lot of additional work to the employer and oftentimes to other employees.

vmception 5y ago
You would be okay with it being paid for by the private sector and having the same result? Or, you think not having public money involved would also fix the result? Not clear what the public money part has to do with your observations
cool_dude85 5y ago
>The reasons are that I don't care about other people's kids Isn't this kind of one of government's fundamental roles? I don't care about the road 2000 miles away from me in front of some random guy's house. He doesn't care about the road in front of my house. Neither of us will ever drive on the other's road. And both roads get built.
- thefz 5y ago
  Well I have a say on how public money is spent, and my idea is that public money for personal lifestyle choices is wrong.
  - op00to 5y ago
    This is a nonsense statement.
  - handoflixue 5y ago
    Driving is a personal lifestyle choice, but you said you support roads (or at least "infrastructure"). I'm not sure how you can possibly support "education" if you don't support "having kids" in the first place - do you only mean college? And claiming that health care doesn't involve subsidizing dozens of bad personal choices is obviously absurd: why should your taxes pay for someone else's smoking habit, or choice to engage in a dangerous career like "cab driver"?

habosa 5y ago

It's great that so many companies (including mine) are offering more leave for parents but I don't think the incentives can ever be correct as long as this is a private company benefit. Companies will want to appear generous by giving the leave, but secretly hope you don't use it. Parental leave should be guaranteed by the government and funded via payroll (or similar) taxes. It should not depend on who you work for. A company obviously would prefer you stay at work. Going further, it's probably best for the company if you don't have kids at all. One less thing to pull you away from work. The government is in the opposite position. Governments need population growth. Having a child is, for most people, the biggest impact you have on the economy. You just produced another productive worker/consumer! But right now the incentives are all messed up. My wife is a freelancer. When we start thinking about kids the rational thing for her to do would be to apply for full-time work at a company with generous maternity leave before having the kid. That's not really fair to the company, but it's the rational economic choice.

cnity 5y ago
I feel warm to this idea, so I mean this question genuinely: if the paternal leave is funded by taxes, does it still match salary? If so, it will not be easy to convince poorer voters to vote for a policy that gives more money to the rich than the poor. If not, the incentives will still be imbalanced but in another way: lower paid employees will be more likely to accept the leave than higher paid employees.
- dudul 5y ago
  Can it be similar to unemployment? A percentage of the salary with a potential cap? Higher paid employees pay more taxes (just like they pay more for unemployment insurance) so it shouldn't be a problem.
- benhurmarcel 5y ago
  Where I live we get 4 months of paternal leave, and you're fully paid by social security during that time, at your normal salary. In the end the social contributions are proportional to your salary when you work, it's not unfair to have this particular benefit match your salary too.

artpi 5y ago

I'm on the leave right now! I am writing this comment with my baby daughter on my lap, and it’s not easy - sorry for the typos (oh boy, do babies love grabbing the phone). Automattic (The company I work for) offers six months of paid parental leave regardless of gender. Both my wife and I work there, and she just finished her parental leave. I decided to take the full six months right after. I have to admit to some reservations because I am a team lead, so I was worried it would hurt my career, or the work that we’re doing (and I’m pretty proud of) won’t be there anymore when I’m back. But then my baby daughter is the most important thing in my life, and this is the only opportunity to spend so much time with her. I did some mental accounting, and here’s why I think going on parental leave is good for everybody: - Antifragility: it’s the same case as with sabbaticals. Nobody should be irreplaceable, and forcing the company to be without kohl’s decision-makers for extended periods reduces the bus count factor. I had to put a lot of work to make the system more robust and documented so it won’t break in my absence. - The inevitable parental leave forced me to delegate much more than I would be otherwise comfortable with. After all - my team would stay without me for a long time so I had to make sure I’m not a blocker. - When you’re an individual contributor seeing your "superior" postpone or cut short the parental leave or a sabbatical sends a clear signal that you shouldn’t be taking one either. I was thinking of cutting my parental leave short to for example four months, but that would send a signal that that’s not important. I don’t wanna set an example of a bullshit hustle culture. - The imminent parental leave made me focus on high leverage long-term important work vs short-term day-to-day business. That focus has actually been a force multiplier for everything I did. When you have unbounded time due to Parkinson’s law the stuff you have to do will fill it up. If you have limited time to do something you will be much more productive. If you need something done, ask a busy person. - I also don’t want to contribute to the world where the freaking work is more important than a child. Despite all those great reasons I still had some reservations before taking before six months off. I had a nagging feeling on the back of my head that I may be should cut this a little short, despite EVERYBODY (including my lead, HR, and CEO in the DMs) convincing me to take as much as I need, so I see how hard of a decision can it be for somebody less supported. I am two weeks in and I am very happy that they took the whole time. I've written about my plans for this time here: https://piszek.com/2021/07/10/parental-leave/ https://piszek.com/2021/07/10/parental-leave/

da_big_ghey 5y ago

> non-birthing parents what means this here? sterility?

Multicomp 5y ago
It's the newest term for biological fathers. Birthing parents corresponds to biological mothers.
- da_big_ghey 5y ago
  why are we now with a "new term", and why bbc has chosen this, not mother/father?
  - medvezhenok 5y ago
    Presumably to be inclusive to same-sex couples (where both or one parent can be non-birthing) and non-traditional marital arrangements.

jefftk 5y ago

Ninety percent of those surveyed reported their employer offered less than 12 weeks of paternity leave, but almost two-thirds said that they planned to take less than half of that. Fifty-eight percent admitted that they were afraid that taking even six weeks of paternity leave would set their careers back. This phrasing of these statistics makes no sense. If the employer offers a small amount of leave, and then people take a small amount of leave, and are worried that if they want to take more it will be harmful for their career, all of these statistics go together. The article is phrasing it as if instead 90% of employers do offer 12+ weeks of leave.

djohnston 5y ago

As someone who doesn't have kids is it immature for me to wonder why I don't get some time off for not procreating? The world and its collapsing ecosystems don't need more people, and I feel like I have to spend extra time of my youth paying for other peoples' choices to have kids. Where is my non-paternity leave?

dudul 5y ago
Do you also think that its unfair when sick people get sick days while you're not sick and get nothing? Or when people who lose someone get a few bereavement days and you get nothing?
- djohnston 5y ago
  No, because unlike the two examples you've given having children is a conscious decision with negative externalities. I also get sick leave and bereavement time..
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    >a conscious decision with negative externalities. So bereavement should be declined if the dead made a conscious decision for suicide, and sick days should be banned if the person say made a conscious decision to take care of a family member with a communicable disease? I would argue parental leave is only unfair against those who are simultaneously infertile and legally barred from adopting. If both of these don't apply to you then your position is intractable.
    - djohnston 5y ago
      On bereavement, no, you didn't make any decision and the decision of the deceased is out of scope. On taking care of a sick family member, no, your family member didn't choose to be ill. These are both straw man arguments IMO.
      - 5y ago

iammisc 5y ago

Long paternity leaves encourage people to have less children. When you have to take months off at a time for each kid, then parents are encouraged to have fewer so as not to be that guy (or gal) at work who's just having babies. As someone who wants lots of kids, taking off a year for each one is just unfeasible, and would lead me to never working. It's no wonder the birth rate is declining. Mother's and father's are different. We do men a huge disservice by telling them they're going to be super needed at home for months. Barring exceptional circumstances, most men will need to be home for a few weeks at most.

ashtonkem 5y ago
That doesn’t pass the sniff test. America started having fewer kids before long parental leave was the norm. It might be true for you, but it doesn’t seem causal as a society. I think much more plausible is the reverse: having fewer kids makes long parental leave ideal. If you’re only going to have one or two kids, you’d prefer to take time off and invest in nurturing them. This isn’t possible if you’ve had four or five, since you won’t have the time.
- iammisc 5y ago
  Except, this is not just about America. By and large, countries with more parental leave have lower birth rates. America has less parental leave and has a relatively higher birth rate.
  - joshuaissac 5y ago
    Or perhaps the introduction of paternity leave is a reaction to lower birth rates?
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      And changing values around what children are for. The idea that children are things to be cherished and invested in (emotionally and economically) is a relatively new idea. Historically children were economic producers for the household, rather than an economic sink.

sershe 5y ago

I don't understand why paternity leave is even a thing, anywhere. Having children in the first world is an environmentally destructive hobby, as selfish as any other. Sure, go for it, I don't mind - but why should we subsidize it? I'd love to spend 3-6 months with pay coding my dream videogame or climbing mountains, but the fact that I can't is not a societal problem. Why should child-rearing be any different?

mensetmanusman 5y ago

About to take 4 weeks next Monday…