3 ms·

I'm curious, do you have kids? I do, and I think that anyone who had kids in order to get the "free vacation" is in for a nasty surprise.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ramraj07 5y ago
I do not, but I might. The point is that at we all (at least the ones who plan it) subtly factor how supportive our work environments are for having a child, and in that way the leave policies would definitely change the equation at least for some if not all parents. Further, while it might not change someone’s mind if they weren’t gonna have a child, at the least it will make them decide if they want to do it _today_ instead of a few years later. I’m also not against such leaves; while I’m not able to articulate it correctly, I feel there’s definitely something “not fair” about the system. A coworker who took a paternity leave did not necessarily have fun but they arguably ended up with something far more valuable in their life (a child), so as painful as the Time you spend in those days might be you get actual happiness from it. Again, good for you! No ill-will at all! I just wanted to propose a system that might just be better. Whether you want to have kids or not you get that much time off every two years. Have a kid, great. Don’t have a kid, also great.
- dasil003 5y ago
  Sure, I understand the unfairness aspect, but I think there’s a limit to how fair we can actually make things for different individuals in different situations. We do make structural accommodations for people with disabilities and other disadvantages that can seem unfair to those with the privilege of not dealing with that situation. I’m not against your sabbatical proposal per se but keep in mind it’s going to cost the company at least 20-30 times what parental leave does.
  - ramraj07 5y ago
    For sure! Saving money for the company was never a factor in my thought process!

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ramraj07 5y ago

I do not, but I might. The point is that at we all (at least the ones who plan it) subtly factor how supportive our work environments are for having a child, and in that way the leave policies would definitely change the equation at least for some if not all parents. Further, while it might not change someone’s mind if they weren’t gonna have a child, at the least it will make them decide if they want to do it _today_ instead of a few years later. I’m also not against such leaves; while I’m not able to articulate it correctly, I feel there’s definitely something “not fair” about the system. A coworker who took a paternity leave did not necessarily have fun but they arguably ended up with something far more valuable in their life (a child), so as painful as the Time you spend in those days might be you get actual happiness from it. Again, good for you! No ill-will at all! I just wanted to propose a system that might just be better. Whether you want to have kids or not you get that much time off every two years. Have a kid, great. Don’t have a kid, also great.

dasil003 5y ago
Sure, I understand the unfairness aspect, but I think there’s a limit to how fair we can actually make things for different individuals in different situations. We do make structural accommodations for people with disabilities and other disadvantages that can seem unfair to those with the privilege of not dealing with that situation. I’m not against your sabbatical proposal per se but keep in mind it’s going to cost the company at least 20-30 times what parental leave does.
- ramraj07 5y ago
  For sure! Saving money for the company was never a factor in my thought process!