Return to Article: House revisits paid leave for federal parents
-
73941
Thank you, so-so. I am from Japan and also now am reading in English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Discover tickets and find out how an electronic ticket is now standard use on all gulf air flights."
Thank you so much for your future answers ;-). Geraldine.
-
49165
I live in California where we have an employee paid short term disability and paid family leave program. I was able to use this with my last child because I was a contracted employee for the government, but now that I am a government employee I cannot pay into this system and therefore no longer eligible. I would gladly continue to pay in if I was allowed. So this is a case where most of the private sector does have a leg up on the federal government employees because in this state most women get 12 weeks paid following delivery.
-
48746
VA Employee - so you're a new gov't worker and have no leave saved up for maternity leave? And what would you have done if you didn't get your new dream gov't job...do you think it's your right to have others pay for you to have a child?
-
48444
I am a fairly new employee of the Government. to be honest with you it was a dream come true to finally get a job with GOV. But here I am 17 weeks pregnant with my first child and stressed worring about if I will be able to pay my bills. Now I know some employees have over 25 years of service but what able the new people who havent been there that long, is it fair. i just pray this bill is past before I give birth to my child because this is stressing me out
-
46882
To CBP Employee: Maybe I've been running in the wrong circles, but I would have to disagree with your statement that "most" non-federal companies provide paid leave for parents. I have been in the private sector (until not) since 1987 and it has been my experience (and my peers) that most private companies do NOT offer paid parental leave. I've actually only seen it in a few cases: extremely wealthy companies with a high profit margin (Fortune 500) and then only the upper level executives get that benefit. That was certainly the case when I worked for a large bank in their corporate offices. These companies can offer that type of "cadillac" leave because they make so much money. Those type of benefits are the first to go when a company goes downhill. I think the Feds struggle with offering a benefit to its employees (which are substantial) on the back of the taxpayers when most of those same taxpayers do not receive that benefit.
-
46673
Let me first open up by saying...it's a shame that its 2008 and the decision to grant parents federal leave is up for debate!!?? The decision for the "HOUSE" should be "a no brainer,!" Why should it even be a problem or even voted on? It should be automatically understood that "ANY" parent needing to tend to their child or children "SHOULD" recieve "PAID LEAVE." Anyone that believes other wise obviously needs to take a step back and think about the their work environment. I would much rather have my co-worker recieving PAID LEAVE to tend to their child, rather than have them at work and not be mentally focused on their duties. Yes, we do have annual and sick leave, however, it would benefit the government to have other incentives such as maturnity leave/paid leave for parents. MOST OF NON-GOVERNMENT BUSINESSES HAVE PAID LEAVE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES, SO WHY IS IT SO HARD FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO DO THE SAME??? WOW!!! AND TO THINK WE LIVE IN THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY???
-
46651
"I'm still amazed that you want to have maternity/paternity leave covered under short term disability insurance. Childbirth, unlike being in a car accident, is not short term disability; it is a choice that you make".
For nearly 30 years now, Federal law has mandated that pregnancy be treated the same as any other diaability (SAAOD). Private-sector employers have been complying with this law for decades. No "choice" is involved, at least not for maternity leave.
Of course, folks can just stop having children and we can just be eradicated as a nation.
You people without children should be glad someone is having them so you don't have to since obvioudly you don't want them. But remember, the children of today are your doctors and caregivers of the future...you'll need them.
-
46611
I understand that people don't want to have to pay for others to take family leave - that's your decision. But those of us who start with the government at a young age and want to have a family before we are too old don't have time to accrue 6 weeks in leave. Especially if you are like me and you have high risk pregnancies where you have to go to the doctor no less than 2 times a month throughout, deliver early, and have a baby in ICU for a few weeks. Yes it is MY CHOICE to have children, but give me the choice to pay for my own disability insurance so that I can stay home without trying to figure out where we can cut corners so I can be home. With the rising costs of gas and food everyone is feeling the crunch...two income families or not. Some of the responses people have put on here are just unbelievable. Every situation is different. You have no right to judge for others decisions and situations.
-
46457
To the Moderators (if there still are any on this site...): Please post this for all - it is offered for the benefit of your boards. I am fairly tolerant of many viewpoints/opinions but I am getting fed up with the unwarranted personal attacks being made by poster Dan Ketter. I welcome an Editor's comments on how these postings are monitored.
GOV-EXEC - take note that letting Dan Ketter rant and rave against people and not the issues will soon drive people away from your boards if you don't start moderating personal attacks...BUT PLEASE let me take a small liberty of being hypocritical for a short moment and address Dan directly!
To Dan Ketter: All you are demonstrating to everyone is your ignorance, bigotry, prejudices, and small mindedness when you attack the person and not debate the issue or offer viewpoints.
PLEASE STOP & Grow Up - or take your attacks to boards who freely encourage that type of discussion. I am tired of your childish comments...the ONLY person you are demeaning is yourself.
p.s. I would pick a "verbal" fight with you - except I don't beat up unarmed opponents...you just aren't worth the distraction from all the other valid/interesting comments...
-
46397
Dan they aren't spending their money on a large home. I said they're struggling to pay for health insurance, gas, a modest home and two cars because both of them HAVE to work to support themselves. In this economy with so many people getting laid off, what happens if you only have one income and that person gets laid off? Then you get labeled as irresponsible for not having two people in the workplace. Paying for health care, gas, the cheapest food and clothes you can find, utilities, and transportation to and from work is not living a luxurious lifestyle. What happens if the sole earner gets disabled and can't work anymore? Well if mom hasn't been in the work place for over 15 years she's gonna have a hell of a time finding many people who are interested in hiring her.
-
46341
I strongly believe that Federal employees deserve 8 weeks of paid maternity leave. We have a lot of baby boomers in the Federal Government who are leaving in droves. That means, in order to attract and retain the best qualified crew from the next generation, we NEED benefits like this one. This is not only for our new parents, this is for the security and safety of our country. Attract the best. Keep the best. This would be funds well invested.
-
46133
Dan, you really think that two incomes is simply a choice that most couples make so that they can live a luxurious lifestyle? You need to read the Two Income Trap: Why Middle Class Mothers and Fathers in America are Going Broke. It's not because they're living a luxurious lifestyle. "So we looked at the data for two-income families today earning an average income. What we found was that, while those families certainly make more money than a one-income family did a generation ago, by the time they pay for the basics -- an average home, a health insurance policy, a second car to get Mom to work, child care, and taxes -- that family actually has less money left over at the end of the month to show for it. We tend to assume with two incomes you're doubly secure. But if you count on every penny of both of those incomes, which most families today do, then you're in big trouble if either income goes away. And obviously, if you have two people in the workforce, you have double the chance that someone will get laid off, or double the chance that someone could get too sick to work. When that happens, two-income families really get into trouble, and that's how a lot of families quickly go bankrupt."
So, if both parents don't work they're financially irresponsible when they get foreclosed on. If they do then they're greedy and want to live in luxury. No wonder so many families feel like they just can't win anymore. People need to accept that times have changed and even though people successfully survived with one income 30 years ago, it's a whole different ball game now.
-
46131
For all of you who piss and moan about higher taxes, I don't want to pay higher taxes to support more prisons when your children end up in jail because you cared more about work than providing a stable home and meeting your kids needs. Maybe there's a reason why we have more people in jail than any other industrialized nation. I don't want to be RIFed cause your kid ended up in jail.
-
46127
You don't have to have children to use the short-term disability insurance. If you get a cancer diagnosis you will be very glad you had disability insurance and didn't exhaust all leave. It amazes me how people think that a short-term disability policy favors parents. What about the fact that CSRS employees got 6 hours of annual leave from the start and FERS employees with no creditable service get 4 hours for the first 3 years.
Is someone with a sick parent an irresponsible person? You people who criticize things like parental leave as favoring parents are the same people who would never donate annual leave to a coworker in need. It's time you realized that you can't plan for every possible contingency in life. That's why things like life insurance, health insurance and disability insurance exist.
-
46107
Boy, the emotions run high on this issue. Having children is both a right and a choice. You have the right to choose to have children or not to have children. And, unlike some nations where you are limited, you have the right to choose to have as many or as few as you like. However, along with this right and this choice comes responsibility. If you choose to exercise your right, then you accept the associated responsibility. If you are not prepared to accept the responsibility, then one should question your right to make the choice. The government has very lucrative leave policies, better than most other companies can provide; and not everyone can work for a Fortune company. Most people get only 1 week of vacation and 1 week sick leave per year and do not have the ability to carry the time off over from year to year. For this reason, they purchase an insurance policy that covers extended catastrophic events. People have the right and the choice to obtain such a policy and accept the responsibility. I do not feel that this is a government issue, but rather a personal choice issue. I do take exception to the concept that we create a new category of leave for having a child. Based on this logic, then I would like to see a special category of leave for Dentist Visits, or annual physicals at the doctor's as I am not "sick" when I see these professionals, nor is it a vacation. Additionally, one could view a benefit such as this as a violation of equal rights or an issue of age discrimination. If an additional 8 weeks of paid leave is to be granted, it needs to be granted to all employees, not just those who are of child bearing age. But then again, I am up for some more leave so I don't have to use all of my annual and sick leave that I have effectively managed and accumulated over the years. I would like to accumulate some more leave that can be used to either extend my years of service or get a lump sum payout for when I retire in 5 years. A BIGGER COOKIE FOR ME!!! (I learned how to get those in Day Care). But then reality sets in. I too am a tax payer and will have to pay for this benefit in the form of taxes.
-
46106
I am shocked by the comments I read on here. I was thrilled to see that the house was considering this, in light of what others have mentioned about the abundance of leave provided to new families in other developed nations. I am a young fed, choosing to work for the govt rather than go private and make more than triple what I make now, because I believe in the US and want to support it. However, all of my friends working in private industry have been able to get married and start families with paid maternity leave. No one is asking for a "free ride" - just a chance to be able to have a baby and not go bankrupt. I have saved my sick leave, but at 4 hours a pp, that goes awfully fast with one bout of the flu. Oh - and those who think that choosing to start a family when you will need to go back to work and can't be a stay at home mom demonstrate an archaic mindsight and should be immediately disregarded. Their opinions are the past; this country needs to move forward, not backward.
-
46097
Kim--under short-term disability, you would not be paying anything for anyone. The person paying for the disability policy bears the cost of the policy. Different story, of course, if the government decides to just award maternity leave.
And to Dan, if you are going to call people losers, you ought to learn to spell it correctly lest you look like one yourself. I thought they didn't allow inflammatory remarks here?
-
46033
I'm still amazed that you want to have maternity/paternity leave covered under short term disability insurance. Childbirth, unlike being in a car accident, is not short term disability; it is a choice that you make. You don't plan to get in a car accident, but you supposedly do plan to have a baby. I should not have to pay for that decision you make. It is no secret or surprise that the doctor visits during pregnancy/recovery time from childbirth amount to a lot of time away from work. I chose to not have children because I don't want the responsibility, not to have them and expect someone else to pick up the tab.
-
46032
As a manager, I have learned that there are a few intense moments in the life of an employee, that can have a significant impact on overall job satisfaction and productivity. How an employee is treated during the birth or a child, death of a parent, or during a life threatening illness , matters. Not just to them, but all the employees watching. A policy of compassion, that is also an investment in the health of our newest citizens, just makes good financial sense.
-
45966
I am aware that childbirth is not vacation or an illnes, but it is a medical procedure that requires some recuperation for the mother, therefore, it really does fall under a disability or using your sick leave even though you are not "sick" per se. As for the adoption process, yes I realize that STD would not cover that and there probably does need to be a special provision for that. We also have to remember that we cannot compare the government to what Fortune 500 companies do. Remember the word "Fortune" is there for a reason. Those companies are making tremendous amounts of profit and they can use their discretion with their profits to determine their benefits. I'm also betting that those wonderful parental leave benefits don't trickle down to all employees. It has been my experience that those types of benefits were reserved for the executives and not to the administrative staff. I just don't see how the government can foot the bill for this since they are not a profit-making venture.
-
45891
Having only a short term disability program isn't enough. As the proud parent of a beautiful baby boy whom we adopted at his birth, "disability insurance" would not have covered time off for my wife to be home with our son. With the large amount of time and paperwork involved with adoption --- including the fact that you legally can not bring baby across state lines to your home until certain paperwork is completed - usually a several day to several week process - not to mention the needed time to be home with baby just like every other parent in this world - I can assure you, maternity/paternity leave that ensures coverage for adoption is much needed and long overdue.
-
45883
Christine, childbirth is neither a vacation nor an illness, so sick leave and annual leave aren't the correct leave when someone has children. You may not have had a problem with the amoutn of leave you had, but there are those of us who don't have the income to be able to take unpaid leave to care for a newborn. I have been a federal employee for 2 years and my wife doesn't work. She is pregnant with our third child and I have been saving up my sick leave as much as possible, even workign when sick, so I can take a full month when she delivers. If there was the possibility of having even 2 weeks parental leave, without having to use my leave, I would jump at the chance. If the cost was a few dollars per pay, I could live with that more than not having income because we only have 1 income and can't afford the loss of my salary.
-
45881
The option to elect to pay for short-term disability insurance, as Christine mentioned, sounds like a good compromise to me, and could be useful for all types of "family friendly" uses. Alas, some might have difficulty with this concept, since it means that we have another CHOICE, and many of the readers here have problems with the current choices they have. And, by the way Entitled Young Fed, retirees have the option of continuing their health benefits with the same co-pay as federal workers - it's not "free".
-
45869
I am a new civil servant but worked for a contractor for 20 years. No, it wasn't a Fortune 500 company. I don't agree with awarding special leave for childbirth. My previous employer offered short-term disability for $15.00 a pay period. That is what the highest paid employee had to fork out for it and they made over $100K per year. It covered me for 6 weeks after childbirth and I used leave for the rest. I think that's more than fair. I also used it when I was diagnosed with cancer. The article states that STB would be $40 per pay period. I can't believe it would be NEARLY that high, especially with the great rates the government gets for insurance. I was working for a very small company and I thought our fees were reasonable. The government just needs a short term disability plan.
-
45854
Marie - There is obesity with the adults in this country as well.
-
45852
JT - I could have not said it any better. The governments in Western Europe do care for the welfare of there people. Being a Fed, I have some seen some crazy spending of your "tax money" on basically sh.....! My fault, we rather spend money on $%^$@@#* rather than being concern with the quality of LIFE. That is American way!
-
45845
Hey Jan- I don't feel that I should have to pay more for health insurance because you and your fellow old/more-of-a-health risk retirees keep raising the cost of our premiums. Entitlement generation??? How about you and the other boomers who are the only retired employees left in this country entitled to lifetime medical benefits. Who do you think is paying for that??? I bet if the fed govt started acting like all the other employers in America and took away your lifetime medical benefits, socialism wouldn't be sounding so bad, huh? And to all of you who point out that having a child is a choice- it is. It is a choice to continue the human race, not a lifestyle decision.
-
45834
To "Ex Gov Mom" - You say "This "work-hard till you die" attitude that our American culture has taken to the extreme as its top priority (with family down on the list) is the reason why our culture is overweight, stressed out, with troubled children acting out in horrific and destructive ways. " Did you ever think that the reason might be that not enough mothers (or fathers) stay home and raise their children these days? You say "the family is down on the list" - again, someone should be home with the children, I agree, but that's the family's responsibility.
-
45831
I'm amazed that there are so many stupid responses coming from people using women's names (personally I don't believe they are all women). Fact is that we are the only developed country in the world that doesn't offer it's citizens benefits like universal health care, disability insurance, paid maternity and paternity leave, etc. We're right up there with Uzbekistan and Malawi in what we offer our citizens. Most of Western Europe offers these benefits, and the Euro is doing just fine against the dollar - maybe they know what they're doing? And for those of you who thinks this smacks of Socialism, so what? There's nothing wrong with social programs - we even have a few already, but not enough. Uh-oh - I guess this makes me a ...... liberal! Oh No!!!!!
-
45818
Wow.... these comments say enough. Each person has their own opinion on leave usage and we all have different situations at home. I've been in the Federal Government 20 years and opinions never change. Thank goodness Clinton created the FMLA; it protects parents like me who have sick children, sick parents and folks like me who have a disability that require me to take off when sick or for an operation. Over the years I had 6 operations related to my disability, gave births to two children, both pregnancy's I had toxemia and my youngest son has Asthma. Many folks are blessed to be healthy, have healthy children and healthy parents. This new legislation would help a majority of parents and would be equal to the private sector. You can plan your life to include children but you can not foresee if you will develop health issues or crisis during the pregnancy, you can not foresee the health of your parents and/or your children. Most offices I have worked in did not allow us to work comp or credit hours or work from home. That hinders employees who need to take care of sick parents, children, spouses and themselves. I know parents who have dealt with children born with illness, cancer, asthmas, etc. The Federal Government should support all employees, not just the ones who have no family to support and those who are blessed with abundant health. P.S. To Dan, you need a reality check, some women make more money than there spouse because of the line of work we do. My spouse makes less money than I do and I am proud to be married to a man who builds houses for a living. You may be living in one of the homes he built.
-
45817
As a fed, I believe we get enough leave and holidays. My first pregnancy (21 years ago) I took 10 weeks of combined sick and annual leave and went back to work. The second pregnancy (18 years ago) I borrowed leave which took about 3 years to pay back. I didn't ask anyone to donate leave. I am so tired of the "entitlement" generation. Take care of yourself for awhile it builds character - something you obviously didn't learn growing up.
-
45795
This is a stupid idea. Again, it will cost the taxpayer too much money. AND it will dump responsibility on people who don't have children. How about giving me three months of paid leave so I can get a great tan in the Bahamas???
-
45697
This is really opening a can of worms. I do not in any way, shape or form feel I should be responsible as a retired government employee and taxpayer for your child bearing decisions. There is something called family PLANNING. If you don't have the time and have to work, why have children for someone else to raise? If you are the families breadwinner or a single parent how responsible is it to have children you can not afford or raise without a handout? Not my problem, that's for sure, so don't make me spend my dime for your irresponsibility.
-
45535
Dan's comment is insulting and sexist - and I'm very surprised that GovEx let it through. I have every right to make more money than my husband, and I doubt many people would agree that my teacher husband is a loser. The article wasn't just about maternity leave, paternity leave was included. A man who loves his family and supports his community is not a loser - but one who makes such comments is a bigot.
-
45531
Comparing federal benefits to the benefits offered by Fortune 100 companies distorts the civil service vs. private industry comparison. Most people in this country do not work for a Fortune 100 company that offers a gold-plated benefits package. To most of us, the 13 days of sick leave that federal civil servants can take each year, combined with the year-to-year carry-over privilege, seems incredibly generous. Civil service benefits are more than generous when compared to the benefits those provided to MOST employees in private industry.
-
45530
Abbey, you better go back to Economics 101 so that you will understand why it is important economically for a country to support families and childbearing and a decent culture in which to raise those children. Children are our future leaders, teachers, employers, businesspeople, consumers, and will raise your grandchildren. Get a grip, Abbey, it DOES TAKE A VILLAGE AND AN ENTIRE COUNTRY.
-
45484
I'm amazed at the numer of women posting that they are the bread winner in their family. Looks like you married a bunch of loosers, hopefully this will be your last pregancy until you can find a spouse who is worth something. Please don't tell me that you both need to work that's a life style choice
-
45482
For those commentators on having children being a choice - it is and if we don't do a better job supporting that choice the Demographic nightmare we are facing will only get worse.
Why do you think we have society and government anyway?
-
45480
This may seem like heresy, but such a thing could only be done if the annual leave entitlement were cut back a bit - and quite probably sick as well - in exchange for good short term disability insurance.
-
45478
My husband and I adopted our son when he was 12 months old. I took 3 months unpaid family leave because I had only been a federal employee for a year and really didn't have much built up. I wanted to save some leave so when I came back I could use it for pediatrician appts., to cover the baby when he was sick, etc. So we were fortunate to be able to afford to have me without pay for 3 months. What bothered me was the attitude at work that my family leave to care for the adoption of a baby was considered "taking a vacation", "taking the summer off". They just treated me like a slacker for taking off care of a newly adopted child, which is covered under the family leave act. I think attitudes in the federal system need to change.
-
45477
Federal Employees really do need some kind of disability insurance. I had it when I worked in industry and never had to use it. Of course when I became a federal employee my husband and I were hit with various surgeries/medical emergencies, causing me to deplete my leave balances, and resulting in unpaid leave under the family leave act. I'd gladly pay for diability insurance if it were offered. I can't secure it independently because of previous medical conditions. All the planning in the world and saving of leave will not cover you completely in the case of a medical emergency.
-
45463
Let's see, for those concerned with cost savings, if I could have back every minute of my own time that I spent traveling, staying late and working weekends, taking phone calls and answering e-mail while I was on leave, and skipping lunch and the supposed two breaks I'm supposed to have each day just so that I could ensure that the mission of the Agency was met to the best of my ability, well heck, I wouldn't need "extra" maternity leave at all. Most feds are professionals and deserve to be treated that way. And for those that are concerned about socialism - yep, sometimes the government does things that are for the betterment of society. If they didn't, you wouldn't have a job.
-
45452
Nobody at DHS: That's why you are a nobody. Whine. Whine. Whine. And I KNOW what all these women are asking for. I had kids too. Womens Lib and all that.But I didn't ask others to donate their hard earned time, nor would I ask the taxpayer. Take responsibility. It really takes a FAMILY....your family....NOT A VILLAGE.
-
45448
To all you ladies (with the exception of Marie). If men had the babies, birth control would be free. M(P)aternity leaves would be a constitutional right and would last at least a year. This country needs to come out of the dark ages regarding parental leaves and health care for everyone--not just feds.
-
45446
I am also over 50 and started with the Fed government out of college. I also planned for children along with my husband. We waited until we had saved money, bought a house, and saved leave. We did not expect the government to give us extra time off or for anyone to give up their annual leave. Even now, you should be embarassed to take potential leave that could be donated to a fed suffering from cancer or other life threatening condition that could never be expected because you did not adequately plan for your family. We need to start taking responsibility again.
I don't want to pay the higher taxes that will be needed to pay for this and I don't want to see feds Rif'd because we have become even more costly to employ.
-
45416
The whine about the Federal Government being unable to hire becasue they don't give pregnancy leave - what a joke. The Feds are one of the biggest give-away programs going! I know! I worked there for over 35 years. Government work is well paid; therefore, you shouldn't need pregnancy leave. Take leave without pay; after all, babies are a CHOICE!
-
45414
The Nanny State. Socialism. It has arrived. Pregnancy is a CHOICE. These are YOUR children. I shouldn't have to pay for you to take time off. What is this? Sweden? If you can't afford to give your kids a 'good start' DON"T HAVE ANY! You are just too greedy.
-
45413
The negative comments against a federal plan for new parents smack of sexism. I'm a pregnant woman who is a federal employee - I'm also the primary breadwinner for my family. I've planned very carefully and will be fortunate enough to take 12 weeks of paid leave, if my pregnancy goes perfectly. The government likes to present themselves as a progressive employer and therefore I have yet to meet someone who isn't gobsmacked when they learn that we have no maternity or paternity leave whatsoever. We're the only large, industrialize nation who doesn't support the very family values that our leaders speak of - is that because I'm not supposed to work, but rather stay home?
-
45409
First, I planned both my pregnancies, Deborah, but life loves to give unexpected twists. I have been with the government full-time since 2001 and had one child in 2004 and recently gave birth to twins in October (who were premature). For my first child, I saved my pay and took 12 weeks unpaid leave under FMLA and "saved" my leave for the doctor appointments (before and after birth) and for the unexpected sick days that my infant would endure in daycare when I went back to work. Note, NO VACATION. This last pregnancy, I tried to save my leave but I never bounced back due to finding out this was a twin pregnancy which is high risk and with more doctor and ultrasound appointments. I was put on medical bedrest early September with two more months to go before the twins were due. I ended up in an emergency c-section in October and had complications from the surgery 4 weeks later. Meantime, no pay was coming in because all my leave was exhausted. My agency does not let people donate leave for a pregancy so Darcy (posted below) is lucky! The only way for me to be a candidate for the leave share program was due to medical reasons (didn't cover much at all). I'm thankful that I qualified for the program but the paper work didn't go through until after my twins were born even though I asked about it in mid-september. Why do different departments and agencies have such different policies on leave donation? Marie, I'm appalled at your comments. I did not take ANY "vacation" during both my pregnancies and worked up until the very day I went into labor (first time) and when I went into pre-term labor (second time). This "work-hard till you die" attitude that our American culture has taken to the extreme as its top priority (with family down on the list) is the reason why our culture is overweight, stressed out, with troubled children acting out in horrific and destructive ways. This last pregnancy has taught me that my number one priority is my family and my children. I decided to quit my federal job and stay at home. I can't afford to go back to work even if I wanted to because the cost and quality of child-care is astronomical for two infants. Look to Europe and their culture, they put family first. Some countries will pay the mother for a full year off from work to bond and raise her child.
-
45400
I hope that this legislation does not pass with the federal government (tax payers) footing the bill for 6 to 8 weeks of paid time off for parents. That is exactly what SL is for--save it. We all accure 4 hours SL each PP so you are in control of what you use. If you don't have enough leave and don't have enough savings to cover your bills while you are off without pay, then you probably shouldn't be having a child. The government would do better to provide short-term disability insurance that employees would have to pay for.
-
45399
Who do they think is going to pay for this? The taxpayer of course! And since the taxpayers offer an unlimited source of income for the government, we may as well as withdraw more from their bank to pay for a bunch of whining federal employees. I have had five children, surgery four times and a heart attack (missing multiple weeks each time), and I never once had to use leave without pay. I still have sick leave on the books, and a full compliment of use or lose annual leave. Today's young employees consider sick leave to be "their time" that they can use as soon as they earn it. If you want paid maternity or paternity leave, go to work for one of those 75 fortune 100 companies that offer it.
-
45387
Socialism. We have arrived. The Nanny State, for sure. What crap!
-
45386
Let's see if we all understand what the taxpayers might be on the hook for.
Right now a full time Federal employee can earn and use 13 days of sick leave per year (which can also be accumulated over the years and used when necessary). They can earn anywhere from 13-26 days of annual leave per year. So far they can take anywhere from 26-39 days of leave per year. They also might have credit time that can also be earned and used. Now Congress is proposing possibly up to 12 more weeks of paid leave. A person might actually be allowed to be on paid leave for at least 17 weeks in a year (and more depending on sick and annual leave balances they have)if this does pass. Is anyone wondering why things might not be getting done and why costs are so high.
-
45384
No, no, no! You are creating a special class of people, those who choose to have children. They should take care of their families, but not on my/our dime! What's next, paid family leave for gays adopting a child? Get real.
-
45378
Wow!! Some of these comments floored me! I am 30 years old and am currently pregnant. I have worked for the Good Ol' Fed Gov't for 6 years and have taken practically NO sick leave, in hopes of having a child one day. I have saved almost 350 hours and I feel secure with that. However, because I am pregnant my immune system is shot to hell and I had to take a week off recently due to the flu. There goes 40 hrs. I have a dr appointment every other week (there goes some more leave), and I am having twins so the chance of them being born premature is great. As most of you know that have kids...there really is no such thing as planning when you have children. And even if you do plan, expect the unexpected. My 350 hrs will be gone in no time. But I don't expect any sympathy from you guys!!!!
-
45374
Marie, Most new parents are younger and newer to the fed govt, meaning that they are still in the 4 hour leave category. Even if you didn't take a vacation day for an entire year, you would only have 12 paid days after giving birth. Also, while pregnant, you need to use your sick time for doctor visits, tests, etc., so by the time you give birth, your sick leave is seriously depleted to less than 12 days. Standard medical recovery time after birth is 6-8 weeks, with most physicians recommending waiting 3 months before returning to work. I have been with the federal govt since 2000 and have had two children. With my first, in 2004, I had to use almost all unpaid leave and return just 6 weeks after giving birth. With my second, just last November, despite "saving" my leave, as you put it, I had a difficult pregnancy which depleted most of my sick leave. I ended up having to do a combination of annual and unpaid leave just to swing 8 weeks off after giving birth. Now, I have two kids, with their own doctors appointments that I need to use leave for, and only a day of sick leave in the bank. This is ridiculous. By the way, my husband, who works for a non-profit, received 4 weeks of paid paternity leave. If the federal government is unwilling to offer its employees paid maternity/paternity leave, like 75% of the other employees in this country, it should at least offer short-term disability insurance to cover the income loss during unpaid FMLA leave.
-
45364
Marie,how dare you compare the subprime mortgage crisis to the proposed legislation. This has nothing to do with saving up time, there are too many unknowns when having a child so it's difficult to be able to anticipate how much time you will have or need to be with your family. This legislation would also apply to individuals needing to care for aging parents and other ailing family. Hopefully, you won't ever need this legislation.
-
45344
Here we go again...let's not have anyone responsible for themselves, the gov't will take care of you. Why bother to save your sick leave and annual leave? Go ahead, take your vacations, days off when you just don't feel like going to work, and then you can ask for donated leave, or better yet, you can get an extra 6 weeks paid leave when you decide to have children. We in the gov't have an opportunity to accrue sick and annual leave - private industry workers don't. These are the same people who buy houses they can't really afford - why save up for something - and then want the gov't to step in and stop the foreclosure process.
-
45336
I currently work for an Executive Branch Agency in the Federal Government. I had one planned pregnancy and one surprise within a 13 month time frame. With the first one, I recieved generous donations of voluntary leave up to the 8 weeks I was eligable for. We had also planned financially for this one so we were OK while I was out for 12 weeks. The other child was a complete surprise so we had no financial planning in place and I recieved no voluntary donations during the time frame I was out. It was very hard because I felt the presure to return to the office early due to our finances, but I wanted to give this child the good start she had a right to just as my other daughter had. As a result, we were 30 days late in the payment of our mortgage and our credit has obviously been effected. Having some sort of maternity leave would have staved off this problem. With the health of our children in the US declining, how can we be put in the position to pay for essentials or stay home and give our children a good start!
-
45334
I recently attended a Supervisor Training session for a DOD organization and was left speechless when during discussions with our training instructor about FMLA our senior SES in our organization stated, paraphrased: "if the federal employee needs to take that much leave, then maybe they should seek employment elsewhere!" I was simply floored that there she was setting the organizational tone for supervisors to follow. Statements and attitudes like that is exactly why Federal employee's need legistlation like the FMLA in the first place! Anything that can be done to protect federal employee's from the "don't care" attitudes of senior ranking officials of their organizations would go a long way to providing outstanding quality of life, and work life balance programs. Programs that are instrumental if the Federal Government wants to continue to attract and keep quality employee's.
-
45333
That why we have family planning, they should plan before starting a family. I am 55 year of age now and I planned. This is nothing new.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.