Survey: Americans want paid family leave, and they support social programs for families

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 4:23 p.m.

    The first question is how much of a pay cut are emploees willing to take to fund paid family leave.

    The second question is how many jobs are they willing to lose on account of more mandates.

    Even unpaid leave comes with costs to the employer who has to hold a job for someone while still getting the work done.

    And does unpaid leave mean loss of health benefits during the period of leave? Or do the naive not realize how much most employers put toward health benefits for the employees? If the employee isn't working, he isn't generating any profits to pay for those benefits. Or will employees happily pay cobra type rates for continued coverage while on unpaid leave?

    I know. Socialized medicine will just solve these problems.

    Family leave is a fine benefit that might be factored into a total compensation package. But I wonder how many of the young, single, detached generation, or older folks whose parents have passed and who don't have kids of their own, will want reduced pay or reductions in other benefits so those with family obligations can get guaranteed time off.

  • soutahnative Cedar City, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 4:01 p.m.

    I want to have a ten fold increase in pay. Of course someone else "should pay for it shouldn't they? Should I get it just because I want it? No? Life is hard - and then you ... I have children and I love them, but much of the nationis pretty upset because of having to pay for school bills for families that have multiple children, not to mention tax deductions. I support education because society benefits from it, but Is there a need to extend family into everything economic? We already have Parent and nursing places, even baby sitters for mother employees offered by some businesses - voluntarily. If people want children then family planning might be an option - I take care of my own.

  • PhilRM Anchorage, AK
    Oct. 20, 2016 3:57 p.m.

    Take a look at McDonald's to see what happens when people demand more pay for a job not worthy of it. Mickey Dee has brought in ordering kiosks thus eliminating the need for an employee to stand at a register and do the same job for $15 bucks an hour. I wouldn't pay someone $5 an hour to do that job.

  • bamafone Salem, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 12:27 p.m.

    Americans want everything free. Welcome to the world of lazy dumbed down dropouts that have no future. Soon there won't be enough hard working Americans left to support them, then they will really howl.

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 12:22 p.m.

    Of course everyone wants family leave but NO ONE wants to pay for it....they want you and me to pay for it. Well, I pay enough taxes for education that I can't afford family leave, too. Maybe employers could work it out individually as a company without federal mandate. Why would they though, if it costs them too much in lost productivity? You want 10% more benefits...produce 10% more work product.

  • comments4us Brigham City, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 11:39 a.m.

    What they don't ask when doing these polls is "How much are you willing to pay now, to take your time off later?" Or how much are willing to ask your co-workers to pay so you can take that time off? Even if if it is a forced benefit for employers to cover, how do you suppose that helps our economy to increase business expenses without any correlating increase in gdp? So the company covers the expense, and passes it on to the customers... while you enjoy your time off, you pay more for groceries, gas, healthcare, and everything else so that all these companies can pay for additional time off for employees. When you look at socialist countries that have all these great perks, what you don't see is that they have tax rates that at the lowest come in at 40%, sales tax at 25%, $10 a gallon for fuel, vehicles that cost $20-$30,000 more because of the government fess on those. I would rather have the freedom to manage my own finances, savings, and time to take care of my family without more government taxes, interference, and force used to make everyone pay for something they may choose to not use. Nothing comes free. My freedom to choose is more valuable.

  • Thid Barker Victor, ID
    Oct. 20, 2016 11:26 a.m.

    Let's make our grandchildren pay for it! What's another trillion or two on their backs as long as we get what we want!

  • Red Smith American Fork, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 11:19 a.m.

    Free School kindergarten to 12.

    Hillary is promising free College - 13-16.

    Health care for all.

    1/5th of the Nation is on free food now. Why not free food for all?

    Free borders - any and all come and go as you please.

    Free day care.

    Who is going to pay for all this free stuff?

  • cval Hyde Park, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 11:03 a.m.

    If I owned a small business, the threat of maybe having to pay someone for time not worked would have a chilling affect on my willingness to hire workers.

    I love the idea of being able to support my employees, but very few small businesses have a big enough margin to pay people for not working.

    There are always two sides to any equation, and they have to balance. If you add costs on one side, you have to also add income on the other side.

  • NedGrimley Brigham City, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 10:50 a.m.

    Hutterite: "My suggestion for a paternity leave system is employee funded, not employer."

    Great suggestion. I would think just about everyone on this board is in complete agreement, especially with the "suggestion" part. I think it's a great idea that businesses should look at and consider in their particular circumstances. They could even offer it and pay for it, if they so desired. It is one of those great benefits that employers could offer that would make working for them more appealing. "Benefit" being the operative word.

    Now, forced compliance by the government? Another story...

  • a_voice_of_reason Woods Cross, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 10:29 a.m.

    I think paid family leave is one of the greatest benefits an employer can offer. But I think it's a benefit, and should not be required by law - particularly of small businesses. Companies will offer the benefit because they want to compete for the best employees - that's just how it works. Imagine a small company that's trying to survive and hoping to grow someday. They have 10 employees, one of whom is their Accountant/HR/Office Manager. She has baby and the government tells them not only do they have to give her months off work and have her job still available, but that they have to pay her while she's gone. While I believe this is an important benefit she should be offered by a great employer, how can a company that wasn't planning on that survive such an expense and burden? I'll tell you how they'll do it - by not hiring people likely to take paid family leave - mostly young, married, women. If you think gender discrimination is a problem now, just imagine if there was major financial incentive to discriminate. For many businesses it would be a matter of survival.

  • AveragePerson WEST JORDAN, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 10:07 a.m.

    By "requiring" employers to provide extra benefits, all employees basically take a pay cut. Employers have a certain amount of money for wages and benefits. When benefits increase, wages are stagnant or even decline.

    If you want to have a family, plan, save, sacrifice, it really works. It's not always pleasant or comfortable, but it's definitely do-able.

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 10:06 a.m.

    Here come more taxes...

  • Danny Chipman Lehi, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 9:40 a.m.

    Plan ahead to set aside money from your paycheck for you to live off of when you have a baby. It was your choice to have one, after all, with all the future sacrifices that entails.

    Benefits were never meant to be "rights".

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 9:33 a.m.

    The rock...
    I AM a good liberal. Proud of it. And I DO have a small business. Not as many employees as you suggest, but it's not a good time in the petroleum business.
    My suggestion for a paternity leave system is employee funded, not employer. I support the idea, as apparently do a majority of Americans, because I see value for our whole society in strong families and parent child relationships.
    Sure, there's paperwork. That comes with the territory. But mostly it's done by software these days, and it really wouldn't be above and beyond what I'm already doing anyway.

  • red.diehard Central, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 9:27 a.m.

    Your family your problem, why make it my problem?

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 9:19 a.m.

    Money has limits, not unlimited, people abuse laws: give them 5 paid leave days, they want 12, give them 12, they want 29 more days. "Satisfy our demands, we have a dozen more" someone once said. Secularist push environment and science when their real goal is to call the "other side" less than intelligent, they have no science on their side for transgender bathrooms; and they want paid sick leave, since many on drugs and want 4 day weekend. Europe is going down with obsession with vacation and benefits. The left wants to appear "more kind", when in reality, talking about the poor does nothing. We can all solve our own problems with family and community helping out when needed. Thank you very much. Don't need this. Having children outside wedlock is major cause of poverty, and you can't blame that on "the rich."

  • carman Wasatch Front, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 9:08 a.m.

    Every new mandate means higher costs, less competitive companies, fewer jobs, more government dependency and a lower overall standard of living in the long run. While very basic safety nets can encourage risk-taking and growth, creeping regulations and mandates do more harm than good in the long-run.

    If you ask people, they will tell you they want Cadillac benefits. But when you ask them about keeping their Cadillac benefits or their job, they will almost always choose to keep their job. Let's just make that decision up front.

  • Betcha Waltham, MA
    Oct. 20, 2016 8:54 a.m.

    When will people learn and understand that you cannot have everything, no one has and no one ever will, there are sacrifices that need to be made, When a man and a woman marry, and they both want to work, then don't have children, because it is the children who will suffer, don't impose your wants and desires at the expense of some one else, we all make sacrifices, I wanted children, I had a college education, I decided to stay home. Sure we did not have the biggest house or the best car, but I taught my kids I was a MOM. Now that they are all raised, married and have children of there own, I can work, And I can promise you , nothing I could have done in the work place would have been as rewarding to me as my children are now. To make businesses pay for peoples time off when they have a child won't help that child, and it won't help the parents, being a parent is a full time job, you have to choose, Make a choice and then be happy with that choice.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Oct. 20, 2016 8:33 a.m.

    @Hutterite - American Fork, UT

    Oh, you are such a good liberal. You think it is the right thing to do so you would like to force everyone to do it or pay for it.

    Why don't you start a small business with a dozen or so employees? Then you would see what it is like with the government taxing away 40% of your income and them mandating where you spend the rest. Oh, and you get to spend endless hours just doing paperwork to keep your butt out of jail trying to comply with all the regulations (at least 30,000 pages worth) that are frequently conflicting.

    George McGovern retired from the US Senate and tried running a Bed and Breakfast. He then experience the micromanaging and onerous burden of government regulation. He said that had he known, he would have changed the way he voted. That was after he went bankrupt.

    He learned too late.

  • cjd1 Draper, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 8:11 a.m.

    Yea and I would like to have a Lamborghini and a condo in Italy.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 8:06 a.m.

    You make it work by making it part of an employment insurance scheme. Employees contribute via payroll deduction and are able to claim for unemployment, illness or paternity leave.
    It's not the threat of free stuff for everyone but you. It can be and should be a means for everyone in the workforce to look after themselves and one another for the benefit of all society.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Oct. 20, 2016 7:19 a.m.

    I wonder if the first four posters would also like to see the 40 hour work week eliminated. It was considered an overbearing governmental action at the time.

    It was even considered against the Bible, as God worked *six* days - not five - and then rested on the seventh... he didn't take TWO days off!

    The survey results aren't surprising, and represent the perpetual tension between the drive for profits, and the needs of everyone else.

    Since families are under great economic pressure, and fewer young people are forming families, and having children, the question should be if this effort to catch up to the rest of the world would help families, or hurt them.

  • deseret pete robertson, Wy
    Oct. 19, 2016 11:40 p.m.

    It seems like a lot of Americans do not seem to know where the Gov't get the money they spend on any program. People --- it comes from you, the people who pay taxes.Much of the money is wasted on programs that don't work and much is spent on defense and other critical needs --- Yes it could be more efficient and more accountable to us the people.When people want free stuff it is not free -- someone is footing the bill. --The solution is getting more people back to work and everybody paying their fair share or having some responsibility for themselves. That way those who have more can help with those who can't work or need other assistance.How many times over the last 8 years has Obama and Hillary said they will pay for the free stuff by making the rich pay their fair share --- Just what is their fair share --- Maybe they should say, we will look at some of the failed programs and giveaways and get the money for honest needs.Anytime you tax the rich or corporations they only pass it on to the people so your not having the rich and the corps. paying their share, you are only taxing the people you claim to be helping --- Changing the tax code would help a lot.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 19, 2016 11:40 p.m.

    Sure, give me some of that free family leave time.

    And, I demand a new car every year, a huge house, free college, and free medical marijuana.

    "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on Paul's vote."

    We seem to have reached the tipping point where there truly are more people riding in the wagon than pulling the wagon, and it is unsustainable.

  • Holly28 SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 19, 2016 10:43 p.m.

    Sure, give everything to everyone and raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour. Bill the rich! Truly a ridiculous idea just like all the promises of the liberals.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Oct. 19, 2016 10:25 p.m.

    The federal government passes laws requiring states to spend money in particular ways. (Unfunded mandates)
    Both federal and state governments pass laws mandating how businesses spend their money. (Minimum wage, family leave, health care, etc.)

    Millions want free stuff.

    I have a thought: Why don't we require the federal government to ONLY spend their own budget. We could also require that states ONLY spend their own money.
    I don't like it when the government forces me to buy Obama Care (at inflated prices with coverage that don't cover squat). Why should we allow government to bully business?

    Why don't we just let everyone spend their own money and leave everybody else alone?