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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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?
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.
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...
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.
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.
Here come more taxes...
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
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.
Your family your problem, why make it my problem?
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."
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
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.
@Hutterite - American Fork, UTOh, 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.
Yea and I would like to have a Lamborghini and a condo in Italy.
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.
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
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.
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
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
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?