Eight weeks of paid leave for giving birth?
Over at The Daily Whackjob, Greg has been plowing through the early bills being introduced. One such bill from the Senate is the topic of serious conversation:
S 80 - “A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for 8 weeks of paid leave for Federal employees giving birth and for other purposes.”
As a single woman with no kids, I am at a loss to understand the necessity of this bill. Federal employees have significant leave, much more generous than that provided by the private sector in many cases. Options for leave for childbirth are numerous, including the use of advance leave and leave banks.
It seems like to me that this is a costly solution in search of a problem.
The only silver lining I can see that might come of it is that sometimes giving benefits to federal employess leads to manadating the same benefits in the private sector down the road. (It gives labor lobbyists grounds for telling Congress “shame on you” for giving benefits to federal employees which the public at large cannot receive. Many smaller employers in the private sector don’t provide short term disability benefits to anyone, resulting in no maternity leave for its female employees, which can be a hardship especially to one income families. I do think the idea is pro-female, as most men don’t have to worry about what to do when they become dads. So the bright side is, in my view, it might help women federal employees which is a good thing.
I disagree – federal leave builds with tenure. And at a few stages, the amount of leave gained by pay period grows. But newer employees don’t have much federal leave and don’t gain federal leave at a fast clip. And new mothers are often these newer employees (given their age), and so don’t have much federal leave to take the needed maternity time off without losing salary. And, on the flipside, the private sector is way ahead of the government in providing maternity leave.
The federal government shouldn’t be lagging in this department.
I’ll also add that 2 months paid maternity leave is still behind the large group of private companies that provide 3 months paid maternity leave.
Rob – as a former federal employee, I am aware of the rate at which leave accrues. However, since I left (more than 20 years ago), the other options for leave have expanded. Note that advance leave is available. And leave banks.
As for lagging the private sector – that depends on where you live. Down here, you would be hard pressed to find a single company that allows for ANY paid maternity leave (outside of the normal leave granted). A few large companies offering benefits like that is not the norm by any means.
Three months of paid leave in the private sector? I find that hard to believe, but I also don’t work at fortune 500 companies. However, and this will be a very Republicanisque comment, if young mothers would like to have paid maternity leave like those offered at fortune 500 companies, should they make the a priority in their job hunt?
That last sentence should read: Shouldn’t they make that a priority in their job hunt.
As a federal employee I know that we do not get the short term disability that the private sector gets. I just returned from maternity leave and have used ALL of my leave and now have none. My son is sick and I have to take off frequently to take him to the doctor. If I had this 8 weeks of paid leave I would have mo own leave still and I wouldn’t have to be taking leave without pay. Yes, you can take advanced leave, but themn you have to pay it back and playing catch up is not effective either! VJP…get back to me when you have kids and have no leave to take!!!
SB, I agree with you 100%. I worked in private sector for 11 years before getting married and moving to DC. I am now working for the Federal Gov and was really surprised to find out that they do not offer paid materinty leave as my previous non fortune 500 comany had. Now that we are planning to have children this is of great concern to me as I would also like to save my leave for child related events that will occur after birth. With the cost of living here, cant quite afford LWOP.
I’ve been a federal employee for seven years. Although I’ve saved up 3 months of combined annual and sick leave. By the time I get back to work it will be a while before my leave balance will build up. I will probably have to take leave without pay to take my child for his routine pediatric visits. Low leave balances are frowned upon in this agency.
My wife used up all her leave during the birth of our first child. Our second one was born a year later. She had to rely on a few weeks of leave donation to cover her absence
I am a term federal employee. I was notified in advance that my term will terminate in September 2006. I already used up all
my sick leave with just a few hours of annual leave left. I had to return to work a month after giving birth because I did not have enough leave donations.
I have always thought it was outrageous that the Federal Government does NOT provide any maternity leave for its female employees to give birth and similarly does not provide any leave for male or female employees, who adopt children. Contrary to what is written in the first posting, options for leave are NOT numerous in practical terms. So she is quite mistaken in saying this is a costly solution in search of a problem. It is egregious that we living in a so-called developed country (the USA), do not even have support through paid leave for Federal Agencies and large companies to accomodate giving birth and initial bonding. The only leave that is mandated is 3 months of leave that is unpaid, which even for the so-called middle class can be difficult when most of us are relying on 2 salaries to live in this area. Unless one has had the luxury of planning one’s pregnancy several years in advance and has any illnesses during that time, the leave in the Federal Government, while being better than many private companies is good in relative terms, but not in absolute terms. Twelve weeks should be offered, but given that currently zero is offered eight weeks would be a good start.
Several of my friends who worked for private companies in D.C. who gave birth had 3 months of paid or 60% paid leave (through disability insurance). I am about 20 weeks pregnant and have to be very careful about the leave I take. I can not deplete all of my annual and sick leave to spend the 6 months I would like to with my developing child. Mothers less than others can afford to deplete annual leave for childbirth and early bonding, because we need to have leave for illness or child care crises. Our entire nation would benefit if we adopt a more civilized policy, including move large private companies towards a policy that would benefit all employees, including those without children.
I thought I was the only one who felt the Federal Govt. was unfair with their leave policy. I’ve been working for the feds for 5 1/2 years. I’ve only taken 2 short vacations and used a handful of sick days, and I still only have enough leave to to add up to about 10 weeks by the time my babies are to arrive. I’m looking at the high potential of preterm labor so I probably won’t even have 10 weeks saved. I would love to have 8 weeks off after their birth to bond with them, but that isn’t going to happen. I’ll be lucky to have 4-6 weeks off before I have to return to work.
Due to the fact that we are not eligible for state disability because we choose to be civil servants, we should at least be awarded a discounted salary during maternity leave.
Many federal employees are former military. Being one myself, when I had my first child, I had a mandatory 42 days of paid maternity leave which was not charged to my annual leave balance. I then used all of my annual leave to total three months of bonding time with my first born child. However, keep in mind that military don’t have to use sick leave. When a doctor says stay home, you stay home. I came off active duty upon my own request (children is first priority). I took a job with the federal government to use my military skills and support the military and federal government. I found out that I am having a second child. I already use all my sick leave for my first child and routine medical and dental appointments. When I asked about maternity leave, I was told there isn’t any. But, if I don’t use any leave for myself, my daughter, or for my husband returning from Iraq, I would have a grand total of two weeks with my baby once born. That is not only a shock, but it is insulting. Why should the federal government care what every other company is doing? Why do they need someone else to offer paid maternity leave before they do?? I thought the governement might care enough about their employees to offer the paid leave a mother needs to not only bond with their child, but to recover from the childbirth as well.
You can’t get automatically get advanced leave from a government agency. Certain agencies won’t permit you to borrow time. You only accrue 4 hours (1/2 day) per pay period. So if you are expecting before you’re there 3 years, you are in the dark.