133 Comments

My father is in the hospital. My sister had paid time for family emergencies. She is with my father. My brothers, sister and I don’t have the same opportunity. though it is unfair, we a grateful that at least one of us can be with him.

[Reply]

This isn’t a personal story, but I hope this is the appropriate place to post it nonetheless:

I just found on THOMAS that Sen. Ted Stevens has introduced a bill called the Family Leave Act (S. 80), which mandates 8 weeks full pay for maternity leave, 5 days paid paternity or adoption leave, and 8 hours per 12 months for children’s doctor visits.

It was introduced to the Senate on January 4, and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Does anyone know anything about this bill? It seems an odd committee to send it to, but I wouldn’t think that the democratic leadership would try to bury this bill. Unless it’s because it was introduced by a republican senator, and one of the democratic senators has a better bill up his/her sleeve.

I really know *nothing* more about this, and was wondering if anyone out there does.

[Reply]

I never realized how lucky I was until I started reading the stats on the “Moms Rising” website.

My first child was born just 5 weeks shy of my 5th anniversary at a large company covered under FMLA. At the time I was VERY annoyed that they were only paying me for 6 weeks of my leave at full pay (then 2 weeks at 60%) because I hadn’t reached my 4 year anniversary *before* giving birth. I argued with HR that I would reach my 4 year anniversary before I would start into those 2 weeks at 60% pay, but that had no sway on them. What was especially annoying was that I had worked as a “temp” at that company for 7 months before being hired “permanent”–so my daughter was really born nearly 5 months AFTER my “true” 4th anniversary. But I didn’t realize that I had it so much better than so many other moms.

I can’t imagine not having FMLA. My husband worked for a terrible employer when our first child was born, and I’m sure he would have been fired for taking time off to be with me if it weren’t for FMLA protecting him. I don’t have much in the way of family support…so after the birth of each of our children it has been just us.

I sobbed continuously the first day I was back to work after my first daughter was born. I was SO not ready to go back! Again…I’m one of the lucky ones as my husband and I have been able to work opposite work shifts so we don’t have the daycare issue…but it is rough on us. We wonder why the US has a high divorce rate…well there it is…between needing to work and having kids, there is no time to nurture marriages. I pray for my marriage…but I know its gone through some rocky times. We have 4 kids now, I’ve taken a total of 56 weeks of maternity leave in about 5.5 years–36 weeks of it at full pay and 2 weeks at 60% pay. But that really was not without a price.

My career has suffered, and ultimately I was laid off because I was unable to fully devote myself to my work. It would have been better if I had been able to take off at least 6 months at partial pay after the birth of each child so that I could focus on their intense needs during that time–then I could have returned to work with more ability to focus on my job.

[Reply]

I never realized how lucky I was until I started reading the stats on the “Moms Rising” website.

My first child was born just 5 weeks shy of my 5th anniversary at a large company covered under FMLA. At the time I was VERY annoyed that they were only paying me for 6 weeks of my leave at full pay (then 2 weeks at 60%) because I hadn’t reached my 4 year anniversary *before* giving birth. I argued with HR that I would reach my 4 year anniversary before I would start into those 2 weeks at 60% pay, but that had no sway on them. What was especially annoying was that I had worked as a “temp” at that company for 7 months before being hired “permanent”–so my daughter was really born nearly 5 months AFTER my “true” 4th anniversary. But I didn’t realize that I had it so much better than so many other moms.

I can’t imagine not having FMLA. My husband worked for a terrible employer when our first child was born, and I’m sure he would have been fired for taking time off to be with me if it weren’t for FMLA protecting him. I don’t have much in the way of family support…so after the birth of each of our children it has been just us.

I sobbed continuously the first day I was back to work after my first daughter was born. I was SO not ready to go back! Again…I’m one of the lucky ones as my husband and I have been able to work opposite work shifts so we don’t have the daycare issue…but it is rough on us. We wonder why the US has a high divorce rate…well there it is…between needing to work and having kids, there is no time to nurture marriages. I pray for my marriage…but I know its gone through some rocky times. We have 4 kids now, I’ve taken a total of 56 weeks of maternity leave in about 5.5 years–36 weeks of it at full pay and 2 weeks at 60% pay. But that really was not without a price.

My career has suffered, and ultimately I was laid off because I was unable to fully devote myself to my work. It would have been better if I had been able to take off at least 6 months at partial pay after the birth of each child so that I could focus on their intense needs during that time–then I could have returned to work with more ability to focus on my job.

[Reply]

The FMLA is an important component of societal support of the family and the future. Supporting leave for parents to take care of their children helps ensure a healthier (emotionally and physically) future for our society. Supporting leave for children to care for their parents honors the contributions of their generation. Supporting spouses to care for their spouses helps support marriage, which is one of the building blocks of our society.

Our country depends on its people. Our people’s health depends on taking care of each other emotionally and physically. The government should do its part to build and maintain these supports so that we can continue to be a strong and vibrant nation. The costs should be borne by all because we all benefit from having a strong society.

[Reply]

Back in 1994, I was fortunate, in that I belonged to a strong union, American Postal Workers Union. After my third child, my mother was stricken with cancer. At that time, the US Postal Service in Seattle, had not advised, informed, or educated employees about their rights under FMLA. I was fired for taking too much time off to care for my Mother and three young children. Fortunately, with a strong Union, and help from the Local Department of Labor, I won my wrongful termination greivance. After several months, I was reinstated with pay but the stress of the entire process took it’s toll. If it were not for APWU and a very determined Union Rep., who knows how many other employees would have been affected by the USPS policy of not enforcing or educating employees and managers about FMLA.
As our society changes, it is critical that we maintain and improve employees rights under FMLA. I truly believe that workers and Unions are being targeted by the Bush administration’s actions. Not providing adequate FMLA will not “force” families to bond together but it will pull families apart. It will contribute to a more “temporary” workforce where employees can easily be replaced. As was my case, some Employers and even the Federal Government, USPS, will try to quash workers rights in order to make and maintain the “bottom line” or production schedules. I sincerely hope and pray that all workers will “rise up” and take responsibility to keep what rights we have earned. This is a critical time in Labor history.
Thank you for this forum.

[Reply]

I am contacting you regarding the proposed cutting back on the current FMLA as it applies to maternity leave.

It is absolutley absurd that the United States of America is lagging behind so many other nations in there treatment of women in the workplace and not making reasonable provisions for women to stay home and care for there newborn child. This is particularly disconcerning while watching the news and keeping up in current events as we see one after another hired nanny being arrested for child abuse and neglect. And the worst part being that most people then wonder where is the mother and how could she let this happen… well the incomplete and unjust FMLA is the reason for such combined with the every increase cost of living here in the US. I live with my husbanc in a small apartment in NYC where although now we have a fine living standard (which is mostly inpart due to my husbands frugality) the rising costs of real estate makes it nearly impossible for us to purchase a home with our combined income of over 150,000. Know with a little one on the way, the FMLA provisions leave little time for me to properly care for my newborn at home without feeling the urgent need to get back to work.

Another issue of concern with cutting back on the FMLA would naturally be that of abortions. How can the government (ahem Mr. Bush) be anit-abortion and then not provide mothers with the proper provisions and regualtions to allow them to comfortably and safley care for their newborn child?

We really need to focus on family values in this country, all too often we are trying to increase the standard of living in other nations while here in the US we are being left behind.

[Reply]

When I took time off from my job with a large federal agency to adopt my daughter and bring her home from China, I was shocked to find out that for federal employees there is no such thing as paid maternity leave. Regardless of whether you were becoming a parent by birth or adoption, there is no separate paid leave for that — you have to use accumulated vacation time, sick leave and comp time and take unpaid time (if you can convince someone of that idea). And if you take more than six weeks off unpaid, then your paid health insurance benefits stop and you have to pay back the feds for your coverage.

Family friendly? Do I really need to answer that?

PunditMom
http://punditmom1.blogspot.com

[Reply]

When I took time off from my job with a large federal agency to adopt my daughter and bring her home from China, I was shocked to find out that for federal employees there is no such thing as paid maternity leave. Regardless of whether you were becoming a parent by birth or adoption, there is no separate paid leave for that — you have to use accumulated vacation time, sick leave and comp time and take unpaid time (if you can convince someone of that idea). And if you take more than six weeks off unpaid, then your paid health insurance benefits stop and you have to pay back the feds for your coverage.

Family friendly? Do I really need to answer that?

PunditMom
http://punditmom1.blogspot.com

[Reply]

The momsrising email is misleading by leaving out Australia for unpaid maternity leave. I love the thought of momsrising, but we must be able to trust it for accurate information.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2005-07-27-business-of-life_x.htm

“With little public debate, the United States has chosen a radically different approach to maternity leave than the rest of the developed world. The United States and Australia are the only industrialized countries that don’t provide paid leave for new mothers nationally, though there are exceptions in some U.S. states.

Australian mothers have it better, however, with one year of job-protected leave. The U.S. Family and Medical Leave Act provides for 12 weeks of job-protected leave, but it only covers those who work for larger companies.

To put it another way, out of 168 nations in a Harvard University study last year, 163 had some form of paid maternity leave, leaving the United States in the company of Lesotho, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland. “

[Reply]

Leave a Comment