Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: Paid Paternity Leave Edition


It is a shorter week in the office with the a lot of traveling for work, but with that being said, I actually still found some time to do a little reading.  

This week I found several great articles on paid paternity leave.  In recent weeks, I have seen more and more attention paid to this matter.  Given the increased attention to the lack of mandatory paid paternity leave in the United States, I think it is appropriate to dedicate this post to the topic.

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.



CBS News has a great article on the stigma that is attached to the idea of men taking parental leave to care for newborns.  This particular article notes an employee who works for PriceWaterhouseCoopers in Chicago who was able to take 6 weeks of paid paternal leave to care for his newly adopted son.  It is interesting to read through the article and see how there is a certain level of surprise (and maybe even disdain) for new fathers who take paternal leave after the birth or adoption of a child.  For years, men taking this time off was unheard of...but as times change and many men play an increased role in the development and care of their young children, it has become more and more common for paternal leave to become "normal".  Like the Huffington Post article listed below in regard to Nestle, it is interesting to note that while 71 countries offer paid leave for new fathers, the United States has yet to join this list...



This is the first Huffington Post article that caught my eye this week.  Although short, it has a good summary of why TOMS founder Blake Mycoskie believes dads need paid paternity leave in the United States.  In part because of his experience taking 12 weeks of paternity leave, TOMS now grants all new parent employees eight weeks of paid leave and flexible schedules upon return to work.  Similar to the story of Nestle, below, while mandatory paid paternity leave is not required in the United States yet, several companies are jumping ahead of the game and being proactive about the matter. 


There has been a fair amount of discussion the past few weeks/months about whether there should be paid parental leave for workers in the United States.  Many overseas countries already have these types of policies in place...naturally, workers in this country have started to clamor for the same.  Shira Schoenberg has a good overview of how Boston and the entire state of Massachusetts have started to take steps to provide paid parental leave to employees...following the lead of California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.  This is one to keep an eye on.



In recent weeks, Nestle announced it would offer 14 weeks of paid maternity leave for primary caretakers and an additional 12 weeks of unpaid leave as well.  For new fathers, Nestle will give them one paid week of paternity leave if they are not the primary caretaker.  Interesting to note, the company indicated it changed its leave policy to "improve the lives of its workers".  Interesting to note, as well, the Huffington Post article points out that the United States is the only advanced economy that does not offer some kind of paid leave...and instead only guarantees 12 weeks of unpaid leave to those workers who work for companies with 50 or more employees.



In early June, Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Group, announced a change in company policy in which new parents could take up to 52 weeks of paid parental leave at 100% pay.  (Richard Branson's Paid Parental Leave Announcement).  This is great press and publicity and certainly pushes the paid parental leave discussion to the forefront.  However, as Forbes notes, there are some "catches" in this new policy, namely:  the policy applies to fewer than 140 employees in London and Geneva (of a worldwide group of 50,000 employees) and employees are eligible for the 100% pay for 52 weeks only if they have worked for Virgin for at least four years, among other caveats.  Even when looking closer at the new policy, and seeing its limits, this is still a major victory for those pushing for paid parental leave on a larger scale.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more