

The economic case for paternity leave - prostoalex
http://qz.com/266841/economic-case-for-paternity-leave/

======
AndrewKemendo
When I was a U.S. government employee I took 34 days of paid paternity leave
when my daughter was born and 28 days when my son was born two years apart.

The notion that the U.S. doesn't have paternity leave is totally unfounded. In
fact, the U.S. Government as an employer has pretty damn strong
maternity/paternity leave policies.[1] I know of many private companies that
also have great maternity/paternity leave policies.[2]

People seem to want the government to mandate the private sector implement
these policies, however the U.S. Code is not structured in a way that
encourages restrictions on private companies in this way.

[1][http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-
adm...](http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-
administration/fact-sheets/leave-and-work-scheduling-flexibilities-available-
for-childbirth/)

[2][http://www.workingmother.com/best-
companies/ibm-9](http://www.workingmother.com/best-companies/ibm-9)

~~~
dragonwriter
>People seem to want the government to mandate the private sector implement
these policies, however the U.S. Code is not structured in a way that
encourages restrictions on private companies in this way.

This is basically false. There is nothing about the _structure_ of the U.S.
Code that is hostile to mandates on private employers, and in fact the
_content_ of the U.S. Code already includes wage/hour/leave mandates on
private employers.

It doesn't include paid parental leave mandates for private employers, but
there is nothing _structurally_ that supports the current mandates but would
need to be changed for that specific mandate. Its just that federal decision-
makers haven't adopted that specific policy.

~~~
AndrewKemendo
I suppose I should have worded it differently.

The structural process _of changing_ the U.S. Code is not conducive to
encourage restrictions on private industries.

~~~
dragonwriter
> The structural process of changing the U.S. Code is not conducive to
> encourage restrictions on private industries.

That's just the lawmaking process. Which produces new and altered restrictions
on private employers all the time.

------
neves
As a non-american, this kind of argument is really crazy for me. This isn't an
economic discussion, but one about which kind of society we want to live. We
always read all American politicians talking about the importance of the
"Family", but the richest nation in the World can't afford their fathers to
spend a dozen of days with their newborns?

~~~
gordaco
Indeed; I've been thinking the same for a lot of time. The way the economy is
treated in most media and political speech, even here in Europe, is almost
machiavellian: everything is about the economy, nothing actually matters
except it, whichever additional benefit is only collateral to the real thing;
and of course, whichever damage caused is justified by the supposed greater
good, so suck it up. Somehow we have forgotten that economy is the means and
life (both as individuals and as a society) is the end, not the other way
round.

------
jpatokal
There's a lot more than just maternity (or paternity) leave holding back
Japanese women: the cultural expectation remain that women are there to pour
cups of tea, marry eligible salarymen, and drop out and rear their kids while
said salarymen work insane hours.

My wife (MBA, ex-Microsoftie, etc; not your average "office lady") briefly
worked for a super-old-school Japanese trading company in Australia. Her boss
wanted her to go on a business trip to suppliers in Japan with a client; HQ
held out as long as they could (because what would the _suppliers_ think if
they sent a _woman_?), but eventually gave in because there was nobody else
suitable. So they called up all the employees and proudly announced: We're
sending a _woman_ to Japan, for the _first time ever_! Everybody, a round of
applause at how _progressive_ we are!

So when was this? In the 1970s, perhaps? Nope: _2011_.

------
Teodolfo
The USA desperately needs federally mandated paid parental leave and paid
pregnancy leave along with strong incentives to actually take the time off.

~~~
sk5t
Why should the federal government legislate this, and not the states? What
could possibly grant Congress the authority to force such a thing upon all
private enterprises in the land, and wouldn't it open the door to federal laws
for virtually everything argued to be for the general good?

~~~
locopati
Why should it be left to the states when there is an argument to be made that
because of interstate commerce you need to implement a mandate at the federal
level if you are to avoid a race to the bottom?

What is wrong with federal laws for the general good? The EPA and FDA fall
under that very idea. Would you rather have food and drugs managed at the
state level? We've already seen what happens if environmental concerns are
managed at the state level [1].

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain#History_of_acid_rain_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain#History_of_acid_rain_in_the_United_States)

------
stochastica
Overprivileged first world honkies work 8-hour shifts at cushy desk jobs, and
now they want paid leave because their waifu plops out babby? Ugh...

