Archive for the 'Maternity/Paternity Leave' Category

Work-Life Balance Issues At Risk in the New Economy?

Featured Guest Blogger February 16th, 2009

Adria B. Martinelli has practiced employment law in Delaware since joining Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor in 2001 as a senior associate in the Employment Law Section. She is also a regular speaker on employment-related topics, and trains individual employers in various areas of employment law, including sexual harassment, performance evaluations and documentation, and exceptions to at-will employment. Adria serves as an editor of the Delaware Employment Law Letter and writes for the Delaware Employment Law Blog. Please note that the views of our guest bloggers do not necessarily reflect the views of the Sloan Work and Family Research Network.

Legal protection in the work-life balance area is limited. Unlike most other industrialized nations, pregnant workers in the United States are afforded no special protections; employers are required only to treat pregnant workers no worse than other temporarily disabled employees. Pregnancy is not (absent unusual complicating conditions) a disability which must be “accommodated.” The United States provides little in the way of benefits to pregnant employees to make it easier for them to have a baby and then go through a bonding period.

In order to state a pregnancy discrimination claim, an employee has to either provide direct evidence of discrimination on the basis of her pregnancy (“You’re fired because the business can’t handle any more pregnant employees”), or point to similarly-situated, temporarily disabled workers who were treated better. Such evidence often proves elusive. Rarely in my practice have I seen claimants who can produce the “male with a back injury” who was treated differently, as provided in a hypothetical example in the Pregnancy Discrimination Act regulations.

FMLA’s coverage is limited, protecting only employers with 50 or more employees, and only employees who have worked 12 months or more with that employer. And of course, even if you’re an employee covered by the FMLA, the law does not require that the employer pay for any part of your 12-week leave, only that you may take the leave (unpaid), and can return to your job. Many employees cannot afford to take unpaid leave, rendering this benefit illusory.

Work-life accommodations, therefore, including pregnancy, are left largely to the employer. Paying for a portion of FMLA leave, allowing additional time before a new mother has to return to work, or allowing flexible schedules are all examples of accommodations left to the employer’s discretion. In good economic times, such benefits were often viewed as necessary to compete in the marketplace to attract and retain the best employees.  It has been widely covered in the press that Gen Y (males and females alike) places a greater value on work-life balance than their predecessors, and this has been another factor in encouraging employers to exercise their “benevolence” in these areas.

However, all this may change with the new economy, where people are happy just to have a job, and employers don’t feel compelled to offer any special perks to attract or keep them.  I am reminded of a boss I once had who, when asked how he motivates employees, responded “I tell them if they don’t do their job they’ll get fired.”  In the legal industry, it’s already being reported that associates are working more billable hours to earn their keep and keeping mum about work-life balance.

John Phillips of The Word in Employment Law recently wrote a provocative blog on the news that Candace Parker, “the face of the WNBA,” announced her pregnancy, apparently upsetting fans and teammates and prompting some to call her “selfish.”  As noted by John,

In the 21st century, calling female employees who have children irresponsible, selfish, or not good for business is a bit disconcerting, not to mention illegal. We often talk and hear talk about family values. That means different things to different people, but whatever it means usually involves children.

There are encouraging indications about the new administration’s focus on work-life issues: President Obama’s campaign platform included a specific “Plan to Support Working Families and Women,”and just a few weeks ago Michelle Obama appointed Jocelyn Frye, general counsel of the National Partnership for Woman and Families, as her Policy Director. Many advocacy groups have high hopes that the protections of FMLA and/or Pregnancy Discrimination Act are eventually broadened. Let’s hope the notion that pregnancy or work-family balance is “bad for business” does not become more widespread in this economic downturn, not only slowing down progress in this area, but sending us backwards.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The Granite State Introduces a Trifecta of Work-Family Bills

Julie Schwartz Weber February 4th, 2009

Yesterday, three new work-family bills, part of the New Hampshire Women’s Lobby’s (NHWL) Work and Family Economic Sustainability Initiative (“Initiative”), were heard by the House Labor and Commerce Committees in New Hampshire.  The Initiative, developed by the NHWL, several New Hampshire legislators, including Representatives Mary Stuart Gile and Carla Skinder, and other allies, is comprised of the following bills:

  1. HB661, a family leave insurance program bill, which creates a family leave insurance program to allow parents to take time off to care for a newborn, newly adopted child, or to allow persons to care for a family member with a serious medical condition, including a wounded service member.  This bill only applies to employers with 50 or more employees, and establishes the benefit at up to 6 weeks of $250 per week.
  2. HB662, a paid sick days and safe leave bill, which requires employers of full-time and part-time employees to provide up to five days of sick or safe leave for their employees, and is intended to enable workers to seek medical care, psychological counseling for themselves and family, due to sickness or injury, domestic violence, or preventive medical care.  The bill may exempt small businesses with fewer than 10 employees.
  3. HB663, a right to request a flexible schedule law, which creates a process for employees to request flexibility in work schedules, including the number of hours required to work, the times when the employee is required to work, or the location where the employee is required to work.  This process is contingent on meeting specific conditions described in the application and further specifies employer’s criteria for granting or denying such requests.  The proposal only applies to employers with more than 15 employees.

The Initiative evolved from discussions that occurred among and between business, policy and academic folks at the First Annual New Hampshire Summit on Work and Family, held in October 2008.  It will be interesting to see if deliberate efforts to collaborate with business, researchers, and other advocates on these work-family matters, prior to filing the bills, will have an effect on whether these bills move.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Work-Family Policy and Gender Equality: Global Perspectives

Judi Casey October 22nd, 2008

Recently, I read a fascinating report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research called Parental Leave Policies in 21 Countries: Assessing Generosity and Gender Equality. Written by Rebecca Ray, Janet C. Gornick and John Schmitt, the report examines the policies of “21 high-income economies.” It examines “two key aspects of parental leave policies: the level of support provided to parents; and the degree to which leave policies promote an egalitarian distribution between mothers and fathers of the time devoted to child care.”

The authors examined 21 countries and found that six countries have the strongest policies on both generosity and gender equality. These are three Nordic countries – Finland, Norway, and Sweden – plus France, Spain, and Greece. They also found that “across these six high-performing systems, five policy practices stand out as the most important: (1) generous paid leave; (2) non-transferable quotas of leave for each parent; (3) universal coverage combined with modest eligibility restrictions; (4) financing structures that pool risk among many employers; and (5) scheduling flexibility. ….The experience of the countries following international ‘best practices’ suggests that a generous, universal, gender-egalitarian, and flexible parental leave policy, financed through social insurance would go a long way toward spreading the costs of caring for children more equitably across mothers and fathers, parents and non-parents, and employers and employees.”

Any thoughts on how work-family policies might be synchronized to achieve both gender equality and career advancement, as well as responsive workplace policies and practices in countries around the world? Are you studying or researching this area? Please let us know as the Network is interested in gathering resources that examine this dynamic.

Preemie Leave?

Featured Guest Blogger October 6th, 2008

A dear friend of mine recently had a baby at just 27 weeks in her pregnancy; Olivia was due in October, but was born in July. We are happy to report that she is doing well, and that she should be home by the end of the year. The emotional rollercoaster of having a premature baby was just the beginning of a slew of challenges that my friends are facing now. Preemies bring up issues that I hadn’t thought of before— for example, their daughter will always be a bit older in time than she is in development. When she is one, she will likely not be walking as people might expect from a one-year-old. It makes complete sense, but again, I had never stopped to realize this challenge. Another issue that they faced was what to do about their maternity and paternity leaves, since they had a baby who was going to be in the NICU for over 5 months.

Given that 12% of births are premature (1 in 8 pregnancies), thousands of parents across the country will have to think about these questions: Should we take our leave after the birth of our child, or wait until she is ready to come home? Should we stagger our leaves so that one of us works while our baby is in the NICU, and the other works when she comes home? What do we do if we want to pump breast milk for our baby in the NICU? Will we be forced to leave our jobs due to our extended absence?

Talking through these issues with my friends left me speechless, as I couldn’t imagine having a baby in the NICU while facing financial and career overhauls. So, are workplaces supportive of this unique situation? In some cases yes, and in others, no; it’s up to the employer. In looking into this issue, I have discovered some workplaces that offer “compassionate leave” for such circumstances. Are governments helpful? Again, some are more than others. The EU is allotting additional maternity/paternity leave for premature births, but the United States does not.

We welcome your opinions or knowledge on this matter, as it is not something that the Network has examined yet, but it is an incredibly worthwhile topic.

Sex Discrimination and Fathers

Featured Guest Blogger July 25th, 2008

I almost didn’t want to write this post because the last post that I wrote dealt with Australian work-family policy…and I like to keep a nice variety. But, I can’t help it; I just thought this was too neat to pass up…

Australia’s federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Elizabeth Broderick, has just announced her position on several work-family policies (paid maternity leave, women in leadership positions, and sexual harassment, to name a few) as a result of her “Listening Tour,” a 6-month venture across Australia speaking with over 1,000 people about their journey for gender equality. I found one of her post-tour agenda items particularly interesting. As it turns out, she finds herself in a great corner to advocate for gender equality in the workforce, specifically mentioning sex discrimination against working fathers.

While Broderick was once hired to promote women’s equality in the workforce, she recently stated that she wanted to strengthen the Sex Discrimination Act to penalize employers who stick family-friendly fathers on the “daddy track” by refusing to promote them. Fathers have reported that they are not seen as serious players when they “raise their hand” for flexible work schedules, as they are still seen as the breadwinners and as individuals who need to be more committed to their careers. They find that women are more easily granted leave for family time.

Currently, the law only protects fathers who have been fired , not those who have been put on the daddy track without the possibility of promotion. Broderick stated, “If there is one thing I could do to promote gender equality in this country it would be to better share paid and unpaid work between men and women…If we strengthen the family provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act, that will allow men to be more involved in their family and women to be more involved in paid work.”

The opposition states that workers who put more into their careers should rightfully get more out of them. Those employees who take more time off should consider career advancement more of a luxury than a right.

We say, keep the discussion going!

For more information from the Sloan Network on this topic, please see our:
• Class Activity featuring information on the Daddy Track
• Statistics about fathers and family leave
• Suggested Readings about fathers and work

Update: Is the Work and Family Agenda Gaining Ground in Congress?

Featured Guest Blogger June 4th, 2008

Thank you to Steffany Stern of the National Partnership for Women & Families for today’s guest blog entry. Please note that the views of our guest bloggers do not necessarily reflect the views of the Sloan Work and Family Research Network.

My fellow work and family advocates and I are trying not to count our chickens before they hatch, but these days we are more optimistic than we have been in a long time. It appears that after years of stalled progress, Congress may be poised to make real progress on work and family policy, a long neglected issue area that has left millions of families without badly-needed workplace protections. Following on the heels of the first-ever expansion of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) since it was enacted in 1993—to allow military families a few extra weeks to provide care for seriously injured servicemembers—two noteworthy federal bills are making serious headway, and there are signs that other initiatives will start moving soon. When considered separately, these bills contain incremental changes. Collectively, they represent big steps towards the progress working families so desperately need.

Just last week, Congress took a historic stand for flight attendants, and voted to pass a much-needed FMLA fix by a landslide vote of 402 to 9. When the law was originally written, a loophole was unintentionally created that excluded airline flight crews, including flight attendants and pilots, because of the unique way their hours are calculated. The bill clarifies the FMLA to extend protections to flight crews, thousands of whom have never had access to the law.

Our Congressional allies also expect that a bill to provide paid parental leave for all federal employees will be brought to the House floor for a vote in upcoming weeks. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) has proposed a bill to provide four weeks of paid parental leave for 2.7 million workers in the federal workforce, and set a standard for the rest of the country’s employers to follow.

In addition to these two bills, a number of innovative measures to address the real issues facing today’s working families have been introduced. These bills would provide paid family and medical leave for all workers, including those in the private sector (Reps. Stark, Miller, Woolsey and Sens. Dodd and Stevens); expand the FMLA to cover part-time workers (Rep. Baldwin); extend benefits (including FMLA rights) to domestic partners of federal employees (Rep. Maloney), and make sure victims of violent crime, including domestic violence and sexual assault, can access FMLA when they need to take time away from work to recover (Rep. Emanuel).

The introduction of these measures, and the prospects of actual progress for a few, signal that our elected leaders are beginning work to fulfill their promises to improve workplace policies to help working families at a time when many of us need it most. The chances for these bills will be far better if the public gets engaged. Our members of Congress need to hear that these are the issues that matter, and that we will hold them accountable for signing on in support of the bills and voting YES on each and every measure. Then, and only then, do we get to celebrate important progress for our working families.