| Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
| Gender Equality going too far? https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=108257 |
Page 1 of 5 |
| Author: | denisdman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Gender Equality going too far? |
I read the article below this morning, and it seems to me to be another case of people denying biology. In my mind, a pregnant woman deserves more time off than the father/husband. If your wife was sick, she should have more leave than the husband and vice versa. Keep in mind, the case below is a company offering paid leave (Beyond what is required by FMLA which is unpaid). http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/31/news/companies/estee-lauder-eeoc-lawsuit/index.html U.S. sues Estée Lauder for allegedly discriminating against new dads by Julia Horowitz @juliakhorowitz August 31, 2017: 1:25 PM ET The U.S. government is taking Estée Lauder to court over its family leave policy for new fathers. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against the cosmetics company on Wednesday, claiming that a policy that effectively gives new mothers six weeks off to bond with a newborn baby, while giving fathers only two weeks off, is discriminatory against men. "It is wonderful when employers provide paid parental leave and flexible work arrangements, but federal law requires equal pay, including benefits, for equal work, and that applies to men as well as women," Mindy Weinstein, the acting director of the EEOC's Washington field office, said in a statement. Powered by SmartAsset.com SmartAsset.com Estée Lauder launched its family leave program in 2013, according to the suit. It includes benefits for new mothers and fathers in addition to the disability leave it already offered to new mothers to recover from childbirth. The company said it cannot comment on pending litigation. If the case succeeds, the limited number of U.S. businesses with paid parental leave policies could have to make some changes, said Kristen Smith, a lawyer at Bond Schoeneck & King who represents employers. "This has been brewing for awhile," Smith said. "There's a trend in the past five years where high-profile companies are enhancing their parental leave policies, and there's been a lot of debate under the law about to what extent the policies need to be gender neutral." Related: From Facebook to Netflix, here's who offers paternity leave Paid family leave is not currently mandated by federal law. The only states that offer it are California, Rhode Island and New Jersey, though New York will implement it in January. That means just 17% of employers offered paid parental leave in 2016, according to a study conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management. At those companies, female employees received 41 days of paid maternity leave on average, while male employees received 22 days of paid paternity leave, according to SHRM data. The EEOC says Estée Lauder's setup is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, and the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which bars sex-based discrimination between men and women working at the same firm under comparable circumstances. Under this legislation, employers should approach child-related leave with two distinct categories in mind, according to an EEOC spokeswoman. There's medical leave related to the physical process of giving birth, and there's separate leave that's granted so new parents can bond with and care for their infant. "Leave related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions can be limited to women affected by those conditions. However, parental leave must be provided to similarly situated men and women on the same terms," the agency spokeswoman said. The argument: If companies are going to offer paid parental leave, news moms and dads must get the same deal. Related: Is it time for universal paid family leave? "The grounds are pretty simple," said Barbara Zack Quindel, a labor attorney based in Milwaukee who advocates on behalf of employees. "Both Title VII and the Equal Pay Act say you can't treat men and women differently when it comes to compensation." But in putting up a legal challenge against Estée Lauder, the EEOC is also taking a risk, Smith said, noting that some employers could decide that offering paid parental leave could slow down business. "There's a hesitation by some employers to just make it a blanket six weeks [or] twelve weeks for all employees," she said. "There's worries about attendance." The EEOC, which said in its press release that "addressing sex-based pay discrimination, including in benefits such as paid leave, is a priority" for the commission, told CNNMoney that it believes this is the first time it has taken up a case on parental leave. It had initially tried to settle the case with Estée Lauder out of court, the agency said. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
2 weeks is pretty bad. What is denying biology? There is much more to maternity/paternity leave than healing. |
|
| Author: | JORR [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Boilermaker Rick wrote: 2 weeks is pretty bad. What is denying biology? There is much more to maternity/paternity leave than healing. You're getting close to the real truth here. All complaints about gender inequality really boil down to the stubborn fact that only one sex is capable of giving birth. To ignore such an obvious fact seems foolish. Man is the only species simultaneously smart enough and dumb enough to think that there are no differences between its males and females. |
|
| Author: | denisdman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
They are giving paid leave. Very few employers give paid leave. Most just give the unpaid FMLA variety. So in your world, men and women have the same biological stress during and after a nine month pregnancy? With one third of births being C sections I doubt the recovery period is short for the women in those situations. |
|
| Author: | rogers park bryan [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
What is the downside, Denis? |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
denisdman wrote: They are giving paid leave. Very few employers give paid leave. Most just give the unpaid FMLA variety. So in your world, men and women have the same biological stress during and after a nine month pregnancy? With one third of births being C sections I doubt the recovery period is short for the women in those situations. Your fallacy is that you assume that maternity leave only exists because of the need to physically recover.
|
|
| Author: | pittmike [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
I have friends in CA. They had a baby last year and both got an equal amount of leave as per the state. Like 12 weeks or something. The thing I did not understand was that if the company didn't pay the state did in some sort of disability type thing and no job loss possible. The other thing was they could take this at any time in a year. So the mom and Dad could go simultaneous or back to back or even take it in different chunks. Very good for the people and child involved I am sure. Has to drive employers nuts though. |
|
| Author: | denisdman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. |
|
| Author: | Douchebag [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
pittmike wrote: I have friends in CA. They had a baby last year and both got an equal amount of leave as per the state. Like 12 weeks or something. The thing I did not understand was that if the company didn't pay the state did in some sort of disability type thing and no job loss possible. The other thing was they could take this at any time in a year. So the mom and Dad could go simultaneous or back to back or even take it in different chunks. Very good for the people and child involved I am sure. Has to drive employers nuts though. Yeah, too bad for the man. They have it so tough. |
|
| Author: | rogers park bryan [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. I like the Euro model of 6+ weeks of vacation I dont know. What if the wife is really sick and the husband has to stay home to take care of wife and baby? Blanket 6 weeks for all employees seems good to me. Having a kid is a pretty big deal. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
The problem in America is parents not taking care of their kids! Get back to work lazy dads! 2 weeks was more than you deserved to take care of a fragile newborn! You didn't even have anything medically wrong. |
|
| Author: | pittmike [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
rogers park bryan wrote: denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. I like the Euro model of 6+ weeks of vacation I dont know. What if the wife is really sick and the husband has to stay home to take care of wife and baby? Blanket 6 weeks for all employees seems good to me. Having a kid is a pretty big deal. BTW, the CA example I provided was over and above any earned vacation. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. |
|
| Author: | rogers park bryan [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Douchebag wrote: pittmike wrote: I have friends in CA. They had a baby last year and both got an equal amount of leave as per the state. Like 12 weeks or something. The thing I did not understand was that if the company didn't pay the state did in some sort of disability type thing and no job loss possible. The other thing was they could take this at any time in a year. So the mom and Dad could go simultaneous or back to back or even take it in different chunks. Very good for the people and child involved I am sure. Has to drive employers nuts though. Yeah, too bad for the man. They have it so tough. More empathy for THE MAN, then the little guy is such a weird but common viewpoint nowadays. |
|
| Author: | pittmike [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Douchebag wrote: pittmike wrote: I have friends in CA. They had a baby last year and both got an equal amount of leave as per the state. Like 12 weeks or something. The thing I did not understand was that if the company didn't pay the state did in some sort of disability type thing and no job loss possible. The other thing was they could take this at any time in a year. So the mom and Dad could go simultaneous or back to back or even take it in different chunks. Very good for the people and child involved I am sure. Has to drive employers nuts though. Yeah, too bad for the man. They have it so tough. Your post would make sense if I clearly supported the management side over the couple. Nice try though. |
|
| Author: | Hatchetman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
pittmike wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. I like the Euro model of 6+ weeks of vacation I dont know. What if the wife is really sick and the husband has to stay home to take care of wife and baby? Blanket 6 weeks for all employees seems good to me. Having a kid is a pretty big deal. BTW, the CA example I provided was over and above any earned vacation. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?
|
|
| Author: | JORR [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Boilermaker Rick wrote: denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. I guess the balance is the point where too many "free puppies" causes The Man to move the factory to a place where he can use slave labor. But I'm liking your evolution here, Rick. I'll ask leash if he can get you a BERNIE 2020 sticker for your Dodge Stratus. |
|
| Author: | denisdman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
rogers park bryan wrote: denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. I like the Euro model of 6+ weeks of vacation I dont know. What if the wife is really sick and the husband has to stay home to take care of wife and baby? Blanket 6 weeks for all employees seems good to me. Having a kid is a pretty big deal. RPB, here is where I have a problem. This company is offering a perk beyond what is legally required. But they are running afoul of gender equality laws because they are giving a bigger benefit for women than men. I think there is a biological basis for giving women more time. Everyone already gets 12 weeks of leave (for employers with 50 or more employees). If as a nation we decide to pass a law and say you get 12 weeks paid, then fine. But that is not the case, and this company is giving an extra perk. They shouldn't be sued for that. We discriminate all the time based on individual circumstances for need. The ADA requires reasonable accommodations. Meaning, someone who needs extra benefits is given to them relative to someone who does not. I contend that women need extra benefits in pregnancy than men. Rick brings up a very good counter argument about it being more than just physical. But to deny that women need the physical and mental (i.e. more than men), is just wrong to me. |
|
| Author: | denisdman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?The man gets 12 weeks. That company is offering 2 of them to be paid. |
|
| Author: | rogers park bryan [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: denisdman wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: What is the downside, Denis? The same downside as offering every employee 26 weeks of vacation. It adds cost to the system. So there is a balance. I like the Euro model of 6+ weeks of vacation I dont know. What if the wife is really sick and the husband has to stay home to take care of wife and baby? Blanket 6 weeks for all employees seems good to me. Having a kid is a pretty big deal. RPB, here is where I have a problem. This company is offering a perk beyond what is legally required. But they are running afoul of gender equality laws because they are giving a bigger benefit for women than men. I think there is a biological basis for giving women more time. Everyone already gets 12 weeks of leave (for employers with 50 or more employees). If as a nation we decide to pass a law and say you get 12 weeks paid, then fine. But that is not the case, and this company is giving an extra perk. They shouldn't be sued for that. We discriminate all the time based on individual circumstances for need. The ADA requires reasonable accommodations. Meaning, someone who needs extra benefits is given to them relative to someone who does not. I contend that women need extra benefits in pregnancy than men. Rick brings up a very good counter argument about it being more than just physical. But to deny that women need the physical and mental (i.e. more than men), is just wrong to me. Fair enough. We should pass that law. |
|
| Author: | Hatchetman [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?The magic number is likely less but I'm being generous. what exactly do two people do with an infant for months on end? Stare at it? |
|
| Author: | JORR [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Hatchetman wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?The magic number is likely less but I'm being generous. what exactly do two people do with an infant for months on end? Stare at it? Bring it to restaurants and sit at the table right next to mine. |
|
| Author: | Douchebag [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Hatchetman wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?The magic number is likely less but I'm being generous. what exactly do two people do with an infant for months on end? Stare at it? They should have just terminated the pregnancy and got back to work. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: I guess the balance is the point where too many "free puppies" causes The Man to move the factory to a place where he can use slave labor. That gets back to the concept that men and women should be treated equally in the workplace within reason. If a company can survive with a woman being out for 6 weeks to take a newborn why can't they also survive with a man taking 6 weeks? Also, there is a pretty logical theory that one of the things left with the gender pay gap is the concept that a man is more likely to be hired than a female because whether it is consciously or subconsciously done the hiring decision factors in that men will miss less time with trivial things like "taking care of a newborn". But I'm liking your evolution here, Rick. I'll ask leash if he can get you a BERNIE 2020 sticker for your Dodge Stratus. Based on strong anecdotal personal evidence, I believe it too. As an aside, I'm pretty sure I'm more liberal than you are. |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
denisdman wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?The man gets 12 weeks. That company is offering 2 of them to be paid. |
|
| Author: | Free Ajent [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
I was lucky enough to spend 4 months off paid to be with my daughter after birth. I believe that both of the parents are equally important to the child and the bonding time with your child is priceless. I will be expecting my second child in April and will do the exact same thing, my time and bond with her is stronger because of this. |
|
| Author: | Don Tiny [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
pittmike wrote: Douchebag wrote: pittmike wrote: I have friends in CA. They had a baby last year and both got an equal amount of leave as per the state. Like 12 weeks or something. The thing I did not understand was that if the company didn't pay the state did in some sort of disability type thing and no job loss possible. The other thing was they could take this at any time in a year. So the mom and Dad could go simultaneous or back to back or even take it in different chunks. Very good for the people and child involved I am sure. Has to drive employers nuts though. Yeah, too bad for the man. They have it so tough. Your post would make sense if I clearly supported the management side over the couple. Nice try though. Let's assume you did .... |
|
| Author: | Brick [ Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gender Equality going too far? |
Hatchetman wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Hatchetman wrote: Two weeks for the secondary care giver is fine. Why? Why is 2 weeks the magic number?The magic number is likely less but I'm being generous. what exactly do two people do with an infant for months on end? Stare at it? |
|
| Page 1 of 5 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|