Slashdot Mirror


Zuckerberg To Take 2 Months Paternity Leave To Give His Kid a Better Outcome (techcrunch.com)

theodp writes: TechCrunch reports that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg will take two months off from Facebook for paternity leave. Why? "Studies show that when working parents take time to be with their newborns, outcomes are better for the children and families," Zuckerberg explained in a FB post on Friday. "At Facebook we offer our U.S. employees up to 4 months of paid maternity or paternity leave which they can take throughout the year." No word on why the child will only get 50% of that time — maybe that's what the gains chart suggested as a good tradeoff — or if expectant parents who apply to send their children to Zuckerberg's new Primary School, which aims to "help children from underserved communities reach their full potential," will be expected to make a similar commitment.

10 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. And people on slashdot give a shit, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good on him, who cares. Next?

    1. Re:And people on slashdot give a shit, why? by HuguesT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good on him indeed, this means several things:

      He's a big-shot CEO who can delegate. Great

      This sort of things is not reserved for women. Fathers should take time off too. Great

      The workplace is not the be-all and end-all of all things. Kids are important too, they are our future. Great

    2. Re: And people on slashdot give a shit, why? by kuzb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Zuckerberg is hardly what I'd consider a positive role model, unless you feel screwing over millions of people by selling their personal information to the highest bidder while simultaneously looking down on them all as plebs is a virtue.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    3. Re:And people on slashdot give a shit, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it's news in the US because you need to be the billionaire CEO of a powerful company in order to even GET paid paternity/materinity leave, let alone two months of it.

      If youre not from the US i can see why this wouldnt be news, since only 3 of the worlds 198 nations dont require paid leave for having children.

      two being 3rd world shit holes.
      the the third the US.
      but I repeat myself.

    4. Re:And people on slashdot give a shit, why? by davester666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, it is in writing. But can they actually take the time off. A ridiculous number of people can't even take their vacation time because of the fear they will be asked to stop bothering to come into the office.

      And they won't say "we're letting you go because you took vacation time", because would be illegal, just something like "we want to move in a different direction, one without you on our team."

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  2. Though spoiled is a likely side effect... by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why? "Studies show that when working parents take time to be with their newborns, outcomes are better for the children and families," Zuckerberg explained.

    In related research, children born to billionaire parents are statistically likely to experience better outcomes than those below the poverty line.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Though spoiled is a likely side effect... by Nemyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, I think there's an opposite effect going on. I'd say the children born to wealthy parents, but not unbelieveably so, have the best chances. Being the child of Zuckerberg or Gates means you're growing up in a very unique position which isn't necessarily good for a child's development. It becomes hard to have "normal" social interactions, you have a completely out of whack understanding and relationship with money, etc. This goes even more so as a teenager, where the other teens will know who your parents are, which will heavily color their interactions with you. Plus, many of those parents tend to be extremely busy and it's very well known that parental presence is one of the most important factors in a child's development.

  3. Must be nice to be at a wealthy company by blahbooboo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's great when all these very wealthy/successful companies can afford to just hand out massive benefits , but for the majority of companies that are no way as successful (and also provide most of the jobs in the USA), they simply can't afford to pay people for months while not working

    1. Re:Must be nice to be at a wealthy company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that in every other developed country in the world, this is considered a basic human right that *every* company, small and large, can somehow afford to "hand out".

  4. Take It Down by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If Zuckerberg really wanted to give his kid a better outcome, he'd dissolve Facebook immediately and give all his money to the EFF.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.