Twitter To Give All New Parents 20 Weeks of Paid Leave (fortune.com)

Michal Lev-Ram, reporting for Fortune: May 1 will be a happy day for Twitter employees -- at least those expecting a baby. The social media site is the latest tech player to offer so-called "gender-neutral" parental leave, guaranteeing any parent up to 20 weeks of fully paid time off. Other companies that have embraced such policies include Etsy, Facebook, and Change.org. The rationale? Family structures have changed, and allowing for more evenly distributed parenting equals happier employees, both male and female (within, of course, both heterosexual and same-sex couples).

Comments

Here I was all excited!

[tlambert]

Here I was all excited!

But reading the article, the headline is not correct: "Twitter To Give All New Parents 20 Weeks of Paid Leave"

Apparently, this only applies to Twitter employees, and not actually "All New Parents".

Re:Here I was all excited!

[__aaclcg7560]

Apparently, this only applies to Twitter employees, and not actually "All New Parents".

I worked at Accolade/Infogrames/Atari (same company, different owners, multiple personality disoders), the French VP announced to everyone that they were getting stock options at staff meeting. Everyone was happy — except the HR manager, who did a face palm. He then read off the paper that the stock options were restricted to managers, looked up and got confused by all the angry faces. We all got 160 stock options that vested over five years. For the next two years, we watched the share price go from $20.00 to $0.20 per share as the dot com bust unfolded and the company slid into bankruptcy.

What abt people who don't want kids?

[Anonymous Coward]

I want 20 my weeks too, or I'll take a 1 year 38.5% raise instead.

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Somebody has to make more humans for the species' survival. If you work at Twitter, you might be doing nice work, but you're not doing anything as socially critical as reproduction. As far as socially-responsible practices go, this is a good one.

It's a good sign that,in modern times companies must compete for top employees. The only force making Twitter do this is market pressure. This will likely diffuse into society, working down the income ladder, just as Sundays and then two-day weekends and 9-5 hours did, as technology and productivity created the wealth required for societies to afford it (not to mention and end to child labor).

[Out before the curmudgeons equate child labor to Twitter developers]

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[ranton]

I want 20 my weeks too, or I'll take a 1 year 38.5% raise instead.

Invest 20,000+ hours in creating the next generation, and then you can talk about getting another 160-480 hours off from your job.

This isn't charity. I am one of the highly skilled workers with two young children who put family related benefits high on my priority list. My first daughter was born at a company with paid paternity leave, and for my second child my current company gave me weeks of PTO up front because my wife was pregnant when I joined. I assure you my boss and his superiors didn't bat an eye at giving me extra time off if it meant being able to get me to join.

If you care so much about this, negotiate for more PTO time for yourself because of your needs as a single person. If you are worth it they will give it to you.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[NotDrWho]

You get a shitload of extra work to pick up the slack.

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[ranton]

There are already too many people without incentivizing making more.

But not nearly enough people with the financial capabilities and social upbringing who are likely to raise the next generation of high skilled workers the world still needs many more of. I would like to keep Idiocracy just a comedy and not an accurate prophecy.

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[ranton]

Maybe what they do is socially important, but going on vacation and spending money is also socially important. The act of raising a child is what's socially important, not just having them.

Well technically they are not getting this leave to have children. They already are given more than enough PTO time to cover the delivery and disability insurance would cover complications. This leave is for the extra burden of raising a child during its first few months, which is far greater than it is later in life. So this leave is for the act of raising a child.

And in reality this leave is not a benefit given for the public good. It is a recruiting and retention tool. There are plenty of benefits that don't affect every employee, and the usefulness of most of them are closely tied to decisions made by employees (such as having a child).

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[jimbolauski]

Can I still work and collect my normal paycheck and the $100k breeder incentive?

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[blackomegax]

If you think spending 20 weeks with a newborn child is "time off" equivalent to other peoples vacations, you are delusional.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[mattyj]

We childless people also enjoy:

- discretionary income
- smaller house/apartment
- social life
- motorcycles and sports cars
- a good night's sleep

Don't act like new parents are somehow gaming the system to come out ahead of you, our team has a lot of perks, too.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[ranton]

It's funny because properly raising a child is one of the least selfish things you can do

Bullshit. You want some cute kid to play with and love and to carry on your name. Fine. But stop acting like it makes you Jesus, you self-centered fuckhead.

I don't owe you jack-fucking-shit. And neither do any of your co-workers.

When you adopted a dog, did you run to your co-workers and ask them to pay for your fucking Purina too, you arrogant douche?

You are quite an unpleasant person all around. Its good you have the self-awareness to not have kids.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[thegarbz]

If you care so much about this, negotiate

The fact that people live in a civilised country where they are required to "negotiate" time off to create the following generation has scary implications.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[JeffOwl]

I don't know how civilized it is, but it is supply and demand. If you are in demand you have leverage to negotiate. If you are one of thousands competing for the same 10 jobs *cough*Walmart*cough*, you do not have leverage. Frankly I like the negotiating process because it lets me optimize for my own situation.

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[Jason Levine]

This leave is for the extra burden of raising a child during its first few months, which is far greater than it is later in life. So this leave is for the act of raising a child.

And for any childless people who are thinking "well, the first few months of a baby's life are a cakewalk. It eats, it sleeps, you change a few diapers, no problem. It doesn't even move if you put it down", then think again. I've had two kids. I love them dearly and still think having kids is totally worth it (though I don't act like people who don't want kids are crazy - different strokes and all). Still, I warn all new parents about the "hell months."

While your child-to-be is in utero, it doesn't need to have a schedule. If it needs to feed, the umbilical cord takes care of it. If it needs to expel waste (pee since it doesn't poop until it is born), the woman's body processes out the waste. It can sleep or wake, at any time. After birth, though, the baby needs to rely on the parents for feeding, changing, etc. Since the baby can't say "Hey, I'd really like to eat now", it cries. It cries loud. You think you get annoyed when some baby is crying in the store, think how the mother feels since she's tried feeding it, changing it, rocking it, burping it, and it won't stop crying.

Oh, and did I mention that the mother has had 3 hours of sleep in the past 5 days?

The new baby has no schedule. It can cry at any moment for any reason and it's up to you, the new parent, to take care of it. It doesn't matter that it cried at 10pm to be fed, 11:15pm to be changed, 1am to be changed again, and 1:30am just because it was fussy. It'll still cry at 2:03am for no apparent reason. Then, it won't cry for 5 hours and you should sleep but you can't because you are expecting that cry to happen at any moment. And just as you fall asleep, it cries again. It takes about three months of this for the baby to develop a schedule.

And lest any men think that their wives will just get up to take care of the baby, I was the "night shift" with my boys. My wife was exhausted after taking care of them all day. Besides, if she picked them up at night, they'd smell milk and think "feeding time" not "time to sleep." If I picked them up, they'd think "no milk and this guy's rocking us, time for sleep." Of course, putting them down could wake them up so I'd rest my eyes while standing and rocking them. It's amazing how little sleep you can function on!

If any non-parent wants to simulate this, connect a loud buzzer to a random timer. Have it go off at all hours of the night (and day) and require that you hit one of five buttons (again, randomly chosen) to shut it off. Have a fifty-fifty chance that the buzzer will go off ten seconds after you hit the right button with a new "right button" randomly picked. This should give you some idea of what new parents go through (though it will still be easier).

So don't envy these new parents for their 20 week "vacations." Chances are, they are using that time to keep their sanity in check and get some order re-established in their households so they can come back into work and be productive instead of barely functional zombies.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[Jason Levine]

Not to mention that the first three months are the "hell months" when the baby has no set schedule and the parents are severely sleep deprived (and would likely not be very productive workers). That's 12 or 13 of the 20 weeks right there.

Re: What abt people who don't want kids?

[serviscope_minor]

You seem to feel that this time off for parents is really unjust.

The ironic thing of course is that it's not a criminal justie issue, which means it is a social justice issue. And you're arguing vociferously in favour of greater social justice as you see it. Didn't your .sig used to be some pithy comment about people who did such things?

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[jedidiah]

> You are quite an unpleasant person all around. Its good you have the self-awareness to not have kids.

I agree with him completely and I do have kids. It's not my job or his to pay for your life choices, it's YOURS.

That's what it means to be an ADULT.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[jedidiah]

This is just the usual retarded nonsense that you communists come up with any time anyone suggests any measure of self reliance.

Those of us that choose not to be man children at least have some hope of achieving any of those things that you clearly think are so impossible. Not all of us are dependent ninnies.

I like interesting people, not helpless SJWs. So farmers and blacksmiths are actually among my friends and family.

Re:What abt people who don't want kids?

[ranton]

> You are quite an unpleasant person all around. Its good you have the self-awareness to not have kids.

I agree with him completely and I do have kids. It's not my job or his to pay for your life choices, it's YOURS.

That's what it means to be an ADULT.

That's just the thing; we live in mostly the same society and often it really is your job to pay for the life choices of others. You may not like it, just as I don't like funding our huge military complex, but you don't really have a choice. People like you fight against social progress, but you almost always lose. And your wins are short lived. The world is moving to a more inclusive and cooperative place whether you like it or not.

You certainly aren't very pleasant either. That is of course your right, but you would have to be oblivious not to see the developed world almost unanimously does not agree with you. The propaganda the moneyed elite in the US have used to convince the working class (and those who have attained middle class status while still clinging to working class values) to not demand their fair share of the social contract is reaching the end of its effectiveness. That viewpoint, while powerful, could never withstand a ever more educated population for long.

Men like Trump and Cruz are showing those moneyed elites that keeping their core voting block so ignorant of reality has finally backfired. It was a quite effective tactic for decades, but you can only get millions of people to act against their own self interests for so long. It is good it is coming to an end.

Probably not much of a productivity difference.

[StayFrosty]

My experience (not personal, but second-hand) is that new parents--both male and female--seem to get next to no sleep for the first couple of months and don't get a heck of a lot accomplished at work. Staying awake seems to be the biggest challenge. Programs like this will go a long way to improve morale and employee health and might be a net gain (in profit) by the time employee retention and productivity are figured in. I'd like to see a study in a couple of years.

I'm also betting not everyone is going to take the full 20 weeks. I'm betting these new parents may want to go to work (or, more accurately, get out of the house) one or two days a week for a bit of a mental health break.

Excellent

[31415926535897]

So I just need three women whom I can become a new parent by, some proper spacing, and I can get permanent, paid paternity leave from Twitter. If more and more companies go down this road, I don't see any reason why I can't be simultaneously employed by all of them.

Re:Excellent

[Notorious G]

I hope this is being modded insightful (I have no mod points!). Just knock out a couple of kids a year, easy to do with 2 or 3 female partners and even easier if you are female, and you can be the modern version of a welfare queen/king. Go full Dugger and you may never work again.

All other employees get extra work

[NotDrWho]

Guess who gets to pick up the slack of all the workers who managed to get knocked up or knock someone up?

If you guessed "All of you responsible employees who don't have kids" you win!

Re:All other employees get extra work

[serviscope_minor]

Are youbeing asked to work longer hours than the regular 9-5?

a. Yes. (a) refuse, (b) negotiate more pay, or more days off (c) quit and get a job somewhere less abusive.

b. No. Quit whining, you're being paid for the hours you're working for.

Cute,

[tom229]

But in Canada we get a full year, by law. I was actually horrified to learn that most American mothers only get a few weeks before they have to go back to work. So for any of you hardcore conservatives out there, we get a full year and still have plenty of businesses and jobs. So you can do it too.

Re:Cute,

[thegarbz]

And yet there is a trend toward better leave, without Federal involvement

ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahha hahhahah ...ha ha ha ... shit I'm out of breath. ... give me a moment. .. Ok I'm good again.... ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahah hahahahaha...

Shit if I keep this up I may have to call in sick at work tomorrow, and then go see a doctor without it costing me a cent.

Sorry but your "trends" are laughable. Like a really really good joke that makes you laugh so hard you cry, but then you keep crying because you realise just how much of a joke your leave actually is despite it's "trend". The productivity in the USA is good. But as a whole I have never seen a more overworked and miserable folk in the general workforce. You guys talk about work life balance as a negotiated privilege, while the rest of the world lives it on a daily basis.

I am happily part of a multinational which moves people all over the world constantly, including the USA. I've never seen someone from the USA who has lived abroad praise leave or work life balance in the USA. I've never seen someone from abroad who's done a stint in the USA praise the work life balance there either.

You may like a disassociated government, and true a lot of countries have gone too far. But please pick a better example when justifying it.

Re:So a Mormon man gets to work 1/2 time

[LWATCDR]

Umm..
I am a Mormon man and I have no kids.
Funny how some bigotry gets an easy pass on Slashdot. It is not like members of the LDS church all have large families or are the only people that have kids on the planet.

no need to pay

[kiviQr]

As a new parent I welcome 20 weeks without tweeter:)

Re:Business Model?

[mattyj]

There's something to be said for perpetuating the species.

Welcome

[ledow]

Welcome, America, to the beginnings of civilisation:

https://www.gov.uk/maternity-p...

Government-mandated statutory maternity (and/or paternity) leave, including pay (not the full amount but enough), for 26 weeks, guaranteed by law, for EVERY SINGLE FUCKING WORKING PERSON, no matter their job.

What with Facebook and this, you might soon get into something called a civilised state where you actually have a social support network that vaguely resembles humanity.

The devil is actually in the details

[rsilvergun]

companies love to announce stuff like this and soak in the good press. They forget to mention that the vast majority of work they get done is by contractors (often H1-Bs, but I digress) who get none of these benefits. Companies today fall into two categories: the ones that use contractors to do day to day work without paying them benefits and the ones who have so few employees they don't bother ( it's called "scalability" and it means investors can put a little money in and not have to pay for all those pesky employees and their middle class jobs...).