Slashdot Mirror


American Express Will Give All Parents 20 Weeks Of Paid Leave (cnn.com)

Starting in January, the financial services giant will expand its paid parental leave policy for mothers and fathers to 20 weeks at full pay, plus another six to eight weeks for women who give birth and require medical leave. Full-time and part-time employees who have worked at Amex for at least a year are eligible. CNN adds: That's a big shift from the company's current policy of offering six weeks of paid leave for the primary parent plus another six to eight weeks for birth mothers who require medical leave. Secondary caregivers, meanwhile, have gotten just two weeks. Under the new policy, parents will also have access to a 24-hour lactation consultant. And mothers who go on business trips will be able to ship their breast milk home for free.

14 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. so we single folks by anthony_greer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    get to pick up the slack with no extra PTO or a larger salary? I understand the need to help parents, and i don't dispute it. I get that maybe parents needsome time out for a new birth or to leave early or come in late or take time off now and again to deal with older kids, but 20 weeks at full pay? doesn't that put a huge burden on those who dont have kids to pick up the slack?

    1. Re:so we single folks by Shinobi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only if the work environment is already completely fucked up

    2. Re:so we single folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The benefit is to you as a human. Your parents, had this policy been in place, would have been better able to care for you as an infant.

      Non-breeders needn't look at this as discrimination. The kid is the one who really benefits and we were all kids.

    3. Re:so we single folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If parents simply decided that children had priority over wealth, and one of the two gave up their job to care for the children they decided to have, that would be better still. Fuck their "I want it all" attitude and the expectation that society should support them in achieving it. And fuck those who would provide support which allows them to breed more easily.

    4. Re:so we single folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No. This will sound harsh....but I do not care about your kid. It's not my job to care about your kid. Perhaps in a "make the world a better place" mentality, I should. But I don't. You should not get a paid vacation and I do not because you chose to have a child.

    5. Re:so we single folks by dfghjk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Non-breeders needn't look at this as discrimination."

      But they should, after all that's EXACTLY what it is.

      "The kid is the one who really benefits and we were all kids."

      No, it's the parents that benefit. Kids weren't neglected when this wasn't available.

    6. Re:so we single folks by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Look at the bigger picture, in 30 years time you will need the children of today to be around to maintain a viable society and economy. If you make it so unattractive to have children that people don't, you will have a major problem like Japan. The only solution will be massive immigration, and you probably won't like that either.

      Another way to think of it is that by deciding not to have children you already saved yourself a tonne of money, while still benefiting from other people's kids in the long run.

      Rather than being jealous of new parents and the time they get off, maybe you should demand more time off for everyone. In Europe a year for new parents and a minimum of 28 days holiday (which can include national holidays, so typically around 20-22 days you can pick) is normal. We don't have "sick days", you just take time off for illness as you need it, and if you get sick on your holiday you get those days back. I realize this seems insanely socialist to Americans, but honestly our economies don't collapse because of it and in fact it's actually the minimum level you can expect.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:so we single folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly. If people don't come to work sick, they don't get everyone else sick, etc.

  2. Re:lawsuit incoming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only in America.

    I guess that this policy is far too wimpy and liberal for the USA. IF you don't like it, sue it to death!

    Other countries are implementing policies like this. No lawsuits there!
    Some are even making it transferrable between parents.
    The USA is becoming more socially unequal by the day. This policy would help the lower paid more than the bosses (who can afford nannies).
    You really are going to the dogs.

  3. Re:lawsuit incoming... by dfghjk · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What an incredibly un-insightful post.

    Does the earth care where the population growth is? What's wrong with letting immigrants in? It's not a contest.

    Unequal benefits is a problem employers should solve, not one they should accelerate as an incentive to do harm to the environment.

  4. Re:lawsuit incoming... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If you don't like that your company offers maternal benefits to people with children, then quit.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  5. Re:lawsuit incoming... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    But, what about those that do NOT want to have kids?

    Seems unfair and discriminatory against them, in that they don't get this 20 week PAID BENEFIT...?

    Not to mention, that often those childless folks will be just exact folks that have to work extra hours and pick up the slack for those new parents taking time off to care for the result of fucking without protection.

    So, not only do the childless not get the free 20 weeks paid leave/vacation, they also will likely have to work EXTRA to cover for the breeders, and since they are probably salary, that will not come with any overtime.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  6. Re:Here come the complaints about "breeders"... by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Families are already screwed up because unless you want to live in the middle of nowhere, a two-income household is becoming a requirement.

    Well, depends, I guess, on your definition of "middle of nowhere".

    IMHO, unless you consider anywhere outside of LA, NYC, SF and other hugely $$$$ places to live, middle of nowhere....there are plenty of places with reasonable cost of living in the US. And you can still live in a decent place, in a safe neighborhood, where children still play outside, and get by on a single income family. Yes, I am talking about a 'real job', not a burger flipper, but I believe that's what we're all discussing here.

    No, you won't have the latest toys, not the newest car....and you won't be going out that much, but hey, that's what my parents did. Mom stayed at home with me till I was in about 2nd grade and then gradually began working again, up to full time by the time I was old enough to come home from grade school and stay on my own will they got home from work. No problems.

    We cooked at home most all meals, nothing wrong with that, forced us to eat a bit healthier, AND, I was taught from a young age how to cook myself.

    Sure, being a parent is tough, it takes sacrifice both personally and fiscally, But this isn't a new thing...parents have been doing this forever till now.

    Don't have them, unless you are willing to make those sacrifices. I never wanted to be tied down with the little fiscal boat anchors, so I chose not to have any...I like my time and my disposable income. A choice you make. I could NOT have both, and I chose my path and am happy with it.

    If you choose to have kids....you need to take what goes with it and if you have to move to an area with a lower cost of living, then be prepared to do that. Don't expect others to take up the slack for you.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  7. Re:lawsuit incoming... by narcc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is not fair that one set of people are offered this PAID BENEFIT, and other are not.

    All those childless AMEX employees are offered that same paid benefit. All they need do is have a child. That's what it's for.

    .that is discrimination

    You're kidding right? Everyone is being offered the same benefit. No one is being excluded. That's not discrimination by any stretch of the imagination.

    its hard to believe that everyone wouldn't see and jump on this too.

    They don't see the discrimination because it doesn't exist. Again, everyone is being offered that same benefit. No one is being excluded.

    I'm pretty much settled that I DO NOT WANT kids.

    First, let me say Thank You. I couldn't be happier with your decision.

    Moving on, just because you don't want to participate in a particular benefit, does not mean that you're being excluded. If a coworker brings in a plate of cookies, and you decline to take one, you don't get to complain that Alice and Bob each got a cookie, but you didn't. If you don't want it, then no one should have it, right?

    What I'm seeing here is a disturbingly childlike selfishness. You're absolutely terrified that someone, somewhere, got a bigger cookie than you.

    Still, even though you don't want to participate, that benefit is still being offered to you (assuming you're an AMEX employee). You can take your 20 weeks just as soon as you find a willing partner who ultimately delivers.