Post by EmilieMadison on Dec 4, 2012 17:38:01 GMT -5
That's really hard.
But, here's the thing that grinds my gears (not you OP, but in general when this topic comes up). There's so much animosity towards women who don't return after maternity leave, and how they're screwing everyone over, etc.
As long as they give 2 weeks notice, I dont see it as being an different than someone else giving their 2 week notice for any other reason (new job, etc) and not telling their boss sooner that they're job hunting, etc. Most women who have maternity leave either pay for a STD policy, earn/accrue the time off by time already worked, or it's a benefit of the job, and they're entitled to use that time off and decide not to come back.
I know several women who truly had no idea how they'd feel after having a baby and had planned to go back to work and ended up changing their mind at the last minute and not going back. I also know women who planned to SAH, but ended up deciding to go back to work after their maternity leave.
So, as for the "OMG, how dare she do that shit!"Unless someone is under contract, doesn't give notice and simply never returns, or has granted a maternity leave contingent on her returning for X amount of time afterwards, then I dont understand the outrage. People quit jobs all the time for all kinds of reasons.
You do not know what life will be like with a baby until they are born. How well people manage parenting and working varies considerably as well as other circumstances that impact the decision (spouse travels during the week, salary not worth working after paying day care, special needs of child, no family in the area etc.)
After my situation I have a hard time feeling sorry for the company. I had intended on returning to work, but DD was born 11 weeks early after 6 weeks of hospital bed rest. She came home from the hospital the same week my FMLA ran out. I tried to work with my company to give me unpaid leave because honestly there was no way I could go back to work with a baby who wasn't even supposed to be born yet. They refused to work with me because they didn't want to set a precedent - you know because shit like that happens so often. This was a HUGE company, but they decided they'd rather go through the hassle of training someone new instead of retaining a quality employee. Screw them.
That seriously sucks I was so fortunate that my company will allow you to take another 12 weeks unpaid "family bonding time" because there was no way I could go back after 8 weeks ML and my kids were only home for 4 weeks of that. Another friend with a micro preemie ended up with a similar situation like yours.
As long as they give 2 weeks notice, I dont see it as being an different than someone else giving their 2 week notice for any other reason (new job, etc) and not telling their boss sooner that they're job hunting, etc.
So, as for the "OMG, how dare she do that shit!"Unless someone is under contract, doesn't give notice and simply never returns, or has granted a maternity leave contingent on her returning for X amount of time afterwards, then I dont understand the outrage. People quit jobs all the time for all kinds of reasons.
I totally agree. I work for a small company, in which no woman has had a child in over 15 years since the company started. All the women that have worked here are still here but there have been so many guys over the years that have left for bigger and better things and left us in the lurch. I think the unfairness is really in the preemptive mistreatment of pregnant women in the workforce.
This is where the long mat leaves in Canada really helps employers. Typically contractors are hired to back fill so if someone chooses not to come back after their year you do have someone trained who is likely willing to come on full time or extend their contract. You see mat leave postings all the time.
Totally. And it's a great way to get your foot in the door of your industry - even if there isn't a position for you at the end of the mat leave, you've now got a year's experience in your industry to put on your resume - something much more likely to get you a permanent position. It's like a fully paid internship.
At 2 months...holy crap. I can't imagine making a decision about going back or not. That would be an agonizing decision to make. And I wouldn't have felt even close to making an informed one - the first few months are such a blur - I would never have been able to weigh whether or not I was cut out to be a stay at home parent (the newness of the whole thing had barely worn off) or whether I wanted to be back at work.
That's another benefit to the year of mat leave - by a year, it was plenty clear what was best for our family.
Also, mat leave is paid out by EI (Employment Insurance) in Canada, something you pay into your entire working life. So, essentially, yes - you are entitled to it. Whether or not you go back.
But, here's the thing that grinds my gears (not you OP, but in general when this topic comes up). There's so much animosity towards women who don't return after maternity leave, and how they're screwing everyone over, etc.
As long as they give 2 weeks notice, I dont see it as being an different than someone else giving their 2 week notice for any other reason (new job, etc) and not telling their boss sooner that they're job hunting, etc. Most women who have maternity leave either pay for a STD policy, earn/accrue the time off by time already worked, or it's a benefit of the job, and they're entitled to use that time off and decide not to come back.
I know several women who truly had no idea how they'd feel after having a baby and had planned to go back to work and ended up changing their mind at the last minute and not going back. I also know women who planned to SAH, but ended up deciding to go back to work after their maternity leave.
So, as for the "OMG, how dare she do that shit!"Unless someone is under contract, doesn't give notice and simply never returns, or has granted a maternity leave contingent on her returning for X amount of time afterwards, then I dont understand the outrage. People quit jobs all the time for all kinds of reasons.
I understand this perspective, but I have been in the position (twice) of picking up the extra slack for 18 weeks for a coworker who said she was returning (when I seriously doubt she ever planned on it) only to announce at the end of that time period that she wasn't coming back.
I see it as pretty different than announcing leaving a job for other reasons, because you're not leaving your employer (and coworkers) with such a huge gap of work they need to fill. And in this economy, it's not realistic to expect most employers to add staff when someone is on leave.
Jenny this is why I said in a perfect world, women could tell the truth. I did know I was not going to return, but if I had told my employer, they could have terminated me that day, not at the end of my leave. While the pervasive attitude at that branch of the company was to not do that, they legally could have. My company policy was also written that you had to be there 12 months so there was an implication it was earned, as another poster indicated. As I said before, two executives said the leave was earned and I shouldn't have given notice before the end of my leave. I even had one tell a friend (and coworker) that she should have gone on unpaid leave through bonus time so that she could have received a bonus (ours were based on the previous years work).
So should I consider any paid maternity leave a benefit of working here regardless of if I am coming back or not? I am on my husbands insurance, so that wouldn't make a difference in my case.
No. Paid maternity leave AND benefits are purely a benefit IF you return. (ETA - that is the intention of the benefit.) It is a RETENTION benefit, not a "congrats on having a baby" benefit. Paid ML is in place so you return to work. Paid benefits during maternity leave is also a retention benefit in place as incentive for you to return to work.
I honestly feel that if you do not return to work, all of those benefits should be returned. Pregnant women/mothers should not receive ML benefits if they don't return, as it is completely unfair to those who never take ML at all.
Jenny this is why I said in a perfect world, women could tell the truth. I did know I was not going to return, but if I had told my employer, they could have terminated me that day, not at the end of my leave. While the pervasive attitude at that branch of the company was to not do that, they legally could have. My company policy was also written that you had to be there 12 months so there was an implication it was earned, as another poster indicated. As I said before, two executives said the leave was earned and I shouldn't have given notice before the end of my leave. I even had one tell a friend (and coworker) that she should have gone on unpaid leave through bonus time so that she could have received a bonus (ours were based on the previous years work).
Generally the implication is you are eligible, it's not earned. It is not a freebie.
Paid ML and paid benefits arenot a parting gift. It is there for retention.
I'm actually shocked that all employers who offer paid leave (here I am talking about leave outside of STD), don't require it to be paid back should the person choose not to return.
I don't understand why it's never written into the policy. There would be more honesty and ownership. Yes it would be difficult for many to save up say, 3 month's worth of their salary and 3 month's worth of their insurance premiums. But they shouldn't be entitlted to take that and run, never returning.
There must be liability or risk in asking for compensation back. There has to be a good reason.
So should I consider any paid maternity leave a benefit of working here regardless of if I am coming back or not? I am on my husbands insurance, so that wouldn't make a difference in my case.
No. Paid maternity leave AND benefits are purely a benefit IF you return. (ETA - that is the intention of the benefit.) It is a RETENTION benefit, not a "congrats on having a baby" benefit. Paid ML is in place so you return to work. Paid benefits during maternity leave is also a retention benefit in place as incentive for you to return to work.
I honestly feel that if you do not return to work, all of those benefits should be returned. Pregnant women/mothers should not receive ML benefits if they don't return, as it is completely unfair to those who never take ML at all.
But that's not always true. If that is what the company policy says, then yes, its a retention benefit and must be paid back if the employee does not return. But I think a lot of people use the term "paid ML" interchangeably with "paid medical leave" or "short/long term disability". In those cases, the employee (or even sometimes the employer) has pre-paid for this benefit and are entitled, and it's not contingent on returning after the leave. Same for health benefits. If an employee is out on a paid medical leave and then doesn't return, not all companies make them repay those medical benefits.
So this probably will start a mommy war, but it is the system that encourages women to not be truthful about coming back to work after maternity leave. If she told you she was thinking about not coming back or definitely wasn't coming back, she could have lost her benefits. I was hesitant to take maternity leave when I knew I wasn't coming back to work, but I had put in a lot of time at the company. I have since had two executives tell me that is what maternity leave is for and that I earned it. I still could have lost my benefits if I had given notice before my leave was over.
I 100% agree with this. The system sucks and people want to do the right thing but have to look out for their best interests. I always said I was definitely coming back but people started rumors that I wasn't and it hurt my career. I recently had an employee that was on the fence about coming back and I don't know if she was really undecided or just afraid of losing her benefits, but it would have been better for the company to know for sure for planning purposes. They were going to lay people off so she took a voluntary layoff which worked best for her.
But that's not always true. If that is what the company policy says, then yes, its a retention benefit and must be paid back if the employee does not return. But I think a lot of people use the term "paid ML" interchangeably with "paid medical leave" or "short/long term disability". In those cases, the employee (or even sometimes the employer) has pre-paid for this benefit and are entitled, and it's not contingent on returning after the leave. Same for health benefits. If an employee is out on a paid medical leave and then doesn't return, not all companies make them repay those medical benefits.
I'm not talking about STD/LTD that the employee has paid into. LTD typically woudln't even come into play for ML.
As for health benefits - birth of a child is anticipated months in advance.
Extended leave where an employee retains benefits for several months and never returns due to say an aneurysm, is a completely different situation, IMO. You can't compare the two. Unless you are ijack, for example, where you had a preemie, or a baby with extreme complications. Those instances are out of the employee's hand which is why they are often gifted/granted without batting an eye.
I have had three employees return after quitting to stay home with the new baby. 1 after 2 years gone, 1 after three years gone and 1 after five years gone. By staying on good terms, you allow for this to occur. In each case, a private contractor held an outbriefing with the employee. In all three cases, it was the cost of daycare in our area.
It is sad. I can really appreciate the canadian system now that I'm using it. Not only does either parent get a year at partial salary, but it's commonplace to fill the position while they're gone. My job was posted internally about 2 months before I left.
Plus mat leave jobs are great for new grads trying to beef up their resumes.
Now when I quit (which is 90% probable) they've got a man working there already who, from what I hear, is a really awesome replacement. No one will be mad and I don't have to feel guilty.
the US system means in order to keep benefits women can't be upfront it have a change of heart without getting a bad rap. As a country we should do more to support woman and new families.
Thanks everyone for the comments and feedback - I've learned a lot just reading the replies, actually. We are hiring for other open spots right now and let me tell you IT IS SO HARD to find good new hires. Yes, at the levels we are looking at, we need a complex skill set, but we dont require a specific degree...we did a batch day yesterday and saw 4 people (for a role that was more junior than the employee that inspired this post)...we had to turn all 4 down. Bummer.
I am speaking again with the woman I lost to Maternity Leave in 3 months to touch base, and we'll be keeping in touch, but I am so sad to lose her. The team of people that report directly to her will be dissapointed as well. Bummer all around!
the US system means in order to keep benefits women can't be upfront it have a change of heart without getting a bad rap. As a country we should do more to support woman and new families.
It is sad. I can really appreciate the canadian system now that I'm using it. Not only does either parent get a year at partial salary, but it's commonplace to fill the position while they're gone. My job was posted internally about 2 months before I left.
Plus mat leave jobs are great for new grads trying to beef up their resumes.
Now when I quit (which is 90% probable) they've got a man working there already who, from what I hear, is a really awesome replacement. No one will be mad and I don't have to feel guilty.
Another benefit that I forgot (from the perspective of an employer particularly) is that the person going on leave then trains their own replacement which eases the transition for everyone and ensures the role never sits empty. And that's because no one is less than upfront - the person going on mat leave does so with the expectation of coming back, the replacement takes the job knowing it only a one year contract and the employer fills the position as a contract but with the potential of a full time, trained replacement.
I would be willing to bet that part of the reason most companies don't offer full paid maternity leave is that it is too risky that the woman will leave after paying her for 6-12 weeks and they'll lose that money and the employee. For that reason, I think it is shitty for someone to take a full paid maternity leave and then quit (assuming we're talking specific maternity leave time vs. vacation or other earned leave time that accrues that the employee saved up).
At my company, we get zero paid "maternity leave" but we can save up vacation/floating holidays/sick time/personal days to use. Vacation is the only thing that accrues beyond 1 year, so I would assume if you take all your sick time/other leave time in January and then quit in February you have to pay some of it back since it was supposed to cover the entire year and you're not there anymore. But I don't know for sure.
If someone at my company used all their vacation time - that they earned bi-weekly and saved up for maternity leave - and then quit, I wouldn't bat an eye. I do not think under any circumstances it would be fair for my company to pay for 3 months of paid time off for someone who had a baby and then for that employee to quit. That's totally screwing the company if it is a specific maternity benefit and not something the employee earned and saved up for.
I dislike that the American system is this way - I think it would be better if Americans had more paid leave time, either by law or by taxpayers footing the bill or whatever. But until that changes, I don't think it is fair to take from the few companies that offer generous benefits like that and then quit on them. I think that's a good way for companies to rethink offering those benefits in the future, too, so that screws over the women who want to come back and want to take paid leave in the future.
Bucky, we have a very very generous paid maternity leave (relative to benchmarks in our industry, comparing the length of time and flexibility on the back end) and when this employee turns in her resignation formally tomorrow, she will also be responsible for paying back the Maternity Leave pay according to her employment agreement.
She knew this going in, we require a certain number of months of service once the employee returns from Mat Leave to absolve her of paying for that benefit back. This is something that many other moms in the business (outside of our division) were really happy for - in that, they would rather have the longer than average paid leave knowing they had to come back to work for x amount of months on the back end.
Bucky, we have a very very generous paid maternity leave (relative to benchmarks in our industry, comparing the length of time and flexibility on the back end) and when this employee turns in her resignation formally tomorrow, she will also be responsible for paying back the Maternity Leave pay according to her employment agreement.
She knew this going in, we require a certain number of months of service once the employee returns from Mat Leave to absolve her of paying for that benefit back. This is something that many other moms in the business (outside of our division) were really happy for - in that, they would rather have the longer than average paid leave knowing they had to come back to work for x amount of months on the back end.
This makes sense. I am glad something like this is in place, I think that protects both the employee and the employer, as well as future parents wanting to use leave. I think it's amazing that your company offers that benefit! I don't know if I'll ever have a kid, but it's definitely not a decision we can make anytime soon anyway since it would take 3 years to save up enough time for me to take a full 12 weeks mostly paid, and would likely take that long to save up 12 weeks pay if I wanted unpaid leave. I do wish more companies were like yours.
Post by whitepicketfence on Dec 4, 2012 20:06:37 GMT -5
That stinks. Losing a good employee is never easy.
I agree with others who said that she probably struggled with the decision and that it was most likely a difficult one for her to make. I went back to work for 2 months after my (unpaid) ML ended. Then, our circumstances changed and we felt that it was best for our family that I SAH. I had never envisioned myself as a SAHM and this was not an easy decision for me by any means. Even though I wanted to be at home, it took a lot of time for me to come to terms with it.
At my company which is mostly women, everyone comes back from maternity leave actually. One coworker got another job while she was out so she just came back for 2-3 weeks.
We did have one woman who left when her youngest was 6 months or so when her husband got a big promotion.
The only person I know who did this IRL did so b/c her husband took a job in another state. Still my boss feared I would not come back after leave which made no sense to me. Esp considering my H was in school and working PT. How were we going to live??