Is Having Family or Medical Leave from Work Fair?
Georgia does not have a state law that specifically requires employers to offer pregnancy leave. However, most Georgia employers with 50 or more employees may have leave obligations under the federal family and medical leave act (FMLA). I will be mostly referring to this Act and other laws and Acts within the state of Georgia.
My problem with the controversy surrounding “maternity leave”, The Federal Family and Medical Leave Act, The Federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and so forth, is that to me there doesn’t seem to be one mass logical solution or answer.
On the business side of things it can really cause a business to suffer specifically financially and in company productivity if
…show more content…
a job position within in the business is not being met by the employee missing due to maternity leave or any sort of leave for that matter. Having paid maternity leave could be even more devastating to the business. I think everyone would agree it is unfair and damaging to have to pay for something that you aren’t getting. Even worse you may have to pay someone else to cover the missing employees job temporarily causing you to pay twice what you normally would and still get the same amount of work. If the employee happens to be a detrimental part of the business then them not being there could put an extra strain and stress on the other employees, the employer, the services the business provides, and/or people who are receiving services. In some cases there’s no telling how long the employee will be gone or if they’ll even actually continue or be able to continue work. For some people time is money and currently it seems there is even less opportunity for waiting and trying to put anything or anyone before the ability and possibility of making enough money. It can be hard to put money ahead of another person and it sounds like a horribly wrong thing to do. So often though that money is really representing your own life, the life of your family and loved ones, or even your other employees. However for an employee who has qualified for leave according to the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act not getting paid or having the security of still having a job when you return from having to be on leave due to inability to work because of a newborn or a severe medical issue could in some cases quite literally be a matter of life and death. If you were legally crossing the street and a car ran a red light and hit you putting you in the hospital forcing you have leave of work you can’t help that you were hit by a car. Medical bills are expensive as well as any medication, in home medical devices, or any extra special care you may now require. Odds are even if you were getting paid medical leave it would still devastate you financially. Same with having a child, it can take an extreme toll on you physically and financially. Although in some states like in the state of Georgia paid medical leave is not something that is required. Small business and businesses that have less than twenty employees aren’t required to give any leave at all. It is scary how dependent we have to be on money but that is one of the key things that seems to drive the employees point of view to sound like the just answer. It seems to be unfair whether the employee is paid or isn’t paid while on leave. As far not being able to fire someone because they have gone on leave as in accordance with the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act makes a little more sense to me. Again there are many cases where you can’t help what has happened to you to cause you to not be able to work so to be fired essentially without having actually done anything wrong doesn’t seem fair and moral. I think the best answer to that would be to hire someone temporarily if necessary and make sure that they understand and agree to it being a temporary position. So far I have talked about the more logical points of each side but even thinking on a more personal emotional level it comes down to saying one person’s life is more valuable than another, sometimes more than just one other.
I feel for a lot of people the first instinct is to say, “Well the employer needs to make the sacrifice for the employee not the other way around.” Since many stories put the employee as the hard working underdog of any hierarchy scenario. I think it’s also safe to assume that most people have been an employee before and that a majority of people are employees as opposed to employers. However assuming that this is what should be done is still not fair and morally just. Not every employer is going to have a better life than their employees and it isn’t always going to be the employee that would suffer more than the employer would if he got his way. An employer going out of his way or taking risks for his employees like this would be a very kind and noble thing to do but it doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. You could argue that an employer who doesn’t do this for his employees is heartless but you could say the same for the employee as if to say he was taking advantage of the employer and his
business. I cannot think of nor find any mass solution to this issue and there doesn’t always need to be one. I believe it really is impossible to put any sort of value on a person’s life and say one is better than the other but we have, nationally, put ourselves in the position of having to make this type of decision all the time. I believe it needs to be something carefully thought out and decided on as small and personal of a scale as possible. Ultimately it is and should be the employers decision to make, though I hope it is one they make with great care. If your employer were to make a decision that you so strongly disagreed with then would you really still want to work there anyway? Life is unpredictable, at least when it comes to the seemingly small things and things you never thought you’d have to think about or deal with. Attempting to put myself mentally in the shoes of each side of this argument hasn’t led me to a solution but it has raised my awareness of the affects we have on other people. Even the little things we do can make big changes, both good and bad. I hope reading about my thoughts and opinions has brought you to a new level of care and appreciation for those you depend on as well as those who depend on you. Whether or not you actually agree with my opinions.
The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) provides certain employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave and job protection for childbirth, adoption or foster care; to care for a seriously ill child, spouse, or parent; or for an employee’s own serious illness (Cañas & Sondak, 2011). It also requires that their group health benefits remain intact during the unpaid leave of absence. The employee must have worked for the employer for at least a year and must have earned 1,250 hours of service during the previous 12 months ((Cañas & Sondak, 2011, pg. 70).
Arizona employers who do not currently offer paid sick time will be required to start accruing as of July 1, 2017. There has been an enormous amount of debate over whether there is a need to offer sick time, especially to employees who have paid time off which can be used for anything, including sick days. On the other hand, there is a significant need for employees who are not offered any paid sick time or paid time off. You will find a mix of employees and employers on either side and sometimes on both sides of this debate. Few will change their opinion when they think of themselves as the employee versus the employer and vice versa. Employers and employees have raised concerns alike regarding whether providing days specifically denoted as sick will encourage more unplanned days off, will negatively impact those that do not get sick, and whether it is fair to require sick time versus paid time off in which we can all agree everyone should have paid sick time when the
...usly shamed, embarrassed, and demeaned their employees. I think this kind of behavior is a way of separating employers from employees. It helps keep employees in line and also adds the benefit of making employers feel good about themselves at the expense of their employees. Demeaning actions prevent employees from organizing or protesting for higher wages or better conditions. It keeps them “in their place” and does not allow them to hope or strive for anything better. In spite of the dehumanization of employees by employers, there are silent rebellions committed by lower class employees such as jokes, gossip, doing other's work, and just in general helping each other out. These are silent protests, they do not change the status quo in any way, that would be too risky for these employees. It is survival and caring in a corporate world that does not care about them.
The FMLA was passed to help families in the time of a crisis so that the individuals would not have to choose between work and personal responsibilities. The eligible employees are permitted to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and medical reasons. The leave can last up to twelve workweeks in any twelve-month period. Reasons for leave include: pregnancy, prenatal complications, adoption/ fostering of a child, hospitalization, care of an immediate family member, or a health condition that makes the employee unable to do his or her job (Solis). This law applies to any employer “engaging in commerce” ...
This paper will describe the problem that Kelly experienced with her new job with the sick leave policy. We will discuss if Kelly should call CLAIR, or discuss this further with Mr. Higashi? What is this main dispute about for Kelly? For Mr. Higashi? In these types of conflicts is a compromise possible? What are the tangible factors in this situation? What are the intangible factors in the negotiation Is saving face more important to Kelly or Mr. Higashi? Why? Which are more important, the tangible or intangible factors? Is this true for both Kelly and Mr. Higashi?
Many cases are being brought to the Supreme Court because many companies and employers are not cooperating with the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. Just recently a young women working with UPS was forced into unpaid time off because she was pregnant and was told by her doctor she could not lift more than 20 pounds. She felt that she had been unfairly treated because UPS made accommodations for other workers with disabilities but didn’t offer to make accommodations for her. I think that even though the Pregnancy Discrimination Act is there, many companies and employers are not following it. It is not fair for women who become pregnant to be treated any differently than another worker who has a temporary disability. I think that congress should strengthen this act so that women are not forced to choose between their job and the health of their pregnancy and baby. I think that companies and employers who are not following the rules of this act should be punished in some way. One way could be that if they are not obeying this act, they could be fined. It would make them more likely to follow through and follow the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. With more and more women in the work force, it is obvious at some point a majority of these women will be
The Family Medical Leave Act was implemented in 1993. This act was designed to give employees an ease of mind if there came a time where they needed an extended amount of time off from work to care for family if necessary. To take advantage of FMLA, one will have to had to be employed with the same company for at least 1 year or 1250 hour before requesting the time off. The company also must have 50 or more employees. (DOL, n.d.). There are situations that are allowable.
Figure 1, shows the top countries in the world for maternity leave, with all offering over 50 weeks, and Serbia and Denmark at 100% of salary. In other countries both the amount of time and percentage of salary differs, but as Amanda Peterson Beadle points out in her article for the ThinkProgress website, ‘Out of 178 nations, the U.S. is one of three that does not offer paid maternity leave benefits, let alone paid leave for fathers’. (6)
Women have the wonderful ability to bring a new life into this world and are granted maternity leave, a certain amount of time after birth to be away from the labor force. However, maternity leave was not always available to women because of the low levels of employed and educated females. In 1978 changing gender norms and increased female labor involvement influenced the passing of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act prohibiting employment discrimination of women due to pregnancy (Smith, Downs, and O’Connell 3). After this legislation, a higher percentage of women in the United States were not only educated but also employed. In 1987, a critical Supreme Court case (California Federal Savings and Loan Association v. Guerra) in California defined
Those who have a family feel they can be penalized even further. In a survey conducted as part of a Wall Street Journal study, 36% of respondents with children at home feared missing out on advancement while on maternity leave.
America is the one and only developed country that does not offer any paid maternity leave. Maternity leave is a period of absence from work granted to a mother before and after the birth of her child. In America this means twelve weeks of unpaid absence that guarantees her job when she returns. We are so far behind everyone that out of all of the countries around the world seven out of 196 including America do not have mandatory paid maternity leave. (Colorado public radio news) That is a sad figure, to think that we place having a family so high but don’t give the mothers the protection and security they deserve.
the company can attempt to reduce the impact with a better defined strategy. Many firm-specific issues can
As we all know, majority of females are mothers and many are single mothers to beat that. Therefore, the thought of them not having paid maternity leave is quite disturbing to me. Why is the United States the only country in the world that doesn’t make paid maternity leave mandatory in the workplace? How are these females supposed to support their child, along with them if there not getting paid for the time they must take off? In many cases, that female may not have anyone to care for that child, so that she can go back to work. Things such as these may not be put into consideration by employers, but giving birth is a remarkable experience for females. Most importantly, maternity leaves gives a mother time to bond with her newly born child and it gives her time to recover or heal from the overwhelming birthing process. Therefore, the least companies can do is give paid maternity leave to females, while they’re missing work
Sick leave is leave that employees can take when they can’t attend work because they are sick or injured. In the case study “Sick leave costing employers” it highlights the issues of employees calling in sick to work and just how much damage is done both productively and financially to a business (Schermerhorn, et al.). The rationale for investigating this issue is due to the increasing statistics of Australian employees causing large amounts of financial damage to their employers. The realisation is that a high percentage of “sickies” are not related to employees being sick but simply not being bothered to go to work.
Pregnancy and maternity leave is another form of discrimination seen in workplaces. Women are less likely to be hired due to maternity leave where they have to leave for a long period of time due to child birth (Larson). Recently, New York Times has been sued for gender discrimination by a former ad executive, Arielle Davis. Davis was recently laid off while she was on maternity leave for four months. She was “entitled to six months” but her managers “pressured her to take less than four moths” (Roy). Her leave did not affect her department of work in anyway yet she was laid off right before she was about to go back to work. There are several laws such as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act that are supposed to protect women from being fired because they are taking time off to give birth. Even with these laws, women are still being laid off because of maternity leave just as Davis was. It is absolutely wrong to treat a woman differently or discriminate her because she is pregnant. Every woman deserves the right to have a job and start a family at the same