“PTO In The United States”
Faith Goff
In recent years, a largely debated economic topic in the U.S. has been if businesses should be required to provide paid leave of absences for employees during a family member’s illness or the birth of their child. Those who support paid leaves argue that situations may arise, out of workers’ control, making it difficult or even impossible for them to be present during these times. Meanwhile, the opposing side states that it’s unfair to the companies who are compensating someone without the exchange of labor, especially those which may not have the money or enough employees to make up for the loss. Some even think that this benefit can easily be abused with dishonest claims.
There are also people who fall somewhere in the middle, most of which believe that child birth, a “personal choice,” should not be considered for paid leave and that it creates an unfair disadvantage for employees who decide against raising a family. As they automatically receive less time off, this understandably creates a controversial imbalance in the workplace. However, many commenters fail to recognize that, not only is pregnancy often not a personal choice, it’s also a major life-altering event that can only be held off for so long. Working couples that wish to have children shouldn’t be expected to let this desire subside just because they have to worry about the financial constraint that would come with a lack of income despite being employed.
Another important note in this debate is that the United States currently stands as the only industrialized country which doesn’t require sick leave from its companies. This makes it legal for American businesses to have individual choices in the matter (appropriate for the country’s system of economy), allowing a lack of inequality in the privileges of employees. Considering the government remains uninvolved with this particular issue, it also provokes the question of whether or not officials should step in and create a new law regarding paid time off across the nation.
In my opinion, paid leave of absence should be required for all companies, whether it’s due to sickness, maternity, or any other uncontrollable situation. While it’s true that employees are capable of manipulating such a privilege, they should all be trusted until proven deceitful, as with anything else. As for the other workers who aren’t receiving the same amount of time off, it must be taken into consideration the fact that these individuals aren’t being paid during additional vacation days, they’re being paid during a time of grief, pain, or overall importance to their life. Thus, it shouldn’t be argued that the others are being treated unjustly, especially when they could easily fall under similar circumstances in the future. It’s certainly not a matter of “special treatment” or one group of employees receiving higher benefits than the other, but rather showing respect towards dedicated workers who have earned full-time employment at the corporation and stumbled into unfortunate circumstances which have prohibited them from operating efficiently in the workplace.
Works Cited
“Paid Sick Leave Poll Results.” ISideWith, www.isidewith.com/poll/1476448702.
“Paid Maternity Leave: Inside the Debate.” Business.com, www.business.com/articles/paid-maternity-leave-inside-the-debate-and-what-it-means-for-your-business/.
I agree that all workers are entitled to paid time off regardless of the circumstances. If it is sickness, family death, or maternity it should be allowed. I almost feel as though maternity leave is a societal norm. These days most moms have their babies and are out of work for a solid 12 weeks. Although, some moms have their babies, and don’t stop working for more than a week depending on their career of choice. Even though some may feel it is unfair that moms are getting paid leave for that large amount of time, it is a personal choice. They are going through a large event in their life. Even after having children some moms suffer from severe postpartum depression. They need this time off to adjust to a new lifestyle. Generally speaking, people whom are taking this paid time off going through hard times in their life or grief. Some people can abuse the system, but most commonly if you are out with an illness a medical excuse is necessary upon return. If you are pregnant, your body is visibly different. Lastly, most wouldn’t lie about death. Although one could, I feel as though it is not common.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting perspective on our economy, and a topic which I am surprised has not gained more controversy. I agree with your position on this issue, and businesses should not be reluctant to give their employees paid time off. Although it may be considered "unfair," people have unexpected or uncontrollable events in their lives, and they need a reliable, sustaining company that will help their employees in times of need. It would be interesting to see how businesses are affected by paying employees without receiving labor, especially if the absence is a month or more. What do you think is the benefit for businesses when they give their employees paid time off?
ReplyDeleteProviding paid maternity leave (and paternity leave for that matter) is somewhat of a long term investment for an employer. Though there is a period in which a laborer is being paid without a return of labor (Italian law in 2016 offered 22 weeks paid at 80% of usual earnings), when that laborer comes back they are less stressed and therefore more productive then they would be without paid leave or if the business doesn't offer maternity leave and they were forced to work despite having just given child birth.
DeleteIn the first scenario financial stress bogs down on the family as household income is slashed significantly often leading to the latter scenario whether or not the business offers maternity leave. In the latter scenario the worker may be working, but having to raise a newborn leaves them clocking in stressed and tired, decreasing productivity significantly (decreasing marginal utility for that additional laborer, as it were) at a detriment to the company. The business could just fire that worker but they then have to spend time and resources finding and training a new worker to take the place of the former one.
The solution? Ban childbirth nationwide. Then this won't even be an issue.
But seriously, if you want to know more about how maternity leave works in the UK:
https://www.gov.uk/maternity-pay-leave
Where I got the Italy figure:
https://money.cnn.com/2016/02/17/pf/working-parents-paid-leave/index.html
I agree on your stance, I also believe that absences should be paid. Whether that be maternity or illness as long as it falls within the parameters of what the company allows it seems only fair that we as people will have the freedom to take maternity leave and absences when necessary. While I see how it doesn't seem right to be paid for the days you do not work, it seems unfair that a longtime employee is not allowed to be sick or have a child unless they are not paid.
ReplyDeleteI also definitely think that their should be paid parental leave in the United States. The argument you always hear against requiring it is that companies will offer paid leave on their own as recruiting gets more and more competitive. Some economists say that you should let the economy play the course and the market will naturally provide better and better benefits to workers. But the economy has been strong for almost 10 years but wages are still stagnant and their is still very little paid leave offered by companies. The government should get involved and required paid parental leave at least for a few weeks for parents who struggle without it. Do you believe in minimum government intervention or regulations on firms is better for the U.S economy as a whole?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you opinion on this topic. Companies should to provide paid leave, either maternity or illness. By providing this leave, they keep workers, who may otherwise leave the company because of the fact that they do not provide paid leave to their workers. By keeping workers who are efficient and qualified for the job, they also keep workers who keep the company functioning. Though they have to pay them, and are not getting any labor out of them, they still keep workers, instead of having to rehire and retrain new ones.
ReplyDeleteIt is very interesting to me to learn that America is the only industrialized country which doesn't require paid sick leave. You would think that in such a time where financial problems are so prominently contributing to American citizen's struggles, the government would want to help. I agree with your stance that their should be paid absences in the United States. While it is hard to consider the deceptive employees who lie to receive the benefit, it is even harder to think about the single mother who is forced to take a six month leave without being compensated, and then be expected to support for herself and her child. I believe the government should intervene in this situation to require paid parental leave.
ReplyDeleteThis is perhaps less of an economic topic than a social topic; everybody has maternity leave, even the government of Turkey, the world's sole source of scum and villainy. Labor regulations in America are almost as bad as in Thailand or Indonesia when compared to what we would refer to as the collective west; in Wisconsin, for example, where your employer is only required to pay employees once a month, which is just one modicum on a laundry list of offences that cause workers to have very little bargaining power. The root of the issue is that there are very few benefits for a company to give any additional benefits to their employees. A producer won't produce more if they pay their workers more, and reasonably, the only benefit that benefits such as maternity leave have is that they buy loyalty in the employee, and in a market where labor is cheap, you can just hire a new guy instead. From an economic perspective, the theory is that companies will find it valuable to do so, but with any large and untapped group of skilled workers, that's just not true. Now, I believe we do have enough regulation that prevents employers from firing workers because of those circumstances, any other solution to that topic would be barbarous, but the fact remains that regulation has to be passed for PTO to take effect for large swaths of people in blue-collar careers, and to get regulation passed, the issue typically needs to have an interest group like PETA, the NRA, or Catfish Farmers of America lobbying for legislation, which we don't have, at least one that has sufficient funding for an issue as large as this. Unfortunately, given the current climate, we're more likely to all move to Sweden than to get PTO legislation passed in our lifetimes.
ReplyDeleteYou made some respectable factors there. I regarded on the web for the issue and found most people will go along with with your website. online casino gambling
ReplyDelete