Petfinder.com forums :: View topic - Do we get enough time off to be with family? [ ]

I'm a very curious person and I have a thing for knowing and understanding what people think about things and why. If I could I would love to be a Sociologist and do research. Anyway, that's the reason for my questions.

In thinking about my other thread about America's greatness I was pondering things that is great and not so great about this country, comparing it to things that are great and not so great with my original country, Sweden.
One thing I like and miss about Sweden is the time that each Swede is guaranteed time off to spend with his family and children. Laws regulating work places are very family friendly and puts the needs of the family ahead of the needs of the employer, to an extent. I miss this and it's something I would like to see implemented in the US. I'm curious if this is something that Americans would like to see implemented too or if it's something that most people are not very interested in.
In Sweden each working person is guaranteed at least 5 weeks vacation which is meant for spending time with family and reloading your batteries. When you have a baby you get 12 months materninty leave, more if you have a high risk job where you need to take off at the end of your pregnancy. New dad's get a month off to spend with the new baby. If you have kids under age 12 you get a certain number of "care for sick child days" so you can take time off when your kids are sick.
IMO these rights should be allowed to every person and family in industrialized countries. It's bothersome to me that weeks old babies are being left in day care centers because their mothers have to go back to work, especially since breast feeding is so important. I think it's also sad that many people only get 5 vacation days off a year to spend with their families. Kids needs more time than that to really be with their parents and workers need more time to reload their batteries.
I believe that regulations like these would be very beneficial to both American workers and especially American children and families. But I'm definitely biased and have a different view on this since I wasn't born and raised here.
So what do You think? Would you like to have similar regulations in the US being guaranteed more vacation time, maternity leave and some sort of family days when you can take off to deal with family emergencies like sick kids? Note that i'm taking about paid time off, not unpaid like under FMLA. If not, why not?

Thanks

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 5:27 am Post subject:

Well who pays for all that time off? It would seem to me a company would have a hard time staying in business giving that much time off. Unless the government is paying for it or part of it. In that case the taxes must be killer.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:11 am Post subject:

Rockntosh, I was aware that many, well at least several countries did like you are mentioning with the five weeks off. Or, at least a month off. The maternity leave suprised me. I believe in many cases that makes for more loyal and harder working employees. I don't think a company should be forced to do it here, at least not yet. But here if you figure in all the holidays, the sick leave, the vacation, fml, maternity leave, bereavement leave I think we have it pretty well covered as far as allowing people time off while protecting their jobs. Not all companies pay for the entire time a person may need off however.

From an employer I spoke with just weeks ago about this, most employees he has known have taken every bit of the time allowed assuming they qualify for it, plus. With a holiday just about every two weeks in this country there are always people needing that time off too, even if they have used up their floating holidays.

I don't think children here go to school for as many days as other countries. That I would like to google. But to get back on your topic, your question is an interesting one and bound to vary widely in the answers you get.

Oh, and thank you for answering my question in your other thread about what brought you to the USA.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:25 am Post subject:

oops I hit no, but I meant yes - it was all miss kittys fault!

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:12 am Post subject:

Interesting question. First of all, most companies I know of grant 2 weeks paid vacation a year after one year of employment. After a certain number of years, you get 3 weeks, then at another interval you get 4 weeks. Some go as high as 5 weeks or even more. I'm not saying there are not any companies that only give 1 week of vacation but all of them I'm familiar with (and every one I've ever worked for) give 2 to 5 depending on length of employment.

Regarding having laws requiring a minimum of 5 weeks of vacation time and one year of paid maternity leave, I don't know. I suppose from an employee perspective, that would be awesome.

But from an employers perspective, it could be very tough to do. If you are only talking about very large companies being required to do that, I can see how it might be feasible. A company with 10,000 employees could find a way make it work, I'm sure.

But if you are talking about all companies being required to do so, it could present some real problems for a small company. Many small companies would have a tough time doing without a key employee for a year, especially if they have to pay that employee for the whole time AND cannot hire a replacement if they have to guarantee her job will still be available when she comes back.

If that were the law, one potential unintended consequence could be that women, especially young women who are most likely to get pregnant, could find it harder to get good jobs. I can see how an employer might be reluctant to hire, or promote, a young woman into a key position knowing that in 9 months she might be gone for a year, still getting paid and the company not be able to hire a replacement for her. And I'm talking about an employer who is not the least bit discriminatory in his/her hiring practices but is forced to think pragmatically about the survival of the company. What if a small company has 10 employees and half of them are young women who could potentially be off for a year at full salary? A small company couldn't operate that way.

So, I think I will have to vote no.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:21 am Post subject:

Soccerdog, you must live in an area where companies are very fair. I worked full time at three seperate jobs before getting a government job and none of them offered sick days and two weeks vacation after a year. The best I got was one week vacation after one year with unpaid sick days if I had to use additional days. Also, I know Holiday pay is generous but if an employer shut down for a week around Christmas I would only get paid for Christmas day and not for the entire week that my company was not open so I could not work.

Thank goodness for my government job. I actually get to spend a little time cleaning house and playing with my pets! I know that many of my friends and family do not get nearly enough time off.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:29 am Post subject:

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:48 am Post subject:

Unfortunately, lost all of my vacation time when I was laid off from my job in the spring, and the temp company I'm with now offers vacation after a year- I think like 2 days worth or something.
It would be nice to have that much vacation time, so i voted yes!!

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:06 am Post subject:

I voted yes, but I think somewhere in between them and us would work the best. I don't see the US giving that much time, but certainly, most working people deserve more than they currently get.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:40 pm Post subject:

I remember reading somewhere that there are temp workers in some of these countries who roatate in for workers all year while they take their vacation time. As I recall, the company paid for some and the government subsidized as well.

It makes sense to me. The company pays an extra person's salary, but they are never understaffed as they have a full time "sub" to come in who already knows the job. The companies in those countries seem to be doing well enough, so from what I've seen, it's not too much of an issue.

IMO, employers in this country are, by and large, stingy. Most give the bare minimum on things like vacation, floaters and holidays, maternity, family leave, personal days, or sick leave. Again, I guess ti comes down to whose side you want to "take." On one hand, companies needs workers to succeed and make a profit, but at what point is profit more important than the welfare of individual human beings. The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle. If a business would give au some profit to help their employees (say take a million out of a ten million profit -the owner is still making a heck of a lot on that deal-and use it to subsidize substitute and temp workers) The business still profits, and that might even brow as workers who are happy tend to be more productive.

I think we should definitely take a page out of others' books on this, as well as many other issues.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 1:54 pm Post subject:

alot of it depends on the company you work for. at mine, 2 weeks vaca at a year, 5 sick days a year. after 5 years, 3 weeks vaca, after 10, 4 weeks. Plus every year you get 5 personal days.

so I actually have 5 weeks a year if I include my personal days. But it took 10 years to get there. maternity leave was unheard of 21 years ago, you had to use sick time and then leave of absense, where you got paid at 3/4 salary. now its 7-8 weeks paid in full, and if you want more its leave of absense again. They have to guarantee a job for you, but not necessarily the same one, depending on what you were doing.

but we get no backing from the government. this all comes out of the company's pocket

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject:

It would be nice if new dads got to spend a little more time after their child was born. I know we sure could have used it.
My husband's boss is really cool and you're usually allowed 2 days but he allowed him to take 3 days and not get any demerrits against him, the only bad part was it was unpaid, so there was like $300 we lost.

The company he works for though, they shut down at Christmas time, so he'll have 2 weeks off and it's paid. So that'll be really cool. And he still gets to take a week's vacation in the summer.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:44 pm Post subject:

My husband gets 4 weeks paid vacation per year. He rarely takes more than 2 weeks, though.

As for maternity leave, for a lot of small businesses, including my family's, it would put us in a huge hole if our employee's took a year off from work when they had a baby. Even if our guy's took a full month off, it would put us in a bind. There's no way we could continue to pay them when they arent there to bring revenue in. We'd have to find new employees, and in an uncommon, technical field like ours, that's extremely hard to begin with. So in essence, we would be paying two salaries for one job. Yikes.

I dont see how that would work unless the govt. stepped in and contributed, and I dont care for that, either. Personally, I wouldnt expect to be handed a salary after I made the choice to have a baby and stay home. I vote no.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:48 pm Post subject:

I wouldn't care if it were paid.

I would just like the option of being able to take more than 12 weeks off and be guarantied the same job or the same wage when I returned to work. Babies are so little and tiny and need their moms at 3 months old. Sad

*waves at Melinda*

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 4:27 pm Post subject:

Petfinder.com forums Forum Index -> Public Forums -> General Community -> Do we get enough time off to be with family?
	Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

	Petfinder.com forums Forum Index -> Public Forums -> General Community -> Do we get enough time off to be with family?	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 1 of 4