Maternity leave discussion contd...

newlywed26 · January 2010

Regarding the controversial post below, how would you feel if we had the option of taking a full year off, whether it be paid or not, and have your job held for you? I think this would be ideal. For me, finances aren't an issue, and we could totally swing this. I wonder why companies do not offer this. Thoughts?

megdrew1218 · January 2010

When I taught I did this. I took a year's leave of absence and my job was mine to take back if I wanted. I did this when I took a new job and in case it didn't work out, I wanted another option open for me. Of course they hired someone in my spot and told her it was a one-year only job. When I didn't take my job back, she got my position. Wonder if other companies/schools do a year leave of absence with job security?

megwitt · January 2010

We are offered this but sadly we can not afford it so I can not take advantage of it!

robinsokj · January 2010

That seems ridiculous right now considering the amount of people unable to find work

GatorMrs_Esq · January 2010

This is probably not a popular opinion, but I don't see how Canadian companies survive with every new mom being able to take off for a year.

I just don't think this is feasible.

BKHeightsGirl · January 2010

OMG, I would do this in a hearbeat! We have enough in savings for the bills but our lifestyle would be altered for that year. I think it's completely worth it!

BKHeightsGirl · January 2010

OMG, I would do this in a heartbeat! We have enough in savings for the bills but our lifestyle would be altered for that year. I think it's completely worth it!

jilicious · January 2010

LOL that is the last thing I would want to do if I were a company, especially a small business. Hold a position for a year means additional costly training for a temporary employee or paying the exorbitant prices for a temp agency worker.

Everyone seems to think that if you are a business or a landlord you must be some thick-waisted fat cat living high on the hog. Well I can tell you, my husband is a landlord and he's basically a glorified cleaning man who gets the shaft all the time.

Celtic Ember · January 2010

Doing it, happy about it, but I am Canadian, so I have the advantage. As for how Canadian companies manage it? They have to plan for it. Quite often it's like PP said, and people are hired in 1 year contract positions with the advisement that they're replacing someone on mat leave.

mysticporter · January 2010

I would become useless to my job if I took that much time off because in my field I need to stay very current and up to date, and it's true I'm sure of other occupations (you need to either stay up to date or keep your job skills fresh). Most companies, for example, aren't as likely to hire someone with a one year gap in their resume, and I'm sure that's why they don't offer it...they're basically saying they would do just that with a year of maternity.

eSynergy · January 2010

I would do this in a heartbeat as well. I realize people can't find jobs right now, but at least it'd give someone a year-long temp position until i came back...better than nothing!

katater · January 2010

I wouldn't do it. In my field you need to stay active all the time - even on leave (I love what I do though). So even if I took time off I'd find myself writing, researching, etc...things I could better do with the institutional support of the job. That said, I already have quite a flexible job in terms of schedule so I already feel like I have a nice balance (and I will be bringing DD to work with me when she's 4 months old).

baby_tar_heel · January 2010

My school system does this. Of course it's unpaid leave, but at least you have your job if you want it.

trapani2be · January 2010

I live in Canada, that's the deal here. One year off, your job (or a lateral move) is secure and you get a percentage of your pay as well as health benefits and accrued vacation time during your leave. I have friends that have been benefiting from this process by taking nothing but contract maternity coverages. They love the change of pace, working at a new job every year and it also acts as a foot in the door for any positions within the company after the temp job has ended. I loved being off with ds #1 for a year...I couldn't imagine not having a year.

synchrosally · January 2010

Coming from Canada, I'm sort of biased. We have one full year mat leave at 1/2 pay (to a max). It's sort of the norm to take the whole year off and I'm so glad it is. I feel bad for what some Americans have to go through just to get time off to take care of their newborn. There are lots of one year contracts in companies specifically for mat leave, that's how companies can afford it.

Maplebear · January 2010

GatorMrs_Esq:
This is probably not a popular opinion, but I don't see how Canadian companies survive with every new mom being able to take off for a year.
I just don't think this is feasible.

I would think it is easier to hire and train someone for a one year position rather than 6 or 12 weeks.

georgia_peachy · January 2010

My job is considering this as an option for me. If they offer it I would seriously consider it.

preppynewlywed · January 2010

I probably wouldn't.

A year in my industry is a long time. I would come back completely out of the loop.

Companies don't do it, because why should they have to hold a job for a year? How is that fair to them?

lms_bride · January 2010

I think if individual companies wanted to offer this as a benefit, FANTASTIC. What a draw to prospective employees this would be. However, I do not feel it is appropriate for the government to mandate this. Let businesses compete amongst themselves, for business and for employees. Employees and individuals and prospective parents need to make their own decisions based upon what is right for them.

GatorMrs_Esq · January 2010

Maplebear:
GatorMrs_Esq:
This is probably not a popular opinion, but I don't see how Canadian companies survive with every new mom being able to take off for a year.
I just don't think this is feasible.
I would think it is easier to hire and train someone for a one year position rather than 6 or 12 weeks.

Sure, but generally, a company (even a smaller one) can survive without the employee on leave for 6 to 12 weeks (as in, they wouldn't need to find a replacement).

KiwiJ · January 2010

synchrosally:
Coming from Canada, I'm sort of biased. We have one full year mat leave at 1/2 pay (to a max). It's sort of the norm to take the whole year off and I'm so glad it is. I feel bad for what some Americans have to go through just to get time off to take care of their newborn. There are lots of one year contracts in companies specifically for mat leave, that's how companies can afford it.

It's the same kind of thing in New Zealand. Jobs have to be held open for 12 months, and it's the norm to take that amount of time (and is very much appreciated). Companies survive by taking on a temp for those 12 months. The government pays us for the first 14 weeks only, and it's up to a max, but luckily we can afford to take that year off. In fact I only have to decide about a month before the end of my leave whether I am returning to work or not. (Temp contracts often get extended when people don't come back.)

Want a personalized experience?

Maternity leave discussion contd...

Re: Maternity leave discussion contd...

Choose Another Board

Search Boards