NEW YORK, Feb. 1, 2007
U.S. Lags In Family-Friendly Workplaces
Study Shows U.S. Companies Far Behind Other Nations In Maternity Leave, Sick Days
-
(AP / CBS)
-
Interactive On The Job Explore America's labor economy, track recent major layoffs and meet key economic players.
-
Interactive The Nation We Live In Who are Americans and what do they do? A comprehensive look at our economic, sociological and racial breakdown.
The new data comes as politicians and lobbyists wrangle over whether to scale back the existing federal law providing unpaid family leaves or to push new legislation allowing paid leaves.
The study, officially being issued Thursday, says workplace policies for families in the United States are weaker than those of all high-income countries and many middle- and low-income countries. Notably, it says the U.S. is one of only five countries out of 173 in the survey that does not guarantee some form of paid maternity leave; the others are Lesotho, Liberia, Swaziland and Papua New Guinea.
"More countries are providing the workplace protections that millions of Americans can only dream of," said the study's lead author, Jody Heymann, founder of the Harvard-based Project on Global Working Families and director of McGill's Institute for Health and Social Policy.
Among the study's findings:
According to the study, the U.S. fares comparatively well in some areas — such as guaranteeing significantly higher pay for overtime work and ensuring the right to work for all racial and ethnic groups, regardless of gender, age or disability.
"The U.S. has been a proud leader in adopting laws that provide for equal opportunity in the workplace, but our work/family protections are among the worst," Heymann said. "It's time for a change."
The topic is of keen interest in Washington.
The Labor Department is examining regulations that give workers unpaid leave to deal with family or medical emergencies — a review that supporters of the rules worry might be a prelude to scaling back these protections, as requested by some business groups. Comments to the agency on the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act — which grants eligible workers up to a total of 12 weeks of unpaid leave a year — are due by Feb. 16.
At the same time, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., plans to announce Thursday that he will propose new legislation that would enable workers to take six weeks of paid family leave. Congress also is expected to reconsider the Healthy Families Act, a bill introduced last session that would require employers with at least 15 employees to provide seven paid sick days per year.
On the state level, some New Jersey lawmakers are pushing legislation that would make their state the second, along with California, to provide paid family leave. Under one New Jersey proposal, workers who take leave would be paid through the state's temporary disability insurance fund, augmented by a 0.1 percent charge on workers' weekly wages.
Traditionally, many conservatives have opposed moves for paid family leave, but there are signs of some shifts. A prominent anti-abortion leader, the Rev. Paul Schenck of the National Pro-Life Action Center, recently said he would support paid maternity leave on the premise that it might dissuade some pregnant women from having abortions.
"Across the political spectrum, people are realizing these policies have an enormous impact on working families," Heymann said in a telephone interview. "If you look at the most competitive economies in the world, all the others except the U.S. have these policies in place."
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 16 Comments
- Oh, and for all of you saying "well YOU chose to have kids and I didn't blather blather blather" try this: Substitute "care for aging parents" for maternity leave. Maybe that would help you to see over the edge of the foxhole.
- Reply to this comment
- "Could it be because we are trying to get work done in those workplaces?"
Well, no, see. That's a little simplistic. Do you think the US is the only country in which people work?! People in other country's are getting work done, too. They are just not laboring under the delusion that your life outside of work is less important than your life at work.
"Who came up with the ludicrous idea that a company had to raise your family?"
Sigh. I'll speak slowly and use small words. No, that's not what we are saying. I don't want the company to raise my family. I would like the company to make it easier for ME TO DO IT. How about instead of simply thinking they are accountable to shareholders, there is a sacred trust between a company and the people who work for them. IMPROVE THE QUALITY of the workers lives. Everyone benefits. - Reply to this comment
- Let's hear it for all the self-centered pigs that have voted Republicon for the past 27 years! Thanks for voting to take America back to the 19th Century!
- Reply to this comment
- Who came up with the ludicrous idea that acompany had to raise your family? Pull your weight or get out of the way of someone else who can.
- Reply to this comment
- Children are a "poor" choice? You have not had children JUST because you want to be a BETTER employee? No one is swallowing that here. Ask your parents if YOU were a "poor" choice. I bet they don't agree! Something is awry here. Yes, your resentment is clear, loud and clear. I picture a sad person here and I feel sorry for you. I hope you really do have a vibrant life.
- Reply to this comment
- people, in general, want the best for their kids. they are trying to provide, at the very least, the basic necessities of life. let alone, all the extras. but the biggest gift a parent can give to their kid is TIME. people are way over the edge with work in this country. i would rather make less and have more time with my family any day. that should be the normal way in our country. there is nothing wrong with honest hard work, but there is something to be said for balance. we need some value shifts in this country.
- Reply to this comment
- The problem with any kind of "family-friendly leave" is that it shifts the burden of work onto those like myself who chose not to have children. I have been working for over 34 years and I chose not to have children for many reasons, but the biggest reason was that I didn't think that I could be a reliable employee if I did have kids. I've always been the one who covers for the parents, and I've grown to resent the way that many of my co-workers over the years assumed that I didn't have a life away from the office because I didn't have school plays and soccer practice to take me away from work. (It's actually quite the opposite: I can do exactly what I want 24/7, 365 because I don't have school plays, etc.) It gets worse, too. I always have to ask for time off way in advance because I have to work my time off around all those school plays and soccer matches. I even worked for a single mother who suggested that I should be glad to work over-time (doing HER work that went un-done because of her two kids) because I have such a boring and un-interesting life without children! So if I sound more than a little bit resentful it's because I am. People should be more careful about the choices they make. I have absolutely no regrets about my choice; I regret very much that people pass the burden of their (poor) choices on to me and others without children.
- Reply to this comment
- Having children is a big responsibility that requires sacrifice. If you dont feel the job market you are in is conducive to growing families, then stop pumping out kids! The population is out of control anyway.
- Reply to this comment
- And do not fret, liberals. I am sure Jenna and Barb have already picked out the substandard nursing home for W and Laura. The twins will be too busy working (or partying) to take care of them thank to GOP policies.
- Reply to this comment
- The reason why the U.S. is the global economic leader is because we all work so much. Start requiring employers to allow both parents to take six weeks of paid leave each year to be with their kids and watch what happens to our GDP. I am not saying this is right or wrong, but it is just the way this economy works.
The child and elder care industry is booming because there are no more stay home moms to babysit for neighbors, they are all working now. And the moms whose husbands are wealthy enough to allow them to not work certainly do not need the income from babysitting.
As for the comment about CEOs getting paid parental leave if they wanted it, that will never happen since you CANNOT TAKE YOUR FAMILY UP THE CORPORATE LADDER with you. You either stay with your family at the bottom, or you abandon them to chase your career. - Reply to this comment
- "U.S. Lags In Family-Friendly Workplaces"
Could it be because we are trying to get work done in those workplaces? - Reply to this comment
- This does not surprise me. In my opinion U.S.companies and all U.S. Business,Corporation,their rich political GOP friends, etc., do not want workplaces to be family friendly. Divorce rates in this country continue to rise,child abuse rates continue to rise,numbers of seniors getting abused by other family members, sometimes even their own children continues to rise,numbers of retired and disabled people living in Nursing Homes or nursing facilities, continues to rise. President Bush and all our other GOP political leaders say our U.S. economy is strong and prosperous, even if both husband and wife have to work, even if it is two jobs apiece for both husband and wife. Corporate America and U.S. employers love in my opinion are continent with the rising divorce rate and rising child abuse, because single,divorced people with or without children usually end up working the two jobs or working all the overtime hours. Daycare centers make money off of them,divorce attorneys make big bucks as well. Bottom line: family breakups whether it be divorce,child abuse,neglect,etc, all of this hurts children,mom and dads,grandpartents,uncles,aunts,etc, but it benefits corporate America because if you are single,depressed and have not family or if you do have small children you sometimes feel that your career and your paycheck is all you have. I be willing to wager that many other countries have divorce rates that are only a fraction of the divorce rates the U.S.
- Reply to this comment
- skyk.....thank you, you are so right. When did having paid maternity/paternity leave start meaning that the government was telling you how to raise your children? Everyone has to know by now that unles someting benefits the CEO's annual bonus, companies are not going to voluntarily implement it. People are so afraid of losing their jobs to other countries or aliens (whether legal or illegal) that they are afraid to stand up for themselves. The government and big business has worked very hard to bust unions and lower the working family's benefits and wages, while raising their own bottom line. Please before you answer by posting about the evils of Unions in this country.....stop and think; Who do you have to thank for paid holidays, overtime, safer working conditions, paid vacations, fair wages and insurance benefits and many other benefits? You got it....the Unions! And yes, I do know that there are some corrupt union leaders but, there are many, many more corrupt CEO's and their puppets in Washington. The American worker needs to start demanding the same rights that are given to the select few who run everything. You can be sure that if the CEO of some big company wants to take a few weeks off after the birth of a child, he gets paid for it!
Sorry if I rambled.....it just makes me so upset to see the American Worker being pushed back into a corner! - Reply to this comment
- Even if you get decent maternity leave, there's always going to be some ****** co-worker who is going to try to jockey for your job while you are out.
- Reply to this comment
- Having children is a personal choice. Forcing other people to pay maternity or paternity leave, pay for public schooling, pay for food and housing for children is unjust and immoral. We should not be forcing other people to pay for our children.
Keep in mind that anything the government pays for they regulate. The more the government intervenes in child-raising, the more they will regulate and control your children. The government is more than happy to help you today so they can enslave you tomorrow.
Posted by random_radar at 11:19 AM : Feb 01, 2007
+ report this comment
Where do you people come up with this ***. A STUDY has just indicated WE are DEAD LAST AGAIN and here's a Con saying that's okay. IF Company's and Industry WON'T do it, WE THE PEOPLE have a RESPONSIBILITY to do it. I'm tired of being DEAD LAST in everything from the standard of Living thru Family. You Fascist have been in charge for some time now an we have done NOTHING but fall behind... in EVERY aspect when it comes to the Guy out here who loves his family MORE than he loves a buck... you know the guy who has carried this nation on their collective backs for over 200 years, I've had ENOUGH!! We've seen our JOBS shipped overseas and our pensions raided and for what? All those Great High Paying Jobs you fascist Promised if we'd trash our unions and allow you to exploit poor third world people... those jobs DO NOT EXIST!! So YEAH We the PEOPLE must NOW step in... To bad for you!! - Reply to this comment
- Having children is a personal choice. Forcing other people to pay maternity or paternity leave, pay for public schooling, pay for food and housing for children is unjust and immoral. We should not be forcing other people to pay for our children.
Keep in mind that anything the government pays for they regulate. The more the government intervenes in child-raising, the more they will regulate and control your children. The government is more than happy to help you today so they can enslave you tomorrow. - Reply to this comment
The road ahead in Afghanistan, and the crucial decision Obama faces.
