Maternity Leave policies/Short Term Disability

  • Thread starter Thread starter TAS2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TAS2000

Guest
I just need to rant. Another fine example of insurance screwing people over. I am about 6 weeks from delivery, and another lady I work with just came back from her maternity leave. Our discussion led me to re-examine our “maternity leave” policy. On a side note, I have a real problem with the fact that virtually every company lumps maternity as “short term disability”. As if having a baby was a disability!!! However, aside from that, the stated policy is thus:

“Benefit waiting period: seven days for disability caused by sickness or pregnancy.

Maximum benefit period for pregnancy: (for normal, uncomplicated pregnancy) The disability period begins on the cease work date recommended by the claimant’s physician (not earlier than two weeks before expected date of delivery) ceases six weeks after a vaginal or c-section delivery.”

After discussing this with my co-worker and then the HR department I have confirmed that this policy above really means that they will pay you for the eligible time MINUS the seven day period. And they count only working days for the seven day period, but of course, not when they talk about what they are paying us. So in essence, if I start leave on the day I deliver, I will receive 28 days’ pay.

I have worked for several different companies, and thus far each delivery has been under a different company’s system, and I can say this is a first for me. I like to think of myself as a basically ethical person, and I try to do what is best for the company in many cases. For both my previous deliveries, I worked until the day before I delivered, then took six weeks. In this case, if I do the same, I will be “loosing out” on pay. It just seems wrong. If everywhere they say you get 6 weeks of leave, then you kind of expect 6 weeks pay, not 4 weeks pay.

Now technically, I KNOW the company doesn’t HAVE to do anything at all, and I could just sit home without pay, as many people probably do, but it would be really nice if there was some sort of standard policy so that everyone would know what to expect for such a basic life event.

I understand in the UK it is common to have about 6 months of maternity leave. Sigh. Rant along with me if you’d like.
 
When I was pregnant with my first I was a teacher and all I was paid for were my unpaid sick days accumulated that far (which amounted to about a week’s pay). After the six week period of leave was over, I was paid my regular salary for two months because it was during the summer, and then I made the decision to quit and be a stay home mom. I am actually kind of glad that it worked out that way for me, because going without pay for a few months gave us the courage to rely on one income so I could stay home.
 
Wow. I am assuming that you live in the States… I knew that the US didn’t give as much maternity leave, but here in Canada we can take up to a year off, and get 55% of our wage paid through EI (Employment Insurance - government program all workers pay into). I don’t have any children yet, but I cannot imagine going back to work after 6 weeks!! I am sorry for your situation… is that an unusually short mat leave? I also didn’t realize that it was considered STD! :eek:
 
When I was in the Air Force we only got 4 weeks maternity leave when I had my first one. I worked up till the day I delivered with that one. By the time I had my second one we got 6 weeks. So I guess 6 weeks is pretty standard now. I had all my kids in the Air Force so I don’ t really know. I do know that my new boss (started there 24th of June) is paying me for my honeymoon and I haven’t been there 3 months yet, let alone long enough to get medical or vacation time. I think I got lucky with this one . When I was negotiating salary I let him know I would be taking that time off though, to have a honeymoon. You know what he said? He said, “What are we talking, you aren’t planning a 6 month honeymoon are you?” Then he said no problem and told me he was coming with…I said, “No, you are not!!!” and he just laughed. Anyway, The important thing is that you deliver a healthy and happy baby… don’ t stress about the time off.
 
Six weeks is standard, unless it is a Csection, then some pay 8. The seven day policy is because they think you should use your sick time to pay for that. So, you get sick time then STD. No one seems to want to tell you that up front, but I am positive they make sure it is explained in the benefit book. :banghead:
 
6 weeks for vaginal, 8 weeks for c-section is normal from most of the places I have worked or heard from others. However, HOW they do it can vary greatly. For #1 I got paid for 6 weeks. There was a 1 week (5 working days) waiting period, but then they “retroactively” paid you STD for that week, so at week 2, you got the first 2 weeks, then every week after that for a total of 6 weeks. For #2 I got paid for 6 weeks, straight through. For this one, 1 week waiting period is 7 working days (yet when they say they will pay you for 6 weeks, those are only 5 day weeks). And they really only pay you for 6 weeks minus the 7 days, so it will only be 23 days. To me, that is misleading. They shouldn’t say that you get 6 weeks of leave, if they don’t pay you for six weeks. But you can’t fight 'em. They don’t actually have to give you anything, so you are stuck with whatever you get. And of course, in all cases STD is only a percentage of you pay, usually around 60%. I have never seen it more than 2/3 pay.

The benifts book says exactly nothing but you get 6 weeks for preganancy. When I got pregnent they sent a packet of stuff to me saying exactly what I quoted above. It would be very easy to assume that 7 day waiting period was one calendar week, not 7 working days. And it doesn’t spell out that you won’t get paid for that week later, like I did with child #1. I asked about it, and was told oh yeah, you need to take a week off, so you probably want to use a week of vacation for that. It would still be easy to assume that I could take 1 week vacation and then 6 weeks off, and would get 6 weeks STD. But no such luck.
 
Our waiting period is 30 days, not 7, so I got paid for the equivalent of 5.3 days.
 
The company I work for not only grants maternity leave to women but also to the fathers of the children.

As single person whose work load exponentially increases, I think it is a bit unfair.
 
40.png
maryjk:
Six weeks is standard, unless it is a Csection, then some pay 8. The seven day policy is because they think you should use your sick time to pay for that. So, you get sick time then STD. No one seems to want to tell you that up front, but I am positive they make sure it is explained in the benefit book. :banghead:
Click to expand...
This is how it works at my place. You DO get paid, but the first 5 work days come out of our regular paid time off.
 
As single person whose work load exponentially increases, I think it is a bit unfair.
Click to expand...
BzyCath, I am sorry you feel this way. I used to work at a company where we had a daycare benefit (rare these days). The company paid a percentage of the daycare cost if you used the center that was right in the industrial park with us. I had quite a big fight with an older woman in our company who was loudly lamenting in the lunchroom how unfair the policy was since it only benefitted people with young children. Since her children were all grown, she was loosing out, etc. I told her that was like complaining that she wasn’t getting as much out of the health insurance benefit as the guy whose wife had cancer, since the company was paying for medical bills SHE didn’t qualify for.
 
40.png
TAS2000:
BzyCath, I am sorry you feel this way. I used to work at a company where we had a daycare benefit (rare these days). The company paid a percentage of the daycare cost if you used the center that was right in the industrial park with us. I had quite a big fight with an older woman in our company who was loudly lamenting in the lunchroom how unfair the policy was since it only benefitted people with young children. Since her children were all grown, she was loosing out, etc. I told her that was like complaining that she wasn’t getting as much out of the health insurance benefit as the guy whose wife had cancer, since the company was paying for medical bills SHE didn’t qualify for.
Click to expand...
My issue has nothing to do with this issue you bring up.

In the case you mention I would have no issue as everyone’s salary varies and it is up to the company to decide what each person should make, if a person doesn’t agree then they are free to look for a job else where.

On the maternity leave issue, I am torn on how I feel about it. I do understand it but companies seem to abuse those of us who are single, expecting us to be the ones to work after hours and on weekends, as we do not have familes. I have also seen that it seems to be the single ones who are downsized first.

So its not just the maternity leave.
 
I wouldn’t complain about what your getting for benefits because I for one didn’t get any pay for the 9 weeks I was out on maternity leave. I am the breadwinner in my family. The company I work for is so small they didn’t have to even guarantee my job. So just take what you can get because it could be worse.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
My issue has nothing to do with this issue you bring up.

In the case you mention I would have no issue as everyone’s salary varies and it is up to the company to decide what each person should make, if a person doesn’t agree then they are free to look for a job else where.

On the maternity leave issue, I am torn on how I feel about it. I do understand it but companies seem to abuse those of us who are single, expecting us to be the ones to work after hours and on weekends, as we do not have familes. I have also seen that it seems to be the single ones who are downsized first.

So its not just the maternity leave.
Click to expand...
Amen! As a teacher, I can tell you thats on the money! The work load on single teachers increases when their married colleagues get pregnant (meetings, weekends, as you said). Plus, it’s a huge impact on students to have a sub for a month or six weeks. Lots of lost learning.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
The company I work for not only grants maternity leave to women but also to the fathers of the children.

As single person whose work load exponentially increases, I think it is a bit unfair.

AND

My issue has nothing to do with this issue you bring up.

In the case you mention I would have no issue as everyone’s salary varies and it is up to the company to decide what each person should make, if a person doesn’t agree then they are free to look for a job else where.

On the maternity leave issue, I am torn on how I feel about it. I do understand it but companies seem to abuse those of us who are single, expecting us to be the ones to work after hours and on weekends, as we do not have familes. I have also seen that it seems to be the single ones who are downsized first.

So its not just the maternity leave.
Click to expand...
Actually, any company that offers maternity leave is required by federal law to also offer paternity leave - otherwise it’s sex discrimination.
My dh has a very different take on this issue. It’s all the single moms where he works that assume he doesn’t have family obligations outside of work that irritate the dickens out of him. It is assumed that since he has a wife, he can work all the O/T, go on all the business trips, and doesn’t need to spend time with his newborn babe.
And as far as the first being laid off - he has worked places that we know for a fact take into consideration the cost of paying the company portion of benefits for a family of 9, but don’t blink an eye at the homosexual employee requesting coverage for I.V. fertility treatments. Last year, we were seriously worried that they were only going to offer coverage for employee, employee and spouse/partner, couple and 2 or less dc, or couple and 2 - 4 dc! That would have left 3 of our dc without any health coverage!
My dh almost never takes a vacation day and has not taken a sick day in over 5 years - he’s gone to work doubled-over puking. If it wasn’t for me having a baby every 18 - 24 months he’d NEVER get to use his vacation time at all, because maternity leave is only paid at 60% and then you are in the hole on your paychecks for 3 months afterwards to pay back the health benefits your check didn’t cover while you were on leave.
ARGH!!!
 
ByzCath, I think my comparison is totally fair. ANYONE who is not currently using the leave would have their workload increase when a co-worker is out. It isn’t just unfair to single people. And anyone who isn’t chronically ill is getting less out of their health benefits than someone who is. That could be considered unfair to the healthy. As always, some will use the benefit, some won’t.

And there is so much discrimination against families that it is actually illegal to ask an interviewee if they are married or have children, because of the ways companies can see families as a negative.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
The company I work for not only grants maternity leave to women but also to the fathers of the children.

As single person whose work load exponentially increases, I think it is a bit unfair.
Click to expand...
While I sympathize with your frustration, work over-load reflects poor staffing and thus, poor management–not a flawed maternity or other health benefits policy–the two are really unrelated. (Except of course in the minds of those people “left behind” who are unreasonably expected to pick up the workload of those who are out on S-T-D.) Pregnancy leave, in particular, is an event for which employers, just like expectant parents, have PLENTY of time to plan. Failure to do so should reflect on management, not the expectant parent doing everything he/she can do to adhere to policies management established.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
My issue has nothing to do with this issue you bring up.

In the case you mention I would have no issue as everyone’s salary varies and it is up to the company to decide what each person should make, if a person doesn’t agree then they are free to look for a job else where.

On the maternity leave issue, I am torn on how I feel about it. I do understand it but companies seem to abuse those of us who are single, expecting us to be the ones to work after hours and on weekends, as we do not have familes. I have also seen that it seems to be the single ones who are downsized first.

So its not just the maternity leave.
Click to expand...
There is a flip side to this argument. Statistically, married people with children are safer bets to employers. They are unable to change jobs easily, and tend to be more reliable employees. They need the money, so they work. In my field and DH’s field, it takes 3 years of training before you become profitable. The first 3 years, the companies take a loss for you. Single people are more likely to change jobs, so they are more of a risk. Trained, they are more likely to leave. Any benefits given to the more stable employees, like more medical insurance or the 12 weeks of UNPAID leave mandidated by the FMLA are seen by our companies as being less than the average loss that they take by hiring and training flighty singles. Giving birth and raising small children are relatively short time periods in one’s life compared to the time that you work in your career.

Also, before I had kids I put in my time as a single. Nights, weekends, holidays. That time allowed me to become a great, efficient engineer and a valuable asset to my company.
 
I have a different perspective on this question. My wife and I run our own business. My wife has NEVER received any maternity leave. She has scurried to finish payroll checks while in labor which we dropped off at the shop at 1am with her on her knees in the car on the way to the hospital.

She has returned from the hospital only to sit in her office with baby in her lap and toddlers at her feet to accomplish the work that no one else can do when you run a small business.

Running your own business has advantages and disadvantages.
Sometimes it offers more flexibility and sometimes less. Over all, it has worked for us. We have never had to find outside childcare as we have shared work and childcare duties. (Which makes Dad more understanding about what goes into running the home.)

As a small business owner, I could never afford to pay empoyees for 6 months of no work and another employee to cover their duties.

You are responsible for providing for your children. If you chose to do this with 2 salaries, at least do not complain too much about ONLY receiving 4 weeks of pay. Be grateful for what you get, including a little time off without outside work. My wife just never had that luxury. (By the way, she is currently pregnant with #6.)

As for 6 months paid in other countries, I’m sure your tax rate is high due to this universal benefit. This benefit sounds as though it would discourage stay at home moms since I assume they get no benefit because they don’t “work”.
 
Be grateful for what you get, including a little time off without outside work. My wife just never had that luxury.
Click to expand...
This is key. We all have our own situations and there are advantages and disadvantages to them all. You should be grateful that your wife has a job where she CAN have her children with her, and proably breast feed whenever she needs to, etc. That would NEVER be possible in my job. I can’t take off whenever I need to, or have flexible hours, or do work from home as many self employed people can.
If you chose to do this … at least do not complain too much about …
Click to expand...
Again, this applies to all. If you choose to have a small business, don’t complain that your wife never got any leave. For a big business, maternity leave isn’t a “luxury”, it is a benefit that is usually stated when you first take the position. My complaint was that if the stated policy says in writing you get 6 weeks of leave, you have every right to expect 6 weeks of leave, not 4 because they are using tricky language. I dont think it is unrealistic to be disappointed in this policy.
 
I work for a large refrigerated foods manufacturing company and we actually have a nice maternity leave compared to other companies in my area. We get 6 weeks full pay which starts at the time of birth. If we are off work before the birth of our child and it is doctor ordered we also get paid and it doesn’t count towards the 6 weeks after. I have three children and took 12 week with each (6 paid and 6 unpaid under the FMLA). My complaint isn’t the benefits but I actually got grief for taking 12 weeks off. I was the first management person to take more than 6 which is pathetic to me (only if financially you could take more and choose not too). The HR mng actually said (and he is a man) “I didn’t get 12 week off when my wife had a baby.” at which point I walked out of his office. I have been there 11 years now and that HR mngr is gone and the attitude is getting better. I actually job-share now with another mother (who also took 12 weeks with each child) It is a big step for a company like ours to offer this kind of flexibility…hopefully others will follow or already are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top