Posts Tagged ‘ maternity leave ’

Ohio Working Mothers Need Not Apply

September 9, 2010
By

Just because it’s legal doesn’t make it right.

The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that businesses can fire women for taking time off to give birth or for pregnancy-related leave if they haven’t worked the minimum amount of time required to earn leave. In McFee v. Nursing Care Mgmt. of Am., Inc., the court ruled 5-1 that “an employment policy that imposes a uniform minimum-length-of-service requirement for leave eligibility with no exception for maternity leave is not direct evidence of sex discrimination.” Maybe not, but that doesn’t mean it’s not terrible policy.

 Tiffany McFee, had been working at the Pataskala Oaks Care Center, a subacute and rehabilitation facility with the motto “Caring is What We Do Best” (oh, the irony!), for eight months when a doctor ordered her to stop working for a pregnancy-related condition. Soon after she gave birth. She was fired three days later because she took leave before she was eligible. Company policy requires an employee work a year prior to taking leave for any purpose.

The ruling was based on a law that allows “an employer to terminate an employee for any nondiscriminatory reason” and another that states pregnant employees must be treated “the same for all employment-related purposes.”  The court wrote in its ruling, “we do not agree with the premise that McFee was terminated on the basis of pregnancy. Instead, she was let go for taking unauthorized leave from her employment.” This is the same court, remember, that doesn’t consider breastfeeding a pregnancy-related issue.

The case never should have gone to court. Pataskala Oaks Care Center and its parent company, Nursing Care Mgmt. of America, Inc., should have a maternity policy in place for employees with short tenure. It is ridiculous to expect that hopeful or expectant mothers can fully control when they get pregnant. Miscarriages, infertility and a whole host of other factors can interfere with a woman’s plan (Not to mention the move in this country to restrict a woman’s access to the full spectrum of reproductive health options.)

The United States ranks poorly for maternity leave policies, infant mortality rates and maternal death rates. More than two women die every day in the United States from pregnancy related causes and the incidences of “near-miss” complications, where a woman comes close to dying from pregnancy or childbirth, have increased since 2005. What would Nursing Care Mgmt. of America have preferred, that Ms. McFee give birth at work during her lunch hour? Did they really want that responsibility? (My coworkers didn;t even want me to leave breastmilk in the company refigerator never mind leave an afterbirth mess on the office floor.) More likely, they would prefer to hire childless women and not assume the burden of a workforce with uteruses. Maybe they’d even pay a childfree workforce fair or better wages.

The courts may feel restricted by the laws when deciding case like this, so our lawmakers need to wake up too. According to Moms Rising, having a baby is a leading cause of poverty in the U.S. Women represent 51 percent of the population and the majority of our national workforce right now. Women are breadwinners in two-thirds of all U.S. households. Can our national economy really afford to continue to discriminate against such a large segment of the workforce? It’s time corporate America and our legislators recognized these facts and created work/family policies that truly work.

Is there a Reverse Wage Gap?

September 3, 2010
By

 

An article in Time magazine yesterday, “Workplace Salaries: At Last, Women on Top,” suggests some interesting news on the gender wage gap. Data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey and analyzed by James Chung of Reach Advisors, shows a reverse gender wage gap in the largest U.S. cities by up to 17 percent. But only single, childless women under the age of 30 are out-earning men.

Chung attributes this gap in women’s favor to education. Women college graduates are outpacing men three to two.   He also points out women are better compensated in cities where the primary industry is knowledge-based, where there is a minority majority and where manufacturing has decreased.  

Across the board, women earn, on average, .20 cents less than their male counterparts. It would be wonderful to think women are closing the gap, but unfortunately the Time article points to several disturbing trends. The loss of manufacturing jobs and the low wages for men in minority majority communities isn’t good news for anyone. The fight for fair pay calls for equal wages for equal work. Nobody wins if one gender is underpaid.

And then there is the issue of who is out-earning men: single, childless women. Despite some saying this data proves discrimination is not a factor in the wage gap, choice is, that argument is flawed. How many women do you know who chose to have a family without the involvement of a partner? I know one. And I know hundreds of women who made that choice with a husband or male partner, and a few who made it with a wife.

People choose to have families; but women often care for those families. And yes some women choose to opt out of work and care for the children just because they can. But many women leave the work force or reduce their hours because their husbands earn more than they do and they can’t find affordable childcare. Is that a choice? Technically, but not all choices are created equal.  

It will be interesting to watch two things moving forward. What will happen to the women Time highlights if they do marry and/or have children? And what will happen to men as more women take the breadwinner role? Will they choose to take on more care giving roles and how will those choices affect their careers?

Will they sit in job interviews, like I did, and field the question, “”You have children. Are you sure you’re up for this job?” Will they take time off for the birth of their child with the title Key Account Manager, like a female friend of mine did, and return reassigned to the underperforming accounts no one else wanted? Will their manager assume, like I once did, that they aren’t interested in plum assignments because they have kids?

Only an honest conversation about the realities and needs of work and family will get us to true pay equity. So let’s start talking.

Six Ways to Honor Women’s Equality Day

August 26, 2010
By

Today is Women’s Equality Day marking the ninetieth anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment, which gave women the right to vote. It’s not an easy day to honor. Do we celebrate the tremendous work of the suffragettes who fought long and hard for women? Or do we note the irony of an equality day when women still earn, on average, only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns; bang their heads against a glass ceiling; still do the majority of housework and haven’t reached critical mass in Washington?

I say we mark the day by taking action. If we exercise our power as women, we both honor the women who came before us and help advance those who will come after us. Here are six suggestions for celebrating Women’s Equality Day.

1. Vote. The suffragettes fought a long, hard battle in order for women to have the right to vote.  If you aren’t already registered, register to vote today, read up on the issues and cast a ballot in the midterm elections. Women are 51 percent of the population and we do make a difference on election day.

2. Run. Better yet, why not run for office? Ladies, it’s great to help candidates and cast a vote. But we are so much more powerful than just phone bankers and sign holders. We need a critical mass of women in elected positions both locally and nationally if we want equal representation. Visit She Should Run, Emerge and The White House Project to learn about campaigning.

3. Speak. At a minimum, let your elected officials know what you expect of them. Call your Senators and tell them we need them to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Healthy Families Act. Tell the White House it’s time to ratify CEDAW, The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Equal Rights Amendment. We’ve waited long enough.

4. Teach. Tell your children about suffragettes like Helen Gardener, Ida Husted Harper and Marjorie Shuler who aren’t in the text books, but should be. These women changed the course of history.

5. Thank the women who are fighting for equality today. Make sure they know their work is appreciated. My sincere thanks to so many women including Gloria Feldt and Jodi Jacobson who stand up for our reproductive rights; Zoe Nicholson who never stops fighting for equality; Marie Wilson, Jehmu Green and Katie Orenstein who teach other women how to use their power; CV Harquail and The Mama Bee who inspire me by how hard they work; Lea Webb and Jill Miller Zimon, who are modeling a new ideal for public servants; @rosiered23 and Cynthia Samuels for giving women a place to read, write and learn.

6. Notice the women who are quietly making a difference in your life (the coworker who negotiated maternity leave, the sole woman on the city council, the boss who stuck her neck out for you) and honor their work by following their lead.

Enjoy the day and feel free to leave a comment with the names of other women we should thank.

Does the Chamber of Commerce Have a Woman Problem?

August 24, 2010
By

When Brad Peck, blogger for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, revealed his true feelings about the wage gap, he also exposed the organization’s woman problem. Peck, in writing about the gender wage gap last week, implied the gap is the result of individual choice, not discrimination. Others have made the same uninformed claim and if Peck had stopped there he may not have attracted such an outcry. But he went on to quote Donald J. Boudreaux from Café Hayek who wrote, “obsession with income equality also reflects a Scrooge-like fetish for money.”

Peck would be wise to understand his organization’s base. The U.S. Chamber says it represents “the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions,” and that “more than 96% of U.S. Chamber members are small businesses with 100 employees or fewer.” The organization professes dedication to one mission: “strengthening the competitiveness of the U.S. economy to increase opportunity and prosperity for all Americans.” A large percent of that base is women. Earlier this year women surpassed men on the national payroll. And as far as small businesses are concerned, the SBA reports more than 40 percent of all businesses are women-owned, a number that’s been rapidly increasing each year. If the goal is truly to strengthen our economy, than the chamber ought to get on board with the issues working women face – issues like paid sick days, maternity leave, work life policies, affordable childcare, institutional sexism and, of course, fair pay. Women demanding equal pay for equal work isn’t about a money fetish. It’s about doing what’s good for women, good for families, good for business and good for the economy.

When Chamber COO David Chavern, responded to Peck’s missive with his own post the following day, “A Wrong and Wrong-Headed Look at the Wage Gap,” the words felt cheap. Actions speak volumes and the Chamber’s actions, when it comes to working women, are overwhelmingly unimpressive.

A search for “maternity” on the Chamber’s website turned up not a single document addressing maternity leave. There was nothing on affordable childcare either. A search for paid sick leave, a critical issue for not just women but most employees, turned up the Chamber’s Labor Policy Priorities for 2010 which includes:

- Oppose efforts to expand the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) by covering smaller businesses and making leave paid, and
- Oppose efforts to mandate paid sick leave.

There is information on the website about the Paycheck Fairness Act – a letter in opposition. The Chamber claims that although it, “strongly supports equal employment opportunity” this bill would “expand remedies under the Equal Pay Act (EPA) to include unlimited punitive and compensatory damages, significantly erode employer defenses for legitimate pay disparities, and impose invalid tools for enforcement by the Labor Department.”

And then there is the Chamber’s leadership. There are no women on its Board of Directors, just one woman among the seven regional vice chairmen, just one women out of 5 on the senior council, and more than three quarters of the senior management team are men. Is it any wonder the Chamber doesn’t understand more than half of its constituents?

Do Men Cheat on Breadwinners?

August 17, 2010
By

Here’s a scary story to send women back to the kitchen: the more economically dependent a man is on his female partner, the more likely he is to cheat on her. A new study from the American Sociological Association is generating lots of coverage. My favorite headlines for this story so far are:

 from Science2.0.com: “Kept Men More Likely To Cheat Than Bigger Breadwinners”

from the Toronto Sun: “She Pays the Bills, He Cheats”

and from the Winnipeg Free Press: “When She Pays, He Plays.”

 The study reveals men who are financially dependent on a female partner are five times more likely to cheat than men who contribute an equal amount of income to the partnership. It’s the demise of the American family, the American workforce, life as we know it. If only we women could just stay home, have babies, stop demanding paid maternity leave and stealing our men’s jobs. And, if we crazy feminists still insist on working, can’t we at least just take part time gigs? Because the study also reveals that men in relationships with women who make only three quarters of the men’s income were the least likely to cheat.

 But wait. There’s more. The study, “The Effect of Relative Income Disparity on Infidelity for Men and Women,” looked at 18- to 28-year-old married and cohabitating couples. That’s right: 18 to 28 year olds. Isn’t it possible that getting married in your teens and twenties comes with its own relationship stresses and challenges unrelated to who pays the bills? Christine L. Munsch, a PhD candidate in the department of sociology at Cornell University and author of the study, does some really interesting work on gender and I don’t want to dismiss her work. But I do want to caution the ladies, before you quit your jobs to save your marriage and your man’s ego, dig deeper into the study results and see if age, length of relationship, or any other factors may be in play. And, on your way home from work Friday, why don’t you stop and buy your guy some flowers and let him know just how much you love him? Unless of course, he’s cheating.

Have You Heard Women Make Bad Bosses?

August 12, 2010
By

I didn’t want to do this, but here it is: my personal boss scorecard.

Boss 1. Male Irrational and unethical. Oh, the stories I could tell.

Boss 2. Female She rocked.

Boss 3. Female Demanding, micromanager who was smart as hell and taught me volumes.

Boss 4. Male Great guy. I’d work for him again.

Boss 5. Female Great woman. I’d work for her again.

Boss 6. Female She rocked. (It was Boss 2 again.)

Boss 7. Female Toxic. (Docked my bonus when I got pregnant.)

Boss 8. Female Neutral.

Boss 9. Male Toxic.

What does any of this mean?  Not much. The fact is some people, regardless of gender, make great bosses and some don’t. And yet this week alone I’ve seen two “men make better bosses” stories. The first was surprisingly in The Glass Hammer and lead with this zinger, “You don’t have to look too far into management research to uncover that all the statistics point to one thing: we prefer to work for men.” The so-called research the author cites is a survey of MBA students taken and written about by Ella J. Edmondson Bell, PhD. Bell teaches a leadership course at Tuck where the classes typically average 20 -60 students. The other was an informal Facebook poll done by ForbesWoman. These “statistics” mean nothing.

The second story was in the UK newspaper The Daily Mail and ran with the sensational headline, ” Men are the best bosses: Women at the top are just too moody (and it’s women themselves who say so).”  And while this story was based on a survey of 3000 people conducted by recruiting firm UKJobs.net, it is still flawed and misleading.

Put aside the completely damaging statements in the article like “They are hormonal, incapable of leaving their personal lives at home and only too happy to talk about their staff behind their backs. Female bosses are a nightmare to work for….” and examine how workers arrived at their conclusions.

Supposedly the respondents preferred men for a variety of reasons including that they are, “straight-talking, less likely to get involved in office politics, able to leave their private life at home, have no time of the month, more likely to share common interests.”

Shall we break those down?

Straight-talking, less likely to get involved in office politics

The employees surveyed prefer a certain set of attributes-  attributes they accept as corporate norms. Those attributes have become norms subtly and over time because they have been consistently exhibited by leadership  and that leadership has been predominantly male for years. And, they have been reinforced by performance evaluations which are often inherently biased against women. It makes sense. Performance reviews are usually created by management. And management at most companies has been and still is predominanteyl male. Leaders are likely to evaluate employees on “acceptable behaviors” –  those that mirror their own. So whether or not they realize it, most employees, both men and women, have been conditioned to view stereotypically male behaviors as acceptable corporate behaviors. No wonder employees prefer men’s communications styles in the office. It is what they have observed as normal corporate culture for years – both in the office and in the media.

Able to leave their private life at home

No kidding?! I don’t know what the statistics are in the UK, but here in the US at least one study shows women do 53 percent more housework than men. The study, from Vanderbilt University, defines housework not only as cooking and cleaning but as childcare too. Women traditionally take on more elder-care reponsibilites than men and still are the only sex capable of bearing children, causing them to need time off for doctor’s appointments, labor and delivery. Is it any wonder men can leave their personal lives at home?

Have no time of the month

The fact this issue even surfaces in the survey results leads me to believe the study was written with a strong gender bias. Unfortunately I couldn’t find the original data on UkJobs.net so I couldn’t dissect it.

More likely to share common interests

Take a look at the clip from the 1970s hit sitcom “Maude” below. Many of the issues the fictional Maude faced as a woman manager still ring true today. Again, because corporate norms have been so heavily skewed toward men for years, women often feel the need to adopt the dominant behaviors in their workplace. And when they do, they are often penalized for being a “bitch” or come across as inauthentic.  So it’s not surprising employees feel a connection with their male bosses who are free to be themselves.

But hey, aren’t things changing? Don’t we have more women on the national payroll then men? Aren’t high-profile female CEOs like Carol Bartz (Yahoo!) and Ursula Burns (Xerox) creating a new corporate reality? Yes, things are changing. And a whole host of research proves that corporate America will be  better led by a diverse leadership team than by the status quo. But progress takes time and articles like these, that ask the wrong questions, don’t help.

Instead of talking about whether or not women are capable of management roles, possess the intelligence to hold senior positions, or affected by their “time of the month”, we should be talking about:

What kind of leaders do we need to bring about a recovery?

How can we find, nurture and retain a more diverse leadership and workforce?

 and, How can we better support working parents so that they can fully participate in the economy?

Those are the questions we need to answer. But alas, those questions don’t sell newspapers or attract unique visitors to a website.

For more analysis on this topic:

“Why Does Forbes Think Everyone Prefers Male Bosses?”

“Are Working Women Mean?”

Working Women Need a Mother of Exiles

August 11, 2010
By

Mother of Exiles

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Emma Lazarus’ words from her poem “The New Colossus” grace the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. They should also grace the front door of most US businesses to welcome mothers back to the office after giving birth or adopting. After all, the United States, land of opportunity, ranks at the bottom when compared to most other countries’ maternity leave policies. As a result, having a baby while working leaves most women tired, poor and yearning to breathe free. Lady Liberty’s torch guided immigrants coming to America. Who will guide our working women?

Yes the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 provides unpaid leave up to 12 weeks with guaranteed job protection but it doesn’t protect workers in companies with fewer than 50 employees or who have worked less than 1,250 hours at their current employer. And, it doesn’t require employers to pay workers while on leave. As a result, it is estimated that a mere 8 percent of workers have paid leave benefits in this country.

Workers who are not covered by FMLA are subject to state laws and employers’ private policies. This week in Massachusetts, the Supreme Court ruled employees are allowed eight weeks of unpaid leave to give birth or adopt a child but after eight weeks of leave the law does not protect their job. According to a Boston Globe article, Boston lawyer John J. Barter, said the ruling was “a victory for business interests.” He couldn’t be more wrong.

The reality of working mothers can be brutal. Many women are forced to cobble together sick time and vacation to cover leave. As a result, they return to work knowing they have no time available in the near future for taking a break or spending time with their family. Often they return to work before their bodies have fully recovered from childbirth. A 2008 report from the National Bureau of Economic Research, showed women who return to work too soon are at higher risk for depression and poor health. Most certainly they are sleep deprived which affects their job performance. And financially, they are at risk. According to Moms Rising, an organization dedicated to building a family-friendly America, “having a baby is a leading cause of poverty spells in the U.S. — when income dips below what’s needed for basic living expenses” and “51% of new mothers lack any paid leave — so some take unpaid leave, some quit, some even lose their jobs.”

So while Barter, in referring to how the Massachusetts law is applied, sees a victory for businesses, he is missing the bigger issue. A growing body of evidence shows a correlation between happiness and workplace productivity. Sick, tired, financially-stressed workers are unlikely to be very happy. And that affects a business’ bottom line. So with more women than men on the national payroll and 66 percent of women with children age 17 or younger working, doesn’t it behoove American businesses to move beyond baseline legislation and implement family-friendly policies that work for their employees, and ultimately them? That would be true victory.

It’s World Breastfeeding Week

August 3, 2010
By

 It’s World Breastfeeding Week sponsored by the World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action (WABA), a global network of individuals and organizations concerned with the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding worldwide.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “breastfeeding contributes to a lifetime of good health. Adults who were breastfed as babies often have lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol, as well as lower rates of overweight, obesity and type-2 diabetes. There is evidence that people who were breastfed perform better in intelligence tests.” And, “Breastfeeding also benefits mothers. … It reduces risks of breast and ovarian cancer later in life, helps women return to their pre-pregnancy weight faster, and lowers rates of obesity.” WHO recommends women have at least 16 weeks off from work after giving birth in order to adequately rest and breastfeed their child. However the organization reports many women abandon breastfeeding before the recommended six months because they lack the time and a place to breastfeed or pump at work.

Here in the U.S. women definitely struggle to find the time and space to breastfeed. Most women are lucky if they can take 12 weeks maternity leave. I pumped in an electrical closet full of spiders when I returned to work 12 weeks after my son was born. My supervisor, who suggested I quit when I told her I was pregnant, told me it was up to me to figure out how and where to pump at work.

When I returned to a different job following eight weeks of unpaid leave after my daughter was born, I pumped in a common area bathroom. That boss told me she was withholding my bonus because I got pregnant and only had this to say about my breastfeeding, “You’re not going to put that milk in the fridge, are you?” I didn’t. I brought my own cooler to the office.

Women hear such a mixed message when it comes to having children. Embrace motherhood, raise good and healthy children, earn a living (because we need your income) but manage it all on your own time behind closed doors.  Just last week The Mama Bee was harassed by a conductor on the Long Island Railroad because she was breastfeeding her baby on the train.  Her story is upsetting and sadly still too common. Read it here.

The Mama Bee writes about the fact there are men who are comfortable viewing women’s breasts for pleasure but not for nourishment. I wonder where the support for breastfeeding is from the people who made pregnancy a preexisting condition, don’t want women to have control over when they have children and fail to implement family-friendly policies in the workplace?

Visit the WABA website to learn more about the benefits of breastfeeding and what we can do to support nursing mothers.

You are Not a Pre-Existing Condition

November 4, 2009
By

DeniedDo you know who may be denied health insurance?

* Me. I had a Cesarean section. C-sections are pre-existing conditions.

* A good friend of mine. Her husband hit her. Domestic violence is a pre-existing condition.

*The one in six women who will be sexually assaulted. Rape is a pre-existing condition.

*Another good friend of mine. She underwent IVF. Fertility treatments are a pre-existing condition.

Ladies, we are NOT pre-existing conditions.

The list goes on:

*My cousin. She is having a baby. Many health insurance policies do not cover maternity care.

*My sister. She needs a mammogram. It’s not covered by her insurer.

*My neighbor. Her health insurance company charges her more than they charge men but her employer pays her less. She can’t afford coverage.

*You. If you are a non-smoker. Health insurance companies typically charge female NON-smokers more than male smokers.

Most gender-based discrimination occurs in the private insurance market, where the self-employed and small businesses find insurance. But even among the group health insurance market, gender discrimination exists.  Insurance companies are allowed to determine premiums based on the number of women a firm employs.

This is appalling. Health reform is NOT a political issue. It is a matter of human rights. Click HERE to contact Congress TODAY and tell them a woman is NOT a pre-existing condition. We deserve equal coverage for equal premiums.

(*NOTE: Clickon the title of this post to view a video.)

Read more on this topic here and thank you to the National Women’s Law Centerfor their report “Nowhere to Turn: Insurance Companies Treat Women Like a Pre-Existing Condition”  which you can download here.

Updated: Equal Coverage for Equal Premiums

October 15, 2009
By

DeniedSeven years ago, after 32 hours of labor, my doctor recommended I have a Caesarean section. My cervix didn’t dilate and a c-section seemed to be the safest way to deliver my baby. Today, the very decision I made to keep my child safe could be the same reason I can’t provide insurance for him.

As you know, earlier this week the Senate Finance Committee voted to move forward on a healthcare bill known as the Baucus Bill. Now, it must be merged with a separate proposal from the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee before it can go to the full Senate for a vote. There is still plenty of work to do. Over the coming weeks, our legislators will continue to examine discriminatory insurance practices and a public option.

Ladies, if you haven’t been paying attention to the healthcare discussion in this country, you need to start now. Here’s why:

- C-sections, evenly medically mandated ones, are considered pre-existing conditions by some insurance companies

 - Domestic violence is considered a pre-existing condition by some insurance companies –no not for the batterer, for the victim

- Only 20 states require private insurance companies to cover routine mammograms*

- Women often struggle to find coverage for maternity care. And then they often lose valuable income while on earn maternity leave.

- Women, on average, earn less than men and the wage gap has widened. Our dollars need to stretch further.

- Yet women often pay 30 – 40 percent more for health insurance policies than men do.

I am not a pre-existing condition. I am 51 percent of the population. I am in control of 85 percent of consumer buying power. I am strong—I am able to grow a life inside of me, care for that baby on little to no sleep, recover from abdominal surgery and return to work all in less than three months. I am a breadwinner. I may not make as much as the guy in the office next to me who didn’t give birth, but I’m working on it. I am a registered voter. And I demand equal coverage for equal premiums.

Ladies, click here to tell Congress YOU are not a pre-existing condition. Demand equal care for equal premiums.

Thank you to RH Reality Check for alerting us to the “I am not a pre-existing condition” campaign. Read more here.

*From the National Women’s Law Center Reform Matters fact sheet

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes