American moms will be getting generous gifts on Mother's Day: the National Retail Federation estimates that in 2011 the average American will spend $141 on Mother's Day gifts, with total spending of about $16.3 billion.
Moms are valuable, right? Your average consumer thinks so, but when it comes to laws and policies, it seems that lawmakers don't agree.
A prime example is the lack of paid family leave -- including maternity leave -- under U.S. law. In all but two states (California and New Jersey), there is no guarantee under law of paid leave from work after childbirth or adoption. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act guarantees only unpaid leave, and almost half of U.S. workers aren't even eligible for that.
Families the world over value their moms, and in most places government policies reflect this. At least 178 countries have national laws requiring paid leave for new moms (and many also do for new dads), according to a 2010 study by experts at McGill and Northeastern Universities. In nine countries the researchers had insufficient information on paid leave policies, but in just three they found there is definitely no law on paid leave for new moms: the United States, Papua New Guinea, and Swaziland.
Other countries guarantee this paid leave not out of altruism, but because it pays off. Paid leave programs have positive results for businesses, economies, and public health. A study of 19 developed countries found that paid parental leave had a greater positive effect on productivity than unpaid leave, and predicted that instituting 15 weeks of paid maternity leave in countries without it (like the U.S.) would increase multi-factor productivity by 1.1 percent. For businesses, paid leave helps retain employees and avoid turnover costs. One study found that 94 percent of leave-takers who received full pay returned to the same employer, compared with 76 percent of those with no pay.
Paid leave is also good for public health, and for containing health care costs. Paid and sufficiently long leaves for new moms are associated with lower infant mortality, lower risk of postpartum depression, higher rates of immunization for babies, and higher breastfeeding rates. A 2010 study found that the U.S. could prevent nearly 900 infant deaths and save $13 billion a year if 90 percent of mothers breastfed exclusively for six months. That is less likely to happen if a mother returns to work within weeks of childbirth -- often the case for moms with no paid leave.
You might ask why laws are needed when employers can voluntarily offer paid leave. The reality is that leaving this to employer whim results in paid family leave being available to few workers, and in gross disparities by income-level. According to Department of Labor data, about 11 percent of workers -- mostly high paid professionals -- have paid family leave benefits, hardly a huge percentage. But only 3 percent of the lowest-income workers have these benefits. Others might have paid sick days, but about a third of workers have no such benefits.
You might also worry about burdens on employers of paid leave. But the programs in California and New Jersey show that paid leave imposes few burdens, and in fact offers significant benefits, for employers. These two states offer partial pay for up to six weeks of family leave, funded exclusively by employee payroll deductions -- not a penny from employers. In New Jersey, for example, workers pay a maximum of $18 per year into the paid leave fund. A 2011 study on the California program, also funded exclusively by worker contributions, found that employers overwhelmingly report positive or neutral effects of the program on productivity, profitability, turnover, and employee morale. Small businesses in California were less likely than large ones to report any negative effect.
Perhaps policy-makers have failed to adopt paid family leave laws because they fear voters will oppose them. But a 2010 survey of registered voters found that 76 percent of respondents supported laws on paid leave for family care and childbirth. Voters seem to understand that supporting working families with paid leave is good for families and good for business.
If the average American will spend $141 on Mother's Day gifts, is it really so hard to imagine joining the ranks of almost all other countries by guaranteeing paid family leave under law? Moms will love flowers and chocolate on Mother's Day, but they may be even happier to get a little support through paid leave when new babies arrive.
Janet Walsh is deputy women's rights director at Human Rights Watch and author "Failing its Families: Lack of Paid Leave and Work-Family Supports in the US."
Richard Kirsch: It's the Prices, Stupid: Consumers Don't Drive High Health Care Costs
Paid Family Leave - California
Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act
Parental leave - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Paid Parental Leave Act Passes House, but Faces Veto Threat ...
THAT is the real world.
AND that is why most women do not want more than a couple of kids if that.
Women are opening their eyes and realizing that motherhood is not always what it is cracked up to be.
This comment is honest and lays it BARE.
From Jerod Hopkins:
" There are a lot of things I WANT businesses to do for me, but that doesn't mean I could ever support the government forcing businesses to do these things. That is a complete attack on the liberty and property rights of business owners. Their rights are just as valid and important as anyone else's. If businesses want to voluntarilÂy pay people to take family leave, that's entirely their business."
The "family" construct is not important. Liberty belongs to property owners and businesses.
It's an economic system that, largely, can only sustain HEALTHY individuals.
Not any theory. Or saying it should be this way. But stating what IS.
A mother doesn't have a "right" to maternity leave. There is a consequence to every action and you must think ahead and accept that responsibility. You have no right to take anyone else's money (through the government) just because you want it.
The reason so many other countries give their workers paid maternity leave for far longer than the author suggests here, is because they know it's good for their economy. If moms can feel like they are being supported in their efforts to raise the next generation of Americans, then they will be far more likely to stay on the job and contribute to the country's GDP. We have too many educated women opting out of the work force because the economics of having a child, unless she's making over six figures, doesn't currently work in her favor. Sure, it's her choice to have a baby. But progress for women depends on her ability to not have to choose between work and family.
BTW, I think there should be paid leave for fathers, too, if they choose to do so.
Secondly, if paid leave is indeed good for the business, then no coercion should be needed to make them do it. Either way, it has to be their choice and no one else's. Just because someone thinks that's the best way of doing something doesn't give you the right to force them to do it.
As for roads and prisons, postal roads and a court system are two of the very few powers of government granted by the Constitution.
Also, you should look at my post below saying that we could completely eliminate the income tax if we went back to spending levels of 1997. Is it really so hard to imagine shrinking government down to 1997 levels? What I think is hard for you to imagine or admit, is how large and intrusive government has become in such a short amount of time.
In America we have chosen to be a society that hates families and undermines, even destroys, them in the name of capitalist profit. It seems normal to us but it's very sick. We are the least family friendly modern country in the world. As long as we have coldblooded apologists for this kind of system, "family values" will continue to be a joke in the US.
I completely support families and think they are the most important and central unit of society. However, telling business owners how to run their businesses is an immoral way of trying to support families. It's means that I have a problem with, not the ends.
Take a look at Europe, what you call the "family friendly" countries. The average age of getting married is far higher, the number of kids is lower, and divorce rates (depending on the source you look at for the stats) are right on par with the US. There is simply no way you can argue those places are more family friendly than the US. That's not to defend the US either, because our welfare system here undermines families here like nobody's business. Neither the US nor Europe is particularly family friendly...we just took slightly different paths to get to the same crappy situation.
It has been shown over and over that NOT treating your employees like indentured servants gets you higher productivity....US companies need to wake up and stop living like it is the 1800's.
Earning profit is not the sole reason for existing...it is just necessary to help support things that are really important, like family and friends and living life.
People need to be at their jobs and working hard, or the company goes under or goes offshore. The competition from around the world is fierce and relentless.
Benefits are nice to have, but just having a job that hasn't been taken from you because some poor souls in China will do the same job for much less and for no benefits is nice too.
Government has to pass legislation to protect us against corporate America. Maternity benefits, pension plans, disability plans should be mandatory. But they won't while Congress continues to approve the sending of jobs overseas driving down our standard of living. In effect we have an evil, corrupt Congress that has sold us out for corporate bribes.
When will we stop seeing this issue through the men vs. women lens? Last I checked, these children are the product of both parents who should have an equally vested interest in employers doing right by their employees. What's good for mom is good for dad, too!
I advocate for longer times off, hopefully with some pay for women, and at least SOME time off for the men. We need to start caring for the family again.
It's always good when moms and dads can spend time with their kids. But, one has to remember that there is always a price. When mom is not at the job, then customers don't get served as they did before. And, when customers don't get served, they go elsewhere. Greater benefits for workers nearly always results in higher prices for the consumer.
Maybe more leave is not the answer but there has to be something better than what we have.
Government interference in private companies' wages and benefits almost always changes things - for the worse.
Also, if they are not paid, they have no money to spend making the economy shrink.
One tip, though: get disability insurance, it is a few dollars a week and they pay a benefit (about 60-80% of your weekly wages) for the first 6 weeks after birth. It's not ideal, but it's better than a kick to the head.
Why must somebody else always be responsible for your choice?
2. According to the GOP, if you get pregnant, you MUST give birth.
See, you can't have it both ways: you can't force women to give birth and shirk your responsibility in helping them bring up the children.
But to answer your question more directly, it's because to not do so is to be penny-wise and pound-foolish.
The US should be treating its workforce as people...not slaves.