Due to some recent policy changes at my job, it's becoming increasingly apparent that if I chose to have another child, I will more than likely have to take at least some leave without pay. These changes are still very new, I'm not ready to spill any details (and I'm not sure if I'll ever be willing to spill those details here). In true form, I have spent many late night sessions reading articles(here, here, and here), trying to sort out my thoughts on the issue.
I'm curious. Did you get paid maternity leave? Was it separate from your other paid leave, or were you required to take your PTO for your maternity leave?
In the Forbes article, it states,
"My experience is that when faced with the choice between family and work, people will often choose family even if it means financial hardship.
When someone quits without paid leave, especially a low wage worker,
they are often forced to apply for public assistance which is paid by
taxpayers. Wouldn’t it be better to contribute to universal paid leave
that lasts six weeks, versus enrollment in public assistance that could
go on much longer if the individual can’t find a new job?
Losing an employee is very expensive. Experts estimate it can cost
anywhere from 50% of the wages of a low skilled employee to 200% of the
salary of a professional staff person. Wouldn’t it be better to lose
someone temporarily for six weeks, knowing they will come back, versus
having a valuable employee quit because of caregiving pressures and
replacing them? There is no guarantee the next person you hire—male or
female—won’t experience caregiving challenges either."
If you're a stay at home parent, was family leave an issue that contributed to your decision to stay home?
I understand that this is a pretty delicate subject to discuss online. If you're more comfortable commenting by e-mail, feel free to send me an e-mail (my e-mail address is located under the Contact Me tab.)