Biden admin denied females pregnancy leave

#5
#5
Clicky headline without very many details. Also why you get things in writing
 
#11
#11
Kristy* said:
The article says they're still employed.
Click to expand...
All of them? They're not recommending cobra for current employees

From the article this one was based on
Ambrosini is among a number of ex-Trump political officials who lost their parental leave when Joe Biden was sworn into office. It’s a byproduct of the field they’re in: Their boss (the president) may have been the one let go, but his departure has meant that they, too, lose their jobs and benefits. Still, they argue that the Biden administration should have honored their leave by keeping them on payroll until the end of it — a request that, emails reviewed by POLITICO show, the Biden transition did not grant.

The Biden White House declined to speak about the issue on record. Instead, an official noted anonymously that political appointees “do not enjoy the promise of federal employment past the end of the administration in which they choose to serve.” The official blamed the fact that the Trump administration dragged its heels on a quick and orderly transition as a reason why some on his team were caught off guard by the benefits ending.
Click to expand...
 
#13
#13
Volgolfer1618 said:
Normally, they can receive benefts up to a month after they quit or let go. So yes, kamala regime could have covered them.
Click to expand...
would like to see the source on that. Maybe to the end of the month but not extra. That's also one month not the 3 being requested

The real question is whether you believe federal employees who have quit or been let go should still receive federal benefits. Should tax dollars to to cover those who don't actually work there?
 
#14
#14
utvolpj said:
would like to see the source on that. Maybe to the end of the month but not extra. That's also one month not the 3 being requested

The real question is whether you believe federal employees who have quit or been let go should still receive federal benefits. Should tax dollars to to cover those who don't actually work there?
Click to expand...
Absolutely not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#17
#17
Trump aides made a late request to Team Biden to extend their parental leave. They said no.

"But she was informed a day before her baby was due on Dec. 17 that her leave would be ending Jan. 20, when the inauguration was taking place."

"Late at night on Jan. 5, the father got an email from the HR office saying that they had been wrong and that their benefit would end on Jan. 20."

“I could have left earlier but I didn’t because I was told ‘hey you’ve got paternity leave coming up,’ and if I had known that you’re not going to get to use your paternity leave and you’re actually gonna just work your ass off when you have a new baby and then get fired, I probably would have made a different decision,” he said."

Seems like this problem started back in December and different departments were telling employees different things at different times.
 
#18
#18
So the new administration wants to continue to protect a freeloader who was 4 months behind on rent before CoVid ever hit our shores, and continues to collect the same "assistance" through the entire pandemic, but will kick Trump appointees to the curb with no benefits. Instead of asking for $1.9 trillion maybe he could have gotten a little bipartisan support asking for $1.900,001.000,000 and provided a continuation of benefits for these families.
 
#19
#19
clarksvol00 said:
Trump aides made a late request to Team Biden to extend their parental leave. They said no.

"But she was informed a day before her baby was due on Dec. 17 that her leave would be ending Jan. 20, when the inauguration was taking place."

"Late at night on Jan. 5, the father got an email from the HR office saying that they had been wrong and that their benefit would end on Jan. 20."

“I could have left earlier but I didn’t because I was told ‘hey you’ve got paternity leave coming up,’ and if I had known that you’re not going to get to use your paternity leave and you’re actually gonna just work your ass off when you have a new baby and then get fired, I probably would have made a different decision,” he said."

Seems like this problem started back in December and different departments were telling employees different things at different times.
Click to expand...
Maybe a proper transition could have alleviated some of the issues
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, Septic and OHvol40
#20
#20
Wireless1 said:
So the new administration wants to continue to protect a freeloader who was 4 months behind on rent before CoVid ever hit our shores, and continues to collect the same "assistance" through the entire pandemic, but will kick Trump appointees to the curb with no benefits. Instead of asking for $1.9 trillion maybe he could have gotten a little bipartisan support asking for $1.900,001.000,000 and provided a continuation of benefits for these families.
Click to expand...
Just these employees or should all former federal employees be covered? How about someone with cancer, heart issues, blown out knee, glaucoma, etc? Where do you draw the line on free stuff?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Wireless1
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top