Biden admin denied females pregnancy leave

#76
#76
Volgolfer1618 said:
Lol, so now you're concerned about spending?
Why not, the gov is on the hook for killing babies and mutilated kids for sex change surgeries.
Click to expand...

Deflection.

You're getting schooled because you fell for a clickbait headline and were too lazy to apply any critical thought.
 
#78
#78
utvolpj said:
1. Kamala did nothing
2. They were no longer employed when their boss got voted out

Maybe it could have been negotiated if there was a proper transition
Click to expand...

Surely if it's important enough for out of work political hacks to retain security clearances ... because they might be needed, and a preterm transition is necessary, then a post-term transition should also be required.
 
#79
#79
hUTch2002 said:
It’s amazing you can detect such things one way but not the other. That’s what is comical.
Click to expand...

Who says I don't detect it both ways?

I like watching the right get lathered up when I point out hypocrisy, just like you do with the left. You have no high ground here.
 
#81
#81
utvolpj said:
Should people no longer employed by the federal govt still receive paid maternity leave?
Click to expand...

There's probably precedence somewhere, but I'd say "nope". If someone had been injured on the job, then it would make sense that the person be fully carried until recovered. Pregnancy (presumably by the husband and not a member of the transition team) just doesn't fall in that category regardless of when initiated. There was never any assurance of a continued job and any income derived from the job to support the pregnancy decision. Indefinite tenure is a risk inherent in political jobs.
 
#82
#82
Kristy* said:
My husband got a week paternity, and it was very helpful. We were in the hospital for a couple of days, plus my c-section recovery made it difficult to get up on my own for a few days after being home. But you're right. If his company didn't give him the time, he would have planned to use his vacation time.

In any situation, 12 weeks seems completely unjustifiable for paternity leave. I think FMLA allows up to 12 weeks for maternity or paternity leave, but companies are under no obligation to pay that time.
Click to expand...
Yep, so take a week, maybe even two in a situation like yours. 4, 8, 12...now you’re just milking it. When men start giving birth, breast feeding, and so on I’ll understand. Of course, look at Luther, we aren’t far away.

Just kidding Luther.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy* and AM64
#83
#83
volfanhill said:
It's called an attractive benefit that costs zero cash. Very common.
Click to expand...
It’s called equity but the fact is men and women aren’t the same. There are biological differences and no matter what the .gov says gender isn’t a state of mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#84
#84
Septic said:
Who says I don't detect it both ways?

I like watching the right get lathered up when I point out hypocrisy, just like you do with the left. You have no high ground here.
Click to expand...
High ground is the only ground I stand on!
 
#85
#85
VolStrom said:
If the workers were on medical leave when they were "laid off" I'm pretty sure the the .gov is required to pay them until their leave is exhausted. At least when I was working that's what we had to do as a private company, you couldn't lay someone off that was put on medical leave/disability.
Click to expand...

I can't see that; pregnancy had nothing to do with the job. A person disabled on the job absolutely should be covered. If their maternity leave hadn't started prior to termination, it wouldn't be an issue ... there would have been no leave. It would be wrong to sever one person's employment to limit maternity leave, but if the entire team and job function goes away then the leave should go away too. Cobra should still apply, and who pays for continuing coverage should have been a negotiated issue at hiring.
 
#86
#86
Wireless1 said:
I think the question is, can the government fire you while you are on maternity leave? Perhaps there is an attorney on here who knows the answer to that question.
Click to expand...

That would be a problem, but transition teams by their very nature have a termination. There's no reason to continue maternity leave when everyone else has been terminated. Pregnancy wasn't a requirement of the job and presumably not a disability resulting from the job. Continuing access to insurance is a different matter, but I thought the great obama had that covered anyway.
 
#87
#87
Y9 Vol said:
BLAH...BLAH...BLAH...
Click to expand...
so you have no argument and agree Trump messed up.

its ok, you can take a baby step now that he is gone and admit everything wasn't perfect and its possible he didn't have the best exit strategy ever.

i really dont get the level of absurdity supporters of either side go to. its ok if "your" guy messed up. own it, and move the eff on. don't be a baby about it.
 
#90
#90
utvols88 said:
Proves to be inconsequential with notices being sent in December. This wasn't a surprise to Biden and his staff.
Click to expand...

You're thinking at some point in December the Trump administration, while refusing to cooperate on virtually anything else, somehow informed Biden that a couple of political appointees who would be transitioning out wouldn't be getting parental leave?
 
#91
#91
clarksvol00 said:
You're thinking at some point in December the Trump administration, while refusing to cooperate on virtually anything else, somehow informed Biden that a couple of political appointees who would be transitioning out wouldn't be getting parental leave?
Click to expand...
Um... You even used the December date as a point in a response of yours.. Biden is an extension of his staff. He's the head. Do I think he personally made the call? No. But it falls on his leadership. His admin made a statement on it, did they not?
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...
 
#92
#92
utvols88 said:
Um... You even used the December date as a point in a response of yours.. Biden is an extension of his staff. He's the head. Do I think he personally made the call? No. But it falls on his leadership. His admin made a statement on it, did they not?
Click to expand...

Um... Why would Biden have any knowledge of that? If you'll read the article, one person complaining about it was informed in December and another in January. I believe there is no mention of anybody contacting Biden's team until a week before inauguration.

Edit: we may be interpreting this differently, but my understanding is the December notification was not a decision Biden or his staff made. They only made a statement that when they were contacted about it, it was too late, which lines up with them being notified by the January 13 correspondence from the guy at DHS.
 
#93
#93
clarksvol00 said:
Um... Why would Biden have any knowledge of that? If you'll read the article, one person complaining about it was informed in December and another in January. I believe there is no mention of anybody contacting Biden's team until a week before inauguration.

Edit: we may be interpreting this differently, but my understanding is the December notification was not a decision Biden or his staff made. They only made a statement that when they were contacted about it, it was too late, which lines up with them being notified by the January 13 correspondence from the guy at DHS.
Click to expand...
"Do I think he personally made the call? No"
 
#94
#94
utvols88 said:
"Do I think he personally made the call? No"
Click to expand...
I don't see any indication Biden or his team knew about this in December if that's what you're still saying. It appears somebody in HR realized they screwed up and these people got notified. Then they asked Biden staff to stick around. The earliest date i see of a request to Biden staff for extended benefits is January 13. The earliest response from Biden staff I see is January 18.
 
#95
#95
clarksvol00 said:
I don't see any indication Biden or his team knew about this in December if that's what you're still saying. It appears somebody in HR realized they screwed up and these people got notified. Then they asked Biden staff to stick around. The earliest date i see of a request to Biden staff for extended benefits is January 13. The earliest response from Biden staff I see is January 18.
Click to expand...
I am saying he did not make the call. At least initially.
 
#96
#96
utvolpj said:
Should people no longer employed by the federal govt still receive paid maternity leave?
Click to expand...
That’s tricky.
Can people on short term disability be fired?
I’m not sure benefits can be or should be taken away till their conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy*
#99
#99
Orangeslice13 said:
That’s tricky.
Can people on short term disability be fired?
I’m not sure benefits can be or should be taken away till their conclusion.
Click to expand...
So, if there are rules to follow they should come first. I know my wife was on short term to pay for her time off with my kids. I just don't put this on the new admin and put it on some hr lackey who has no clue and just wanted to punish based on politics

I also realize this is a story about maybe 3 affected families and truly means nothing. Bad hr advice happens in every company in this country
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and RikidyBones
#100
#100
utvolpj said:
So, if there are rules to follow they should come first. I know my wife was on short term to pay for her time off with my kids. I just don't put this on the new admin and put it on some hr lackey who has no clue and just wanted to punish based on politics

I also realize this is a story about maybe 3 affected families and truly means nothing. Bad hr advice happens in every company in this country
Click to expand...
I agree but the admin has an opportunity to order it fixed. They haven't as of yet. I've seen issues with HR go decently high and was fixed quickly. I'm a supporter of the #DefundHR movement.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top