Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by aianus 3975 days ago
I don't see why it's your employer's job to subsidize the birth of your children with paid maternity/paternity leave.

Why not just pay everyone more and those who want children can use the extra to save up to take a year off work?
5 comments
eevilspock 3975 days ago
For the same reason it makes sense for everyone to collectively to pay for public schools, including those who do not have kids.

In places where population growth is not a concern, such as in the U.S. where birth and deaths are at equilibrium, those who have and raise children and do it at least reasonably well are producing positive externalities[1]. And the better the children are raised and educated, the more the positive[2]. Policies like Netflix's thus benefit society as a whole.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality#Positive

[2] The flip side is that when children are raised poorly, be it the fault of the parent or the society that sets the parent up for failure, it turns negative.

link
aianus 3975 days ago
A country like the US would be better served by immigration than having its own children. You could choose only the best of the best in the world to grow your population instead of throwing the genetic dice.

But that's beside the point; we don't have Netflix pay for public schools, the state does that. Similarly Netflix paying for maternity/paternity leave seems silly to me.

link
alexashka 3975 days ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

Basically this. Why not just be open about it - those who don't end up working for the 'top' companies are at a considerable disadvantage.

This gives the power to these big corporations to bully their way around in all sorts of ways. The ridiculous Google hiring process is just one example of this.

link
shostack 3975 days ago
Because in a down economy where jobs are hard to come by and corporations take advantage of employees any which way they can, this results in people being forced to choose between having a kid or keeping their job.

Some see that as a form of slavery or extreme control, and they want the government to step in to prevent that.

Further, if companies didn't have to pay for that, that disproportionately means that lower-income workers may not be able to have kids while higher earners can because they can afford day care, only having one working parent, etc. That goes down a whole discrimination rabbit hole.

That said, while I am on the side of enforced maternity/paternity minimums, I respect that it is a complicated issue. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if this impacts the hiring of young women by startups. It wouldn't be entirely illogical to assume that a young woman has a higher likelihood of taking extended time off due to maternity leave. For an early-stage startup, that can be their death if a key employee leaves for several months.

link
phil248 3975 days ago
In most countries (that you'd want to raise a family in), it is the job of the government to ensure employers make allowances for child rearing - an activity some consider indispensable.
link
aianus 3975 days ago
Why doesn't the government pay for the maternity/paternity leave? It doesn't make any sense that it's Netflix's responsibility.
link
ambicapter 3975 days ago
Because they recognize that finding a job while having to take care of a 1 year old is a bit stressful, I think.
link
aianus 3975 days ago
They could offer a year's unpaid sabbatical to their employees, parents or not.
link