[a1pulley]

I mentioned my newborn in all of my job interviews because I didn't want any surprises on either side of the table. I interviewed at six places and got five offers - two at FANGs, three at unicorns. I don't think there's a culture of discrimination against young fathers at large companies, and I don't think it's necessarily bad if there is at early-stage, high-growth start ups.

[sidlls]

Why is it not necessarily bad at "early-stage, high-growth start ups?" Some things we regulate are appropriate to carve out exceptions for based on the size of a company, but why is this one?

[cosmodisk]

Any company worth working for would accept it as a fact of life- most people end up having kids at some point. If the opposite is the case,well, it's better to stay away from them.

[scarface74]

Unpopular opinion: why is that necessarily the case? I’m 45 for context.

If the company needs someone that can work 60+ hours a week, with less than market pay, but a promise of equity (or if I were starting something risky with friends) , if I were younger, wanted to build my resume and didn’t have grown folks bills, that would be an opportunity I would jump on. On the other hand, if I really didn’t need the money and wanted to work on something interesting, I might do it. Does that necessarily mean the “company isn’t worth working for” or it’s not the the right company for me?

If I cared about paid paternity leave and the company couldn’t offer it, that also doesn’t mean it’s a bad company - just not the company for me.

On personal note, I’m at a point in my career where I’m being heavily recruited for consultant type jobs that require a lot of travel. I have a son graduating this year. I had to turn those types of jobs down even though they pay more than I make now. Is the job necessarily bad because they require travel?

[cosmodisk]

It may not be popular,but it's an opinion nonetheless. I don't disagree with working extra hours on stuff per se, especially if one is passionate about it. However,this is often abused.What is one man's passion,is other man's nightmare. These things are also very hard to balance from the management point of view. Also,60 hours a week of pure work is a lot and unless it's your own business,I would neither want anyone to do this in my own team nor myself. I'm a fan of "work smarter" not "work harder,aka longer hours". Even if you are out of school, there are many ways to shine and develop portfolio without grinding long hours. The company that is not worth working for isn't the one that allows people,who have a lot of time and motivation to do extra hours, to work longer,but one that finds it's not normal to become pregnant or go on paternity leave. Aa for paid paternity:I imagine you are commenting from the US perspective,while I do it from the European,so this needs to be taken into consideration,as on tbis side of the pond is not an option not to get it, it's more about what company can offer on top of statutory pay. As for consulting, I'm in a very similar situation,only my daughter is much younger, that's why I'm having a job that pays substantially less compared to what I'd get in consulting. And no, the requirement to travel doesn't make the job bad,even though business travel is a tiring experience,but,as you said,it could be a perfect fit to a lot of people.

[scarface74]

I’m thinking more of working harder as in one person wearing too many hats because a company can’t/ doesn’t want to hire more people. I’ve worked up and down the stack over the years from the front end all the way down to infrastructure (AWS/Dev ops) and have had to be my own project manager doing Statements of work during the last days of a dying company. No matter how smart I work, if I am stuck doing a job of more than one person, I’m going to work more hours.

I’ve also worked extra hours voluntarily to work on new to me technology to build my resume.