[endisneigh]

Isn’t the whole point of severance compensation for terminating your employment and other prior agreements, given that you are not at fault?

It doesn’t really make sense for one to demand both severance and their leave.

From my understanding the Google severance effectively pays you more than maternity leave anyways unless you were at Google for less than 3 years. I wonder how many are in that situation.

One example in the article involved a person who had been at Google for 10 years. They would receive 36 weeks severance. More than the 24 weeks they would receive as maternity leave.

It seems that person is arguing they should receive 60 weeks severance.

[michaelmrose]

Most of the folks laid off aren't on any sort of maternity leave. Of the tiny fraction on maternity leave few logically will have just gone on leave the day they get laid of. Statistically if you pick a random time in a 24 week period the average remaining duration is 12 weeks. Its also meaningless to add the severance that google already agreed to pay and maternity together to decide if the total is reasonable, even more so when you are picking the edge case on an edge case of a long term worker laid off right after going on leave. It's not even clear more than one person in the whole cadre actually meets those criteria.

We are talking about presumably a fraction of 1% of laid off workers receiving an average of 12 additional weeks of pay which for google is a rounding error. Most wont be receiving this benefit and of those that will the majority will have closer to 30 than 60 weeks of pay total.