Okay so get this..
Ricochet
01-14-2004, 09:46 AM
I'm in the Army reserves, and when I have drill or my annual 2-week deal where I have to take off work to serve my country, I get paid nothing. However, when a female gets knocked up and has a baby, they get 60% pay for 8 weeks. What the fuck? Some of my buddies get paid double time for days they have to serve because they have supportive employers.. Is there some way I can argue this with my CEO, or is paid paternity leave part of some law all businesses have to follow, where military leave isn't? It really pisses me off, especially because one of our higher-ups is a retired Colonel in the Army.
TheNotoriousMogg
01-14-2004, 09:50 AM
personally IMO "serving my country" is not one weekend a month 2 weeks a year, thats just me :uhoh:
and back to the question at hand, yea their is a law for maternity leave, I do not recall where it is listed but I have seen it before.
and no, it's up to your employer wether to pay you or not on your 2 week "drill" thing.
and back to the question at hand, yea their is a law for maternity leave, I do not recall where it is listed but I have seen it before.
and no, it's up to your employer wether to pay you or not on your 2 week "drill" thing.
Ricochet
01-14-2004, 09:55 AM
personally IMO "serving my country" is not one weekend a month 2 weeks a year, thats just me :uhoh:
I agree, but it's more than most people do... but oh well that's not really the topic I'm trying to discuss. I missed three weeks of work last year, and had to take a huge loss in pay from civilian job to military. I could have used vacation days and get paid, but I want those to actually be used for days off.
I agree, but it's more than most people do... but oh well that's not really the topic I'm trying to discuss. I missed three weeks of work last year, and had to take a huge loss in pay from civilian job to military. I could have used vacation days and get paid, but I want those to actually be used for days off.
TheNotoriousMogg
01-14-2004, 10:02 AM
I agree, but it's more than most people do... but oh well that's not really the topic I'm trying to discuss. I missed three weeks of work last year, and had to take a huge loss in pay from civilian job to military. I could have used vacation days and get paid, but I want those to actually be used for days off.
Okay I will give you that first part, I apologize.
But back at the topic at hand, yea it's fucked but it's your boss's choice wether to give you time off, it's fucked and their should be a law but their is not.
Okay I will give you that first part, I apologize.
But back at the topic at hand, yea it's fucked but it's your boss's choice wether to give you time off, it's fucked and their should be a law but their is not.
NOBU-SAN
01-14-2004, 10:06 AM
I have no idea! But hey, Ricochet, thansk for your service to our Country. Two weeks is a lot more than what mos of us are doing, myself included. Holler
NOBU
NOBU
chicago_guy
01-14-2004, 05:27 PM
Whether you're a reserve or a full blown 24/7 soldier, you're cool with me. I honestly think your boss should pay you for that time you take off to serve our country. You should just try to talk it out with him.
matada
01-14-2004, 06:23 PM
http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/sears.asp
There is a link at the bottom too. Show this to you boss and ask him why he can't follow a good example.
There is a link at the bottom too. Show this to you boss and ask him why he can't follow a good example.
YogsVR4
01-14-2004, 06:53 PM
To bad your boss is not more supportive and the rules are patently unfair.
replicant_008
01-14-2004, 08:40 PM
I applaud your commitment to military service but would make these observations about your post.
New Zealand has legislation that protects certain rights of employees who are military volunteers eg
- Grants leave of absence to serve
- Counts time serving towards calculation of holidays, long service awards
- Prevents dismissal of employees for volunteering to serve
However, it does not require employers to pay folk while on service in the same way NZ does not require employers to pay folk who serve on juries either. Certainly there are many employers who do pay for folk on jury service. The NZ Government pays armed forces personnel on active deployment so the employers need not but doesn't cover non-active service.
From the employer's point of view - they still have to possibly pay someone to cover while you are away. The legislation was put in place the way it was to not but too onerous an obligation for small employers (eg with only a few staff) who simply could not afford to cover the costs.
In terms of paid parental leave - in NZ it covers both parents and for mothers provides for an absence of leave for up to year subsequent whereupon they can resume their jobs (which have to be held open). I actually think it's a good move and encourages professional folk to come back to work. Not all folk are attempting to get 'knocked up' and the costs of raising a child is pretty onerous I think an average kid costs the same as a house in a good suburb in Auckland.
New Zealand has legislation that protects certain rights of employees who are military volunteers eg
- Grants leave of absence to serve
- Counts time serving towards calculation of holidays, long service awards
- Prevents dismissal of employees for volunteering to serve
However, it does not require employers to pay folk while on service in the same way NZ does not require employers to pay folk who serve on juries either. Certainly there are many employers who do pay for folk on jury service. The NZ Government pays armed forces personnel on active deployment so the employers need not but doesn't cover non-active service.
From the employer's point of view - they still have to possibly pay someone to cover while you are away. The legislation was put in place the way it was to not but too onerous an obligation for small employers (eg with only a few staff) who simply could not afford to cover the costs.
In terms of paid parental leave - in NZ it covers both parents and for mothers provides for an absence of leave for up to year subsequent whereupon they can resume their jobs (which have to be held open). I actually think it's a good move and encourages professional folk to come back to work. Not all folk are attempting to get 'knocked up' and the costs of raising a child is pretty onerous I think an average kid costs the same as a house in a good suburb in Auckland.
damir831
01-14-2004, 10:42 PM
In my oppinion, you should be happy that you're still at home! When I got out of the army a few months ago, my base (Fort Campbell) was full of National Guards and Army Reserves...getting ready to be deployed overseas for a year. Some of them had their pay cut by a whole lot compared to their civilian occupations(doctor's etc.), and others, like the MPs who were in charge of all the gates, had already been there on active duty for 2 or 3 years, and keep in mind they're "national guard." They served actively longer than some "active duty" people did. So as long as you're at home, you should be happy to just be able to work a normal job. But that's just how I feel. I've learned a lot about "time management", and people who have never been in the military in some sort of way will never realize how much freedom it takes away from all those soldiers just so they can have all the freedom they want. And what pisses me off even more is, when you "regain" your civilian status, some butthole from Fortune 500 company treats you like a dumbass, when you're the one who was marching 25 miles up some hills named "heartbreak", "agony" and "misery" with an 80 pound ruck on your back, just so he pursue his "profession". Being in the military shouldn't be a choice anymore, everyone should experience it in some sort of way. But then again, the perfect solution would be - not needing a military. Just my 2 cents.
boingo82
01-14-2004, 10:50 PM
..
From the employer's point of view - they still have to possibly pay someone to cover while you are away. The legislation was put in place the way it was to not but too onerous an obligation for small employers (eg with only a few staff) who simply could not afford to cover the costs.
In terms of paid parental leave - in NZ it covers both parents and for mothers provides for an absence of leave for up to year subsequent whereupon they can resume their jobs (which have to be held open). I actually think it's a good move and encourages professional folk to come back to work. Not all folk are attempting to get 'knocked up' and the costs of raising a child is pretty onerous I think an average kid costs the same as a house in a good suburb in Auckland.
I would add, for what it's worth, that women in the US only get unpaid maternity leave if they work for a company with 50 or more employees within 75 miles. If the company has fewer employees, they're under no legal obligation to give you UNPAID maternity leave.
Some companies are nicer.. .but they're not required to be.
Maternity leave is in part because after childbirth women are somewhat incapacitated, however temporarily...but they're recovering from trauma, sometimes major surgery. And the evidence is that the more time the mother has bonding with the baby, the better the baby turns out, which is better for society as a whole.
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/nation/98/02/16/maternityleave.2-0.html
And, Ricochet, thank you for serving our country. :)
Emily
EDD 4.18.04
From the employer's point of view - they still have to possibly pay someone to cover while you are away. The legislation was put in place the way it was to not but too onerous an obligation for small employers (eg with only a few staff) who simply could not afford to cover the costs.
In terms of paid parental leave - in NZ it covers both parents and for mothers provides for an absence of leave for up to year subsequent whereupon they can resume their jobs (which have to be held open). I actually think it's a good move and encourages professional folk to come back to work. Not all folk are attempting to get 'knocked up' and the costs of raising a child is pretty onerous I think an average kid costs the same as a house in a good suburb in Auckland.
I would add, for what it's worth, that women in the US only get unpaid maternity leave if they work for a company with 50 or more employees within 75 miles. If the company has fewer employees, they're under no legal obligation to give you UNPAID maternity leave.
Some companies are nicer.. .but they're not required to be.
Maternity leave is in part because after childbirth women are somewhat incapacitated, however temporarily...but they're recovering from trauma, sometimes major surgery. And the evidence is that the more time the mother has bonding with the baby, the better the baby turns out, which is better for society as a whole.
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/nation/98/02/16/maternityleave.2-0.html
And, Ricochet, thank you for serving our country. :)
Emily
EDD 4.18.04
jon@af
01-14-2004, 10:52 PM
Two weeks is a lot more than what mos of us are doing, myself included. Holler
NOBU
W3rd d00d. Some people scoff at the military, at least there is effort.
Ima have to agree with whats been said so far, it's a bit messed up that stuff like that happens, unfortunately you yourself cant really do too much to change it. Whisper
NOBU
W3rd d00d. Some people scoff at the military, at least there is effort.
Ima have to agree with whats been said so far, it's a bit messed up that stuff like that happens, unfortunately you yourself cant really do too much to change it. Whisper
Steel
01-14-2004, 11:47 PM
Being in the military shouldn't be a choice anymore, everyone should experience it in some sort of way.
I completely agree. I think people would have a lot more respect for our boys (and grrrls) If they had just a TASTE of what our soliders have to go through, just for basic!
I completely agree. I think people would have a lot more respect for our boys (and grrrls) If they had just a TASTE of what our soliders have to go through, just for basic!
Ricochet
01-15-2004, 10:15 AM
Thanks for all the replies. I am happy for being able to stay here so far (knock on fake-wood desk), but from what I've read I guess it's not required unless the employer is "nice" or something. Maternity leave is under short-term disability, that's why they get paid. Oh well, I can either bitch about it or get a new job I guess, but it could be worse... I could be digging holes in a desert somewhere.
About the "everyone [capable of joining] should get a taste of the military" comment, I absolutely agree 100%. It builds motivation, ethics, strength, morale, and self esteem.. everything needed to mold someone into a better human being. That's another reason I believe military and ex-military should receive better benefits from employers, and even higher pay. My captain sent out an awareness card or something to all of his soldier's employers, including mine, and I still haven't received a thank you or anything from any of the higher ups. Maybe this job just sucks.
About the "everyone [capable of joining] should get a taste of the military" comment, I absolutely agree 100%. It builds motivation, ethics, strength, morale, and self esteem.. everything needed to mold someone into a better human being. That's another reason I believe military and ex-military should receive better benefits from employers, and even higher pay. My captain sent out an awareness card or something to all of his soldier's employers, including mine, and I still haven't received a thank you or anything from any of the higher ups. Maybe this job just sucks.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026
