Several major U.S. companies including Netflix, Chipotle and Microsoft recently began offering their employees paid sick and maternity leave. The U.S. is currently the only industrialized country that doesn’t require companies to provide sick leave to their employees. 35% of American workers do not receive any type of paid sick leave.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@9VBH6FG1yr1Y
Yes because if they are sick at home but still doing what they're supposed to do they still should be paid full time for they're services.
@9M9GJB5 1yr1Y
i believe businesses should be able to set their own benefits, but people often abuse such systems to begin with.
@Crab1992 2yrs2Y
Only if that person was with the company for at least double the time needed. A person shouldn't get maternity leave if they been somewhere less than a year.
@9GS95JF 2yrs2Y
Yes, the date of a loved one's death cannot be moved because one has to go to work and the injuries that they are in the hospital for might have been gotten while doing something for the companies.
@9D4Z6MN2yrs2Y
Yes, but there should be an investment for employees and a cap on the time and pay.
@99ZQNTD3yrs3Y
Yes, but only for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family. The employee must have proof of it with a doctor's note and documents. Workers need to STOP taking advantage of these programs and stop abusing the system. The federal government should NOT sponsor these programs because that would negatively affect the economy and make our country a socialist country and we should NOT let that happen.
@8TTL2MVRepublican3yrs3Y
Yes, generally three weeks in your first year in the job, rising with each additional year to around four months max for companies with 50+ employees
@99PBSDQ3yrs3Y
Yes, but only for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family. The employee must have proof of it with a doctor's note and documents. Workers need to STOP taking advantage of these programs. The government should NOT sponsor these programs because that would negatively affect the economy and make our country a socialist country and we should NOT let that happen.
@95Z33GL3yrs3Y
Yes for a birth of a child, but it depends for the sick family and what they are sick for.
@95Y9NJC3yrs3Y
I agree with for the birth of a child but not for sudden sickness in the family
@944RRT9Republican3yrs3Y
Yes, but ONLY for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family. The employee must have proof of it with a doctor's note and documents. Workers need to STOP taking advantage of these programs. The Government should NOT sponsor these programs because that would turn America into a communist country and we should NOT LET THAT HAPPEN.
@mathomas156Libertarian3yrs3Y
No. Employers should decide the number of incentives they offer to employees instead of a government mandate.
@8Z63X624yrs4Y
No. I don’t have a family so this question isn’t relevant.
@8Z63X624yrs4Y
I don’t have a family so this question isn’t relevant.
@8ZSCMSF4yrs4Y
Yes, but only for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family. The employee must have proof of it with a doctor's note. But workers need to STOP taking advantage of these programs and STOP abusing the system.
@8Z2TW9Y4yrs4Y
yes from the government not the place they work at.
@8Y2SD2D4yrs4Y
Yes, but only for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family and the employee MUST have proof with a doctor's note. Part-time works should get paid leave too due to those reasons too.
@8XMC3624yrs4Y
Yes, but ONLY for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family. The employee must have proof of it with a doctor's note.
@8VWW8BG4yrs4Y
Yes but only after being made aware of the situation and only because of pregnancy and the emplyee having and extreme illness like cancer.
@8QSG5PJ5yrs5Y
Yes, maternaty leave is essential, whereas sick leave should be for a limited time only.
@8PV9CHYConstitution5yrs5Y
No it is up to the individual business or company as to what benefits they offer.
@8MRJDL55yrs5Y
No, this should be a state benefit not a private benefit.
@8MNCJ4V5yrs5Y
I think they should provide levy but not forced to.
@8MMG7835yrs5Y
yes but it should be at 2/3 instead of fullpay.
@8M8QFDQConstitution5yrs5Y
Yes, but with more governance
@8LSTXQ95yrs5Y
No, but the practice should be incentivized
@8LM4BVWRepublican5yrs5Y
As a single parent home there should be an option to save per their company policy.
As a dual income family, it is the choice of the employee to balance family and work. Childcare should be their choice before entering a dual income environment for their family. This is on them to cover the value of what is most important.
@blahblah43215yrs5Y
Yes, but only for sick leave. I don't feel pregnancy is necessarily a personal choice, but I do believe it shows why a woman would be a less desirable employee. Discrimination in workplace hirings is a myth, there are legitimate reasons to hire a man over a woman.
Unless you see it’s being abused, such as having children back to back and barely working
@8HDLXQ35yrs5Y
No, it should be left to each state to decide.
@8H4K92X5yrs5Y
Yes but there should be guidelines so that it is not abused. Chronic sickness might require a doctor's note, catastropic should be covered as well a maternity leave.
@8DY845HLibertarian5yrs5Y
If the company can afford it.
@8DK2YFB5yrs5Y
Yes, but only if the business can afford it and depending on the parents domestic situation.
@8D5CYC25yrs5Y
Yes, but dependent on the state of the family for the child. Such as a family with both parents working. Also depending on if the sickness is life threatening or requires assistance from another person.
@7RDNG5C5yrs5Y
Yes but it on the company not the government
@8CMV4Z7Republican5yrs5Y
Yes, the lack of paid sick leave is unfair to working men and women but they must have a doctor's note.
@9BCH68Q2yrs2Y
Not paid for full time but half.
@8TTL2MVRepublican2yrs2Y
Yes, require employers to continue to pay employees who are unable to work due to illness for up to 3 weeks in the first year of employment and for longer periods at full pay proportionate to longer periods of employment
@8TTL2MVRepublican3yrs3Y
Yes, generally three weeks in your first year in the job, rising with each additional year to around four months max.
@99BQMML3yrs3Y
Yes, include part time employees as well
@8ZVQQRM4yrs4Y
Yes, but only for maternity leave, medical leave, illness, sick family member, or death in the family. The employee must have proof of it with a doctor's note. Workers need to STOP taking advantage of these programs and STOP abusing the system.
@jwolfsg1590Republican4yrs4Y
Yes, but only for maternity leave, and only for a few months.
@8PJW3T75yrs5Y
Yes, but these mandates should be made at the state level.
@8FTF5TT5yrs5Y
Yes, for both maternity and sick leave.
@8FF36B25yrs5Y
Yes, but part-time workers should get paid leave too due to birth of a child, illness, and sick family member.
Yes, both maternity and paternity leave should be included for birth of child.
@8QYZ4SB5yrs5Y
No, private businesses, working closely with any existing labour union, should decide the amount of competitive incentives they offer to employees instead of a government mandate
@8CN7P7LRepublican5yrs5Y
No, it will encourage workers not to work and it will hurt the economy
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
