update: 12 week of maternity leave in OH

shannanicole

Just thought I would post this:

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2007/12/06/LEGCOUP.ART_ART_12-06-07_B1_158MJMM.html?sid=101

MrsJSP

Okay, hopefully someone can explain this to me.   Doesn't FMLA say that you can take up to 12 weeks off?   I didn't have that many sick days, but I'm still taking 12 weeks (mostly unpaid).   I thought we were already allowed 12 weeks!   Can someone explain?

Mrs*Pink

FMLA doesn't cover everyone, but I think this would have. 

MrsJSP

Ahhh, okay.  That makes sense!  Thanks!

the_magic_number

I am not sure how I feel about this.  I didn't have the option of taking unpaid leave because we needed the money but more power to the women who can afford that.  On the other side, my father runs a small-business and I can't imagine what would happen to him if he was forced to let his employees take 12 weeks off.  Personally, I believe that they should be working more on mandatory paternity leave.

aleeandbry

I'm with the pp, my DH needs Paternity Leave.  Or we could be working on double the leave for twin mothers!

Seriously though, I think when it's a small business it should be worked out between the employee and employer depending on the circumstance.  I feel bad for women who have to go back after 6 weeks though b/c they don't have STD or can't afford to go unpaid.  The baby is so little at 6 weeks!

Jody81

Yeah, FMLA is currently available to women who work for companies with 50 or more employees. This was trying to get it available to women who work at small companies that have less than 50 employees. And I understand why the small companies don't want it, they don't have many employees so they rely on you much more and have less money to replace you while you are gone.

cork2win

I just want to say how proud of you all I am! It's so great to see some reasonable responses to this issue.  A lot of people have no understanding of what the impact of a law like this would be on a small company. 

Having a child is a choice, yours, not your employers.

ASwank

I agree with the PP about how excited I was to see such reasoned responses.  I am definitely torn on this issue.  I do think that some women (and some babies) are not ready at 6 weeks.  However, my parents own a small business and it would be really hard on them.  They would have to hire a replacement person for the 12 weeks the mother would be off and then lay off either the new person or the mother when the mother came back.  Not only would getting laid off suck for the person but it would increase their unemployment charge rates.  I think one possible result of this legislation is that small business would be hesitant to hire young women and/or working moms because they would be caught in a catch-22. 

tbonegrl

I see this issue from both sides. It's so hard on small business, but also on mothers b/c 6 weeks is simply not enough. Such a hard issue!