Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
One further thought on this: Is this different than paying a woman to take 3 months off because she has a baby to take care of (ie., maternity leave)? Neither benefit -- a premium to someone who has a family to support, nor parental leave -- is inherently sex-based, but in practice both do favor one sex over the other.
|
Well, the first one is a health related matter normally paid for through short-term disability -- much like how you can get three months off with pay when you break both your legs skiing. It is also a benefit that is generally also offered to men -- my husband took a few weeks of paid paternity leave right after our son was born so that I could be free during that time to work (which I did while getting disability pay -- those fuckers).
The second one places value on status, or perceived status, rather than ability and value to the company. This is actually inherently bad for the company no matter which way it runs. While I have heard the old "he has a family to support" excuse before I have never heard it used for the benefit of a woman with a family to support. And single mothers are often at the bottom of the totem-pole in the workplace when they are probably the ones most in need of that extra "family to support" money.
edited to note that bilmore beat me to the single mom thing. I would also like to add that if salary should be based on need then I am in need of one kick ass raise to support my various vices.
