Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Businesses The Almighty Buck United States

Microsoft Will Require Business Partners To Offer Paid Parental Leave (washingtonpost.com) 165

Microsoft has unveiled a new paid parental leave policy on Thursday that will affect the more than 1,000 firms it does business with across the U.S. An anonymous reader shares the report from the Washington Post: Technology giants in the United States offer some of the country's most generous employee benefits, but the workers who mow the lawns or serve lunch in the company cafeteria -- jobs that are often staffed by outside firms -- tend to get far smaller packages. Microsoft announced a new policy Thursday that it hopes will shrink that gap, pledging it will ink contracts only with service providers who give their employees 12 weeks of paid family leave. Per the requirement, mothers and fathers who perform work for Microsoft -- biological and adoptive -- must receive 12 weeks of leave at two-thirds of their wages or up to $1,000 weekly. The announcement comes as Washington state, where the company is based, prepares to introduce paid family leave for workers, the fifth state to do so. Microsoft currently offers its direct employees 12 weeks of paid family leave at full pay, and birth mothers receive an additional eight paid weeks for physical recovery.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Will Require Business Partners To Offer Paid Parental Leave

Comments Filter:
  • Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kulahan ( 2709467 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @04:38PM (#57227618)
    Seriously, paid parental leave should be obvious to society. Countless studies have shown benefits across the whole family when BOTH parents get time off to raise the child at birth. If this is the case, one can only assume that the price of these contracts will go up, which means that MS is willing to accept an additional cost in order to do the right thing. Good on them.
    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Not to mention how parental leave screws the workers who don't have children.

          How is not getting a benefit because you don't qualify getting screwed? Sam is no worse off if Joe and Susie get paid parental leave, and he's no better off if they don't. I'd say he's probably better off if they do, because their tired asses won't be making stupid mistakes he has to clean up.

          Sam could be single, or he could be married with he and his wife both sterile.

          Single people have been known to get married and have kids, and sterile couples have been known to adopt. Just because Sam isn't getting the paid leave right now doesn't mean he won't later on.

      • Wow, you sure spend a lot of your time on slashdot bashing the "lefties". Check your comment history. It's all leftie this and leftie that. Oh, and what's this tidbit:

        https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]

        I say let the market sort it out. Not total lassiez faire, but only as much regulation as necessary to prevent criminal activity. To keep and eye on things, as it were. I don't even think there should be a minimum wage. ...
        Furthermore, you assholes have actually decided that two grown adults of sound mind can't come to an agreement to exchange labor for wages if that agreement is below what YOU have decided is reasonable

        Well here you go. The market is sorting it out for you. Microsoft has decided how they want to spend their money, and they choose to spend it supporting companies that pay their employees what they think is fair, not just in wages but in time off. That's certainly Microsoft's right to do. They are grown adults

      • You live in the wrong country.
        The right country would perhaps be Somalia.
        Or go to Antarcitca?

        But you can do mankind a favour: just take a shovel and dig a ditch for yourself ...

    • Countless studies have shown benefits across the whole family when BOTH parents get time off to raise the child at birth.

      Everyone benefits when they get more time off. School age kids benefit when they have a stay at home mom and when their dad is around more. Elderly benefit when they have a relative around. Dogs benefit when they have someone home more. Single people benefit when they get more vacation time. The USA has some of the worse paid time off of any developed country. I'm not sure why we are singling out new parents.

      Everyone also benefits from more money. Maybe we should just give everyone a raise.

      On a more

    • "MS is willing to accept an additional cost"? You mean "MS is willing to pass on the additional cost to its customers, with an appropriate markup of course". Next time the government support contracts are up for negotiation, prices needs to up, but at least they will have a good PR excuse. If you think they will just eat the cost, your are mistaken. Nothing is free, someone has to pay for it in the end, the question is who will pay for this.

      Whenever you hear someone is getting some benefit, think who is pay

  • by brickhouse98 ( 4677765 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @04:39PM (#57227624)
    Amazing that it takes a private company to start going where every other Western country has been at for some time.
    • Well,
      in Gemany you have parental leave for up to 36 month - 12 to 14 payed - not 12 weeks.
      And the couple, assuming both work, have to decide who of them takes how many months.
      Of course the payment is not done by the employer but by the state.

  • Twelve weeks is a good amount of time to properly train a puppy. I'll happily take it.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      What about the childless singletons? Do they, too, get time off for having to sit and listen to their co-workers talk about their kids? /only a little bitter /still waiting on the comp time I deserve since I dont smoke cigarettes lol

    • by lgw ( 121541 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @05:10PM (#57227782) Journal

      I would like the time for my fur babies

      Twelve weeks is a good amount of time to properly train a puppy. I'll happily take it.

      Man, this "fur parents" stuff needs to be killed with fire. Right up there with actual furries, if you ask me!

  • I'm curious about the eight additional weeks for physical recovery. I can certainly picture it taking eight weeks to recover physically, at least in some cases with more complicated births, but that's not what we're talking about here. Maybe the first twelve weeks weren't set aside for physical recovery, but that's what happens anyway during that period. So now we're up to twenty weeks, and that's a long time.

    And anyway, if something did go horribly wrong during pregnancy wouldn't that be covered by long
    • by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @05:33PM (#57227918)

      I'm curious about the eight additional weeks for physical recovery. I can certainly picture it taking eight weeks to recover physically, at least in some cases with more complicated births, but that's not what we're talking about here. Maybe the first twelve weeks weren't set aside for physical recovery, but that's what happens anyway during that period. So now we're up to twenty weeks, and that's a long time.

      And don't forget that next on the docket is paid Menstrual leave. https://www.self.com/story/pai... [self.com] .

      I'm not against time off for mothers. It's nice to have some time at home with the baby, and in some cases after a C-Section it really make sense.

      But for the fathers? That's 3 months for exactly what? Moral support?

      So here we have a person getting 3 months off of every year that she decides to have a child, and then an extra 12 days of leave every year that she doesn't.

      Folks, we really need to look at the reality of the situation. This sort of thing tends to be well meaning, but eventually backfires. So you have a young woman of childbearing age and a young man interviewing for the same job. They are both similarly qualified. By law, you cannot ask her many questions. I had a big list of verboten questions, and often had to ride herd over a co-worker who tried to sneak them in.

      Who are you going to hire?

      It is actually an important question, especially for demanding positions that require a lot of training. If, as one of the women where I worked had several children over a short period of time, her replacements were putting in more time than she was for several years. Side note - every time she came back to work at her guaranteed job, another woman - the replacement - lost her job.

      I wonder though if Microsoft's demand includes paid maternity leave for the replacement workers filling in while the first worker is out on maternity leave.

      But back to that question of how much time off is to be expected, it will come into question, because there will be a tendency to hire the person who is going to cost your company less. Single men will have a big advantage.

      another note: several women candidate interviewees would quickly blurt out their marital status, and that they didn't intend to have children or already did, so that they could sidestep the issue of our not being allowed to ask anything of the sort. Interestingly enough, they tended to be more qualified and worked out well when hired. Seems like the understood that workplace omertà wasn't working in their favor. third note. I always tried to keep the office at 50:50 regarding gender.

      • by pots ( 5047349 )

        Single men will have a big advantage.

        This is part of the point of paternity leave. Since both parents are getting the same time off, there is no advantage.

        • Single men will have a big advantage.

          This is part of the point of paternity leave. Since both parents are getting the same time off, there is no advantage.

          I'm not certain if you didn't read that right or not, but a single male isn't likely going to take paternity leave. So he has a distinct advantage of not taking three months off.

          So is this leave forced or something? There is no way I could take off three months.

          "Sorry, but the lead person on the project just had a baby, so your project is going to be delayed by three months at least. I'm certain that you understand!"

          And no, not all jobs can have anyone in the office or a temp replace them.

          • by pots ( 5047349 )
            Paternity leave applies to a father, whether or not he is married. Just as maternity leave applies to a mother, whether or not she is married. So while a single person might be less likely to have children, the premise is still the same that neither gender would have an advantage.

            Now... I guess you're pointing out here that a single father is likely likely to be involved with his children's upbringing than a single mother, and so would be less likely to take the leave. That's probably true. But that's an
            • Now... I guess you're pointing out here that a single father is likely likely to be involved with his children's upbringing than a single mother, and so would be less likely to take the leave. That's probably true. But that's another thing which should probably change, and giving him the opportunity to be involved in that upbringing is one part of that.

              Allow me to try once again, I must be really poor at communicating tonight.

              A man who is not married and has no children will not take 3 months of leave. He has no children, therefore no paternity leave applies.

              Why might this be an advantage? A person who does not take as many as 3 mandated months off every year for a number of years is probably going to be available to come into work during the time a new father or new mother is taking that three months off. Now is this person taking the leave time

              • Who are you going to hire to lead your critical project?
                Most certainly not the Bachelor.

                So anyhow, remember you lose your job if the project doesn't go out on time. Who do you hire that you have the best possibility of seeing the job through?
                Best candidate would be the married man. If he so far could manage his job and his family he probably can cope best with the new challenge.
                Second best probably would be the woman, as you imply she has a better education or more experience than "the bachelor".

                If you hire

                • Who are you going to hire to lead your critical project? Most certainly not the Bachelor.

                  Interesting. My experience has been different.

                  Second best probably would be the woman, as you imply she has a better education or more experience than "the bachelor".

                  If you hire the bachelor for a life and death project: you are an idiot.

                  Perhaps. Not that I am in a hiring position any more, but your concept of the weak unreliable bachelor kinda went out the window some years ago. But hey, you want to brand me an idiot, by all means do. Looks like you've reached the condescension stage. Peace out.

              • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • So he has a distinct advantage of not taking three months off.
            And what would be that advantage?

            • So he has a distinct advantage of not taking three months off. And what would be that advantage?

              Unless a person's job is sitting around doing nothing, that will be three months that he is working, and getting paid for it. Unless a person is working a job where they simply plug one person into another person's job, you have to spend time training the replacement.

              Certainly at my career, the others who had the same job qualifications would not travel, and it was almost impossible to get them to stay late or come in early. They were afraid of the suits as well. Taking a day off was difficult to do. Not

              • You seem to think that work is the only important thing in the world. Maybe you don't have anything else in your life, and if that's the case, I feel a bit sorry for you.

                Those mental health days, menstrual leave, or three months off won't mean a thing when they retire.

                They sure as fuck will. Working yourself to the point of death and retiring just before it happens also means something when you retire.

                Quality of life is a real thing that most people value. You don't seem to. That's ok. But to spend hours of your time arguing that it's not a thing that other people should value seems really odd to me.

                Fam

                • You seem to think that work is the only important thing in the world. Maybe you don't have anything else in your life, and if that's the case, I feel a bit sorry for you.

                  Do you have arguments in your head with people? I'm 40 years married, and retired at 55 to be livin the dream, Raised a responsible successfil son. So much for your narrative.

                  Those mental health days, menstrual leave, or three months off won't mean a thing when they retire.

                  They sure as fuck will.

                  Nah. Only people with mental issues need mental health days. Then they should see a professional.

                  Working yourself to the point of death and retiring just before it happens also means something when you retire.

                  Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, the people my age that didn't retire when I did will be working an extra 22,000 hours.

                  Work is only horrible and onerous if you want it to be. Too many people have been trained to look at work as s

              • that will be three months that he is working, and getting paid for it.
                He is payed for the parental leave, too.

                Certainly at my career, the others who had the same job qualifications would not travel, and it was almost impossible to get them to stay late or come in early. They were afraid of the suits as well. Taking a day off was difficult to do. Not complaining now, I was compensated very well, and the maxxed out vacation and sick leave checks at retirement made a nice deposit in my TDA.
                And:
                a) how many job

                • that will be three months that he is working, and getting paid for it.

                  He is payed for the parental leave, too.

                  Yeah, he is. That's my point. He's paid for not working. A person with the same job who is working during that three month period is accomplishing more for the same amount of money.

                  So point is, if you are paying a person who is working for you for nine months the same as a person who is working for you for 12 months, Who is going to get more done for you? If the person you are paying for nine months can have plug in worker foro that three months, you are paying that person, the plug in, and if you have

          • ... a single male isn't likely going to take paternity leave.

            So, you're saying if a male is single now, they will remain single always? If they don't have children now, they never will? Because, in my experience, approximately 100% of fathers were at one point or another single males.

            • ... a single male isn't likely going to take paternity leave.

              So, you're saying if a male is single now, they will remain single always? If they don't have children now, they never will? Because, in my experience, approximately 100% of fathers were at one point or another single males.

              Sir, no I'm not. You can't be certain about any hire. But you can play the odds. Your logic is compelling. Since every person on earth was an infant at one time, it does not mean that everyone is an infant. Think before you post silly stuff.

      • I'm not against time off for mothers. It's nice to have some time at home with the baby, and in some cases after a C-Section it really make sense.

        But for the fathers? That's 3 months for exactly what? Moral support?

        If the time off in case of pregnancy is not equal for both genders then we have the (current) situation where a male is slightly preferred for a position as they require less pain time off. Over an entire population, that preference is seen in the average salaries offered.

        • If the time off in case of pregnancy is not equal for both genders then we have the (current) situation where a male is slightly preferred for a position as they require less pain time off. Over an entire population, that preference is seen in the average salaries offered.

          Of that, there is no doubt. But what are you going to do about that single guy that has no children and doesn't plan to? Or me. After a attempted week, my wife didn't want me at home all day with her and the child.I'm one of those poor souls who is better liked and loved from afar. Now it is true that I got several calls a day with one panic or another. But sitting around the house all day didn't add muuch value on my part. I'm not very good at breast feeding.

          I wonder, does the new setup force time off f

      • It does not matter whom you hire.

        It is called "parental leave" for a reason. Otherwise it would be called "mothers leave" ...

        The father can take leave and the mother can.

        And because some people in hiring positions are to "anti social" it is exactly the reason why it applies to both parents.

      • But for the fathers? That's 3 months for exactly what? Moral support?

        I assume you don't have kids, because if you did, you would understand just how much work a baby is in those first three months. And if you did, the kid's mother would smack you upside the head for assuming that the only role a father has at that point is "moral support".

        • But for the fathers? That's 3 months for exactly what? Moral support?

          I assume you don't have kids, because if you did, you would understand just how much work a baby is in those first three months. And if you did, the kid's mother would smack you upside the head for assuming that the only role a father has at that point is "moral support".

          I remember fondly the days when I breast fed my son.

          Yes, I have a son. No, my wife didn't think that I had to be there every moment. Funny how people seem to have a far right wing "This must be like this! All people must be like this! And if you are not like this, you must conform or be cast out!" thing going on, when the entire concept of the man having to be there 24/7 is most certainly a left leaning thing. Go figure, amirite?

          Y'all have a dictatorial idea of what a good father does. We perhaps did a

    • So now we're up to twenty weeks, and that's a long time.

      Yet here in the UK statutory maternity leave where you receive pay at some level is 39 weeks and other countries in the EU are even more generous.

  • I skipped over this article and only later found it on Twitter. Yes, it's good that MS is making a stand to demand reasonable parental leave of its partners, using it substantial economic power to help this happen ... but it's quite significant that they're demanding twelve weeks of paid parental leave for all partners, even landscapers, janitors, and cafeteria workers.
    • I skipped over this article and only later found it on Twitter. Yes, it's good that MS is making a stand to demand reasonable parental leave of its partners, using it substantial economic power to help this happen ... but it's quite significant that they're demanding twelve weeks of paid parental leave for all partners, even landscapers, janitors, and cafeteria workers.

      I think it's called Windows, Maternity Edition.

      And could you imagine hiring the Duggars? 3 lost months from each person every year.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by jedidiah ( 1196 )

      > it's good that MS is making a stand to demand reasonable parental leave of its partners,

      No it isn't. They using their market position to act as a bully.

      They are trying to act as a de facto government entity. They are pretty blatantly trying to be Robber Barons.

      This is the worst kind of corporate fascism possible.

      Yet you gits eat it up because today's abuse of power suits you. You give no thought to the bigger picture or possible future implications.

      • Wow. Overreact much? Nevermind that the US is way behind the curve on this. People can choose not to do business with Microsoft if they don't like.
        • I think it's hilarious that you idiots see this as progress. First you upend traditional values to the point that "stay at home mom" is seen as some shameful betrayal of feminism. Then you fuck up the male/female dynamic so that fewer people are getting married an having children. Thanks to both of those things you guarantee that the economics of our societies change to the point where single-income families are no longer possible for the vast majority of couples. And then you ry to fix this by making e

          • Seriously, at least until age 16, kids need someone at home. Nannies can handle somethings for a few years, but after that -- you need a mom, dad, or grand parent at home. All the time. And, having children should be something has been planned for a few years...there shouldn't be any surprise.

            I'd be happier if employers offered more generous vacation and parental leave options for their employees. But, this should be their decision, not the government.

            The best the government can do is to promote an econ

      • You give no thought to the bigger picture or possible future implications.
        What is wrong with happy families and happy kids?

        • You give no thought to the bigger picture or possible future implications. What is wrong with happy families and happy kids?

          They give people the idea that happiness is a good thing, and that society has a role in facilitating people's pursuit of it. Like that's in the country's foundational documents or something.

    • by Ogive17 ( 691899 )
      Well if you own a company that does the type of work they are looking for, you don't have to bid on the contract.
  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @04:56PM (#57227718)
    They employ a lot. Last I checked all US tech support is still done out of India (might be the Philippians now, India was getting a little pricey...).
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Six wives, 14 kids. Pajeet hasn't been in to work for years.

  • Does this include Indian "partners"?
  • It's just a benefits dodge that heavily favors employers.

Keep up the good work! But please don't ask me to help.

Working...