Current Events > Ivanka Trump and Marco Rubio teaming up on paid family leave

(+) Yeah! (+)

Spoilers: they're gonna make it suck
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/04/rubio-ivanka-trump-family-leave-385050

Marco Rubio is starting to strategize with Ivanka Trump to win over skeptical Republicans on a traditionally Democratic issue: paid family leave.

Capitalizing on President Donald Trumps endorsement of the idea in his State of the Union address, Rubio is trying to marshal Republicans behind a plan that would neither impose a mandate on employers nor raise taxes to pay for it two hurdles that have long halted the GOP from embracing paid family leave.

We still have to work on members of my own party, Rubio said in an extended interview with POLITICO about his effort. I think there will be significant initial resistance to it, because its just not an issue thats been identified with the Republican Party.

Rubio has barely started crafting a paid leave bill, much less a broader legislative strategy. But he envisions an idea that has recently gained traction in conservative circles: allowing people to draw Social Security benefits when they want to take time off for a new baby or other family-related matters, and then delay their checks when they hit retirement age.

For instance, a person who would begin receiving full benefits when he or she turns 67 years old but wants to take six weeks of paid leave wouldnt draw Social Security checks until six weeks after his or her 67th birthday.

Thats a new idea for Republicans who still identify it as something that comes out of the left, Rubio said of paid family leave. Forcing companies to provide it is perhaps an idea that finds its genesis on the left, but the notion that pregnancy should not be a bankruptcy-eliciting event is one that I think all Americans should be supportive.

Rubio and Ivanka Trump have recently exchanged emails about paid family leave. And in his Senate office in late January, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) also privately pitched the concept to the presidents daughter, who gave it a warm reception, according to one person familiar with the meeting. Lee is a close ally of Rubio, and they jointly lobbied for expanding the child tax credit an Ivanka-backed effort that prompted Rubio to nearly tank the tax bill in the final days of the overhaul. He ultimately voted for it.

Rubio is still in the early stages of crafting a paid leave plan that a critical mass of congressional Republicans and the Trump administration could get behind. In private conversations with senators, Ivanka Trump has discussed hiking payroll taxes or otherwise paying into Social Security to create a new, personal paid leave fund, according to multiple senior GOP sources.

The concept mirrors what Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has proposed. But any plan that raises taxes, especially to create what would effectively be a new entitlement, would hit automatic resistance among Republicans.

Still, congressional sources said Trump has signaled shell be flexible in order to lock down a win on a signature policy initiative. A White House official said Ivanka Trump has explored several proposals involving paid leave and the payroll tax idea was one option presented to her.

While we are pleasantly surprised by the progress we are making in generating conversation around the issue, we know how hard it is going to be and that for all the talk on the issue, nobody has been able to get it done before, the White House official said. We are committed to it and the priority now is to continue to build a coalition.

---

I just don't see how they consider giving you money that's already "yours" as paid family leave.
---

Shitty solution from a shitty politician

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.
---

Antifar posted...

For instance, a person who would begin receiving full benefits when he or she turns 67 years old but wants to take six weeks of paid leave wouldnt draw Social Security checks until six weeks after his or her 67th birthday.

who the fuck can possibly think this is a good idea
---

From a financial standpoint, that is an absolutely fair system for both families and taxpayers.
---

Wait. Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america? What about sick pay?

Sorry for my ignorance, I dont frequent CE that much, but this topic caught my eye.
---

How generous! Maybe next they'll expand it to allow people to withdraw from their 401k accounts to pay for their own parental leave!
---

Anteaterking posted...

I just don't see how they consider giving you money that's already "yours" as paid family leave.

Because you cant just take time off work and live off of social security before youve put in your years, so its still an improvement over nothing.

I dont hate the idea. Seems like an okay compromise to a difficult issue
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america?

I don't think paid time off is mandatory, no. Paid family leave definitely isn't.
---

Anteaterking posted...

I just don't see how they consider giving you money that's already "yours" as paid family leave.

It's similar to the conservative principle that you put money aside while you're working to pay for times you're out of work. In this case, that money you've put aside is money you're letting the state hold for you.

They are trying to find some kind of compromise between having no paid leave and forcing employers to continue paying workers who aren't working, I guess. So, they come up with letting you pull from your social security while you're away from work. I guess that's something...
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

Wait. Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america? What about sick pay?

Sorry for my ignorance, I dont frequent CE that much, but this topic caught my eye.

There is mandated federal maternity leave, but it's not paid. Any paid leave or sick pay is up to your employer. There's no federal obligation for either to be provided.
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

Wait. Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america? What about sick pay?

No; paid leave of any kind is solely up to your employer in most states. Ditto with sick pay.
---

the poors won't survive into old age anyway
---

Just another 'issue' where most other countries figured this shit out years ago and America still thinks it's a partisan issue.
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

Wait. Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america? What about sick pay?

Some companies give you paid family leave, but it's incredibly rare afaik. Most will give you leave but it's unpaid so unless you're pretty well off there's no point in doing it.

Though I know at least at my job if you have short term disability through the company you can get paid through that after having a baby.
---

r4X0r posted...

spaghettyhoop posted...

Wait. Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america? What about sick pay?

Sorry for my ignorance, I dont frequent CE that much, but this topic caught my eye.

There is mandated federal maternity leave, but it's not paid. Any paid leave or sick pay is up to your employer. There's no federal obligation for either to be provided.

I find that crazy! But fair enough if its always been like that. What about statutory sick pay? Like if you are off sick for say 4 weeks with a broken leg and unable to work, do any benefits/welfare systems support you until you go back to work?
---

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

That's odd.... It doesn't seem to affect countries that aren't completely stupid.

But I mean, There's a shitload of perfectly reasonable things your country can't figure out because they boil it down to 'NO, RED!' 'NO, BLUE!'
---

Balrog0 posted...

spaghettyhoop posted...

Genuine question, don't you already get paid leave each year in america?

I don't think paid time off is mandatory, no. Paid family leave definitely isn't.

That depends on who you work for, whether you're fulltime or part time, what kind of position you have, etc. Nothing that is mandated of the employers by the government.

For example, at my employer, every pay cycle (~2 weeks) I get a couple hours of Paid Time Off. That PTO can be spent to get paid if I can't make it to work or want to take time off for vacation. There is no X number of weeks paid time off mandated by the government for all employees or anything like that.
---

Antifar posted...

Ditto with sick pay.

I believe California recently started requiring at least three days of sick pay per year be granted to all employees.

Which is nice I guess
---

why in the fuck does this bimbo get ANY say in shaping policy?
---

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

That's odd.... It doesn't seem to affect countries that aren't completely stupid.

But those countries pay higher taxes!

And they're generally a lot happier than us!
---

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

Over half my office is women <50 years old.

And the government pays for it. The employer pays the temp employee but the government pays for the permanent employee while on leave.
---

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

That's odd.... It doesn't seem to affect countries that aren't completely stupid.

Except... that it does.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave

40% of managers avoid hiring younger women to get around maternity leave

You make women more expensive to employ, fewer women get employed. This is middle school level economics, it's not rocket science.
---

Esrac posted...

That depends on who you work for, whether you're fulltime or part time, what kind of position you have, etc. Nothing that is mandated of the employers by the government.

For example, at my employer, every pay cycle (~2 weeks) I get a couple hours of Paid Time Off. That PTO can be spent to get paid if I can't make it to work or want to take time off for vacation. There is no X number of weeks paid time off mandated by the government for all employees or anything like that.

Right, so it isn't mandatory.
---

r4X0r posted...

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

That's odd.... It doesn't seem to affect countries that aren't completely stupid.

Except... that it does.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave

40% of managers avoid hiring younger women to get around maternity leave

Like I said, countries that AREN'T stupid. Keep up.
---

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

That's odd.... It doesn't seem to affect countries that aren't completely stupid.

Except... that it does.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave

40% of managers avoid hiring younger women to get around maternity leave

Like I said, countries that AREN'T stupid. Keep up.

LOL like, for example, YOUR COUNTRY?

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/business-strategy/the-dark-side-of-maternity-leave/

The dark side of maternity leave

In an anonymous survey conducted in Alberta at the time, anxious employers predicted heightened workplace tensions and potential discrimination against young job seekers. People in childbearing years will be at a disadvantage when it comes to new positions opening up, warned one, while another admitted, We have learned to avoid hiring people we feel will be having families.

Once more: it's not rocket science. You make women more expensive to employ, you make women less attractive to employ. The question then becomes, why do liberals hate women so much?
---

r4X0r posted...

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

It's the only solution that works. Forcing an employer to pay for it will only result in more defensive hiring, which would equate to not hiring as many < 50 year old women.

That's odd.... It doesn't seem to affect countries that aren't completely stupid.

Except... that it does.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave

40% of managers avoid hiring younger women to get around maternity leave

Like I said, countries that AREN'T stupid. Keep up.

LOL like, for example, YOUR COUNTRY?

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/business-strategy/the-dark-side-of-maternity-leave/

The dark side of maternity leave

In an anonymous survey conducted in Alberta at the time, anxious employers predicted heightened workplace tensions and potential discrimination against young job seekers. People in childbearing years will be at a disadvantage when it comes to new positions opening up, warned one, while another admitted, We have learned to avoid hiring people we feel will be having families.

Once more: it's not rocket science. You make women more expensive to employ, you make women less attractive to employ. The question then becomes, why do liberals hate women so much?

Your points are hilarious, given that parental leave isn't gender locked in this country.

Wifey can have the kid and the husband stays home on leave. But please, go on about hating women.

In fact, your own source states its about families in general, not women specifically.

Like I said, this shit isn't hard to figure out. Americans just fuck it up willingly.
---

So the US, Canada, and the UK are all "stupid countries." Let's see how many more "stupid countries" there are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/upshot/when-family-friendly-policies-backfire.html

In Chile, a law requires employers to provide working mothers with child care. One result? Women are paid less.

Add Chile to the list.

In Spain, a policy to give parents of young children the right to work part-time has led to a decline in full-time, stable jobs available to all women even those who are not mothers.

Spain as well.

Elsewhere in Europe, generous maternity leaves have meant that women are much less likely than men to become managers or achieve other high-powered positions at work.

The whole European continent.
---

Yeah, guaranteed paid maternity/parental leave sounds great but who is going to pay for that?

This would allow for guaranteed paid leave, but it won't be an extra burden for taxpayers.
---

Its the same here in the UK, the partner can take the maternity leave instead, it doesn't have to be the woman that gave birth, its just not that common.
---

r4X0r posted...

So the US, Canada, and the UK are all "stupid countries." Let's see how many more "stupid countries" there are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/upshot/when-family-friendly-policies-backfire.html

In Chile, a law requires employers to provide working mothers with child care. One result? Women are paid less.

Add Chile to the list.

In Spain, a policy to give parents of young children the right to work part-time has led to a decline in full-time, stable jobs available to all women even those who are not mothers.

Spain as well.

Elsewhere in Europe, generous maternity leaves have meant that women are much less likely than men to become managers or achieve other high-powered positions at work.

The whole European continent.

You are saying that Chile and Spain have poor climates for female hiring?!

NO FUCKING WAY!
---

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

So the US, Canada, and the UK are all "stupid countries." Let's see how many more "stupid countries" there are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/upshot/when-family-friendly-policies-backfire.html

In Chile, a law requires employers to provide working mothers with child care. One result? Women are paid less.

Add Chile to the list.

In Spain, a policy to give parents of young children the right to work part-time has led to a decline in full-time, stable jobs available to all women even those who are not mothers.

Spain as well.

Elsewhere in Europe, generous maternity leaves have meant that women are much less likely than men to become managers or achieve other high-powered positions at work.

The whole European continent.

You are saying that Chile and Spain have poor climates for female hiring?!

NO FUCKING WAY!

Only somebody like you couldn't figure this out.

http://business.financialpost.com/financial-post-magazine/parental-warning-more-parental-leave-will-only-hurt-women-in-gaining-equality

Parental warning: More parental leave will only hurt women in gaining equality

Justin Trudeau's Liberals have promised to expand parental leave in Canada from 12 months to 18. But let's face, that will only push employers to favour men over women in the hiring category of staffing headaches avoided

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blogs-and-comment/the-subtle-ways-taking-maternity-leave-still-hurts-womens-careers/

The unspoken truth is that many employers see mat leave as a costly, disruptive hassle they would sooner avoida sentiment that will only deepen if Justin Trudeau makes good on his election promise to extend government-backed parental leave from 12 to 18 months.

Why does Canada hate women so much?
---

And they're all cracked, because GOVCO PAYS IT, NOT THEM.

https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/starting-family/maternity-parental-leave-benefits.html

The employer doesn't have to pay you. Its essentially EI. The only hassle to the employer is replacing the person taking leave.

Its a bullshit excuse. Even YOU can't be this dumb.
---

Durrrr it's the staffing logistics. It costs time and money to find a train a replacement.

You make women a bigger hassle to employ than men and you make men more attractive to employ than women. It's literally that simple.
---

I dont understand why anyone who works would be against full paid leave and sick pay
---

r4X0r posted...

Durrrr it's the staffing logistics. It costs time and money to find a train a replacement.

You make women a bigger hassle to employ than men and you make men more attractive to employ than women. It's literally that simple.

Are we moving goalposts now? Are they more expensive, or is it the hassle?

Oh yeah, no leg to stand on, change the argument.
---

Wait, don't people always say that social security won't exist by the time our generation retires anyway

Might as well take the money while it's still there I guess
---

Bio1590 posted...

Just another 'issue' where most other countries figured this shit out years ago and America still thinks it's a partisan issue.

This. WTF is going on when it's a contentious idea to have paid parental leave, or paid annual leave protected in law.
---

Giant_Aspirin posted...

why in the fuck does this bimbo get ANY say in shaping policy?

There needs to be a Trump that's willing to be the president.
---

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

Durrrr it's the staffing logistics. It costs time and money to find a train a replacement.

You make women a bigger hassle to employ than men and you make men more attractive to employ than women. It's literally that simple.

Are we moving goalposts now? Are they more expensive, or is it the hassle?

Oh yeah, no leg to stand on, change the argument.

What part of "costs time and money" didn't you understand? There's a financial burden, and there's a logistical burden. In Canada it's more the logistical burden, in countries where the employer is on the hook, it's the financial burden.

Making women more expensive to hire than men makes women less attractive to employ than men. Let me know where I lost you.
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

I dont understand why anyone who works would be against full paid leave and sick pay

Because liberals are for it.
---

So do they want people to not start families? Can't even imagine that is a good long term strategy.
---

r4X0r posted...

Tupacrulez posted...

r4X0r posted...

Durrrr it's the staffing logistics. It costs time and money to find a train a replacement.

You make women a bigger hassle to employ than men and you make men more attractive to employ than women. It's literally that simple.

Are we moving goalposts now? Are they more expensive, or is it the hassle?

Oh yeah, no leg to stand on, change the argument.

What part of "costs time and money" didn't you understand? There's a financial burden, and there's a logistical burden. In Canada it's more the logistical burden, in countries where the employer is on the hook, it's the financial burden.

Making women more expensive to hire than men makes women less attractive to employ than men. Let me know where I lost you.

So with all these qualified women who aren't getting hired, there must be a large number who are hireable when one who is employed goes on mat leave.
Sounds like employers are throwing out some excuses.
Or did I lose you?
---

BLAKUboy posted...

spaghettyhoop posted...

I dont understand why anyone who works would be against full paid leave and sick pay

Because liberals are for it.

So generally, in America the political parties are so against each other they would rather screw over the average american than support the opposite parties policies?

Its utterly mental when you think about it. In the UK the two lead parties don't get on, but they at least try not to screw over the public due to their rivalry.
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

BLAKUboy posted...

spaghettyhoop posted...

I dont understand why anyone who works would be against full paid leave and sick pay

Because liberals are for it.

So generally, in America the political parties are so against each other they would rather screw over the average american than support the opposite parties policies?

Its utterly mental when you think about it. In the UK the two lead parties don't get on, but they at least try not to screw over the public due to their rivalry.

Yeah no that's LITERALLY the case.
---

spaghettyhoop posted...

BLAKUboy posted...

spaghettyhoop posted...

I dont understand why anyone who works would be against full paid leave and sick pay

Because liberals are for it.

So generally, in America the political parties are so against each other they would rather screw over the average american than support the opposite parties policies?

Its utterly mental when you think about it. In the UK the two lead parties don't get on, but they at least try not to screw over the public due to their rivalry.

To be fair. Sometimes both parties agree on how to screw over the public.
---

Wasn't there some country that did both maternal and paternal leave on the same pool that both parents could draw from? That way the cost isn't just associated with women since both parents would be able to use the time (or only one, whatever the parents decided on).
---

Pack your bags. Let's move to Scandinavia.

UrCa1988 posted...

Wasn't there some country that did both maternal and paternal leave on the same pool that both parents could draw from? That way the cost isn't just associated with women since both parents would be able to use the time (or only one, whatever the parents decided on).

Yes Canada has both. Mothers get 15 weeks maternity leave, and then there's another 35 weeks that can be split any way between the parents.
---