When she earns more than him

[Rumplestiltskin]

I think the booing is because it will be less generous than promised. But I don't think throwing money at maternity leave is the solution anyway.

That's right, women in this country have always had it very comfortable anyway so why throw them an incentive to be lazier than they already are.
Should be more incentive for those who plan their families and aim to be less of a burden on the system as a whole.

 

[Rumplestiltskin]

It's a well known researched fact?

The reality is women will get sick, probably not sick enough that a man would take a day off, but regardless a woman will go down like a horse with colic at the slightest sniffle and probably take an extra "day or 2" for recovery.
She will lose track of how many "sickies" she has taken and end up rorting herself anyway, then crying foul about how she was hard done by especially when management brings up reliability issues when she wants more money.

A man however will reason that taking a day off when sick as a complete waste , he will pull himself up by his bootstraps, drag himself into work for a whole week of potential to pass the bug onto everybody else.
Then he will take a sick day at a later time, to do something constructive like a golf tournament, or working on the house, or sports day for the children.
The amount of sick days he has taken will come up as a reminder in Outlook Express every month.

 

[luce.rocks]

... there are still plenty of women earning more and in happy marriages with happy children.

Agreed. I do wish though that careers advisors at school would at least raise the issue of juggling career and family when you get older. I went to a selective girls school and I know a lot of high-achieving, high-salaried women who were always told they could do anything, achieve anything, etc..

After years of being fed that 'girls can do anything' line, they started in on careers in law and medicine only to realise at 30-ish that if they waited until they made partner or finished their specialisation to have kids, then it might not happen.

Of course, they all married similarly high achieving men, so all breadwinners being equal, the men just assumed the wives would stay home when it was time for babies, which caused marital stress too.

After years of being told that being a woman was no barrier to career success, discovering that there are so many extra hurdles they had to jump that men didn't, they were pretty p*ssed off.

 

[devank]

were always told they could do anything, achieve anything, etc..

They forgot to add the part 'but not at the same time'

 

[weg]

Of course, they all married similarly high achieving men, so all breadwinners being equal, the men just assumed the wives would stay home when it was time for babies, which caused marital stress too.

I don't buy that at all.

Couples make the decision based on what they both want for themselves and their children.

Both my husband and I wanted to continue working and worked together to make it work. We still had stress -some marital- due to babies being hard.

It was not due to blame for forcing one or the other into a role or for taking away opportunities.

You 'can achieve anything do anything' but it's often at the cost of something else or as they say... you can have everything just not all at the same time.

This applies to both men and women. Men because they often miss out on aspects of fatherhood if the main breadwinner (that women staying home don't) or they could be restricting themselves to a high paying job they don't like because of the one income or working more hours to allow a wife that wants to stay home to do so.

 

[Richard Feynman]

thats not discrimination, thats called smart business.

if it were assessing an old person (male or female) who was near retirement age, any business minded person who had the best interest of the company in mind, wouldnt hire them because chances are they were going to retire soon, especially if the training/start up costs in hiring that person were high.

and yes, if I had to choose between a man of quality 7 vs a woman of quality 8 of the child bearing age and situation, id definitely hire the man, you dont understand how much maternity leave , rehiring, finding contractors and then once they return having them integrate back into the workforce all costs. Plus the likelihood that they will want part time hours, plus leave at 3pm to pick up kids.

Its a no brainer for me

When I was 17, I got kicked out of a classroom for asking a teacher--who was "teaching" us about workplace discrimination--to clarify for the class whether or not it was discrimination to hire one applicant over another for a 12 month contract role, assuming both had IDENTICAL skills, where one applicant was heavily pregnant, and had stated she would be starting a family in a few months and would need to take leave and the other was single, not pregnant and stated they could work out the full 12 months to fill the role they were being hired for.

She said it was discrimination.

In disbelief, I asked for further clarification and was immediately kicked out of the class, then sent to the principal with a warning slip.

He promptly tore it up and told me "She's a ****wit. I'll tear up any of these she ever gives you". He was true to his word.

It's obviously a hot topic.

 

[TMNT]

its should be a simple case of being responsbile for your actions

If I buy a super car which is going to cost me $10k per year in insuranc, $5k in maintenance, then in 10 years time my bank account balance would be $100k less

If I decide to go overseas 4 times per year, then chances are I wont be able to afford that super car,

If I have 7 kids, chances are I wont be able to afford the super car nor 1 holiday per year,

do you hear me whining about it, or expecting others to be held responsible for my decisions?????

I am not a single man with no kids, but why should they have to pay for the lifestyle choices that a man or woman makes via having kids, through taxes/increased work load etc etc.

and for the parent to come back after 3-12 months and expect to have also received the same pay rises whilst they were away. Its absolutely ludicrous

If I decide to take 12 months off and go sit in Bora bora,I dont think it would be taken well if I came back and expect my job to be there, and for me to have received the same payrises, while I was working on my tan!

 

[D.T.]

They forgot to add the part 'but not at the same time'

I thought women were the great multi taskers?

 

[TMNT]

I thought women were the great multi taskers?

I think its true that women are better multi taskers then men,

whenever im looking at a map in the car, I always have to turn teh music down, whilst women seem to have no trouble with it

or maybe the women are so used to ignoring the what I say that music isnt a big deal

 

[weg]

I thought women were the great multi taskers?

They are .

I myself can juggle balls while at the same time perform multiple tasks.

 

[TMNT]

When I was 17, I got kicked out of a classroom for asking a teacher--who was "teaching" us about workplace discrimination--to clarify for the class whether or not it was discrimination to hire one applicant over another for a 12 month contract role, assuming both had IDENTICAL skills, where one applicant was heavily pregnant, and had stated she would be starting a family in a few months and would need to take leave and the other was single, not pregnant and stated they could work out the full 12 months to fill the role they were being hired for.

She said it was discrimination.

In disbelief, I asked for further clarification and was immediately kicked out of the class, then sent to the principal with a warning slip.

He promptly tore it up and told me "She's a ****wit. I'll tear up any of these she ever gives you". He was true to his word.

It's obviously a hot topic.

According to fairwork

What is discrimination?

Under the Fair Work Act 2009, discrimination is disadvantaging someone in the workplace because of their:

race
colour
sex
sexual preference
age
physical or mental disability
marital status
family or carer?s responsibilities
pregnancy
religion
political opinion
national extraction
social origin.

I understand that they are creating a fair workplace, but many of them I dont agree with, and it must be a grey area.

I dont want to go to a chinese restaurant and get served by a blonde surfie who thinks Chinese food is Dim Sims and spring rolls

I dont want to join a gym, whose personal trainers are all 50kg overweight or havea physical disability

I dont want to go to a relationship counsellor who has been divorced 8 times

and yet these are all considered as discrimination if I hired staff based on these customer preferences/requests

its a tough call

 

[D.T.]

TMNT
The official line and the actual line are often different.

 

[luce.rocks]

I am not a single man with no kids, but why should they have to pay for the lifestyle choices that a man or woman makes via having kids, through taxes/increased work load etc etc.

Because having kids benefits society overall. Just like I don't mind some of my (future, when I return to the workforce) tax dollars going to support/subsidise kids studying full-time, or roads built in parts of the country I don't travel to, incentives to businesses to take on trainees, etc., etc..

 

[WattleIdo]

When I was 17, I got kicked out of a classroom for asking a teacher---to clarify ...

She said it was discrimination.

Hi Richard,
I think we all agree that we would all prefer to choose the person who we know isn't going to be taking time off. That's why it actually is the law and why employers do have to be careful.

Your teacher actually was correct and although your principal was fair to you, he probably should've explained that it's a law and that's why she was saying that not employing the best candidate because she's pregnant is discrimination.

There are often other women who don't need to take time off who are competing against the pregnant woman as well, don't forget.

Plus, if the pregnant woman really is the best candidate then a few months doesn't make much difference.

It's obviously a hot topic

uh ha!

 

[TMNT]

Because having kids benefits society overall. Just like I don't mind some of my (future, when I return to the workforce) tax dollars going to support/subsidise kids studying full-time, or roads built in parts of the country I don't travel to, incentives to businesses to take on trainees, etc., etc..

I see and agree with your point overall, but in a fair world, if I was paying directly for some single person to reproduce, this wouldnt sit well with me, when the mother/parent involved thought society owed them something because they were able to physically reproduce

that means that if some late 20s/early 30s woman who couldnt have kids for some reason would be the ultimate victim of stereotyping, which I find very unfair

 

[devank]

What is the alternative? Is it good for the country if working Australian mothers don't have children? You can't simply look at one single factor in isolation.

 

[WattleIdo]

I see and agree with your point overall, but in a fair world, if I was paying directly for some single person to reproduce, this wouldnt sit well with me, when the mother/parent involved thought society owed them something because they were able to physically reproduce

There are people working the system for all sorts of reasons, not just the single mum who believes she's not capable of anything else. Most of us get stroppy about someone - whether they be rich or poor.

that means that if some late 20s/early 30s woman who couldnt have kids for some reason would be the ultimate victim of stereotyping, which I find very unfair

Agree with you on this one. Sometimes not having kids is a double whammy. On the one hand, your employer thinks you'll be needing time off, on the other hand, people without kids are seen as less well-rounded.

devank:

Is it good for the country if working Australian mothers don't have children?

Things were looking grim for Australia before Costello kicked off a mini baby boom with the baby bonus. The recession we had to have in the 90's affected uni graduates and many people were late getting started on careers and in saving money.
Combine this with growing female independence and there were proportionally more single women for the first time in about 100 years.

There is a phenomenon going on in all the best countries - Japan, Australia and others - not enough kids. Have you seen 'Children of Men'? That. Even now, we are very reliant on the children of immigrants.

Parental leave is for all of us.

 

[Ausprop]

Because having kids benefits society overall. Just like I don't mind some of my (future, when I return to the workforce) tax dollars going to support/subsidise kids studying full-time, or roads built in parts of the country I don't travel to, incentives to businesses to take on trainees, etc., etc..

yes because those same single men will be sitting on the OAP one day, sucking on the smooth excesses of $7 GP visits and free bus trips all paid for by the kids' - who have matured - tax dollars. The baby boom was kicked off to ensure there was a tax base to cover future liabilities because as it is there isn't enough in the kitty.

 

[nhg]

Any consideration for sustainability?

A system that is dependant on having more and more kids will collapse at some point.

The earlier the better. Be it the cause of my bankruptcy and temporary discomfort.

 

[topcropper]

Any consideration for sustainability?

A system that is dependant on having more and more kids will collapse at some point.

.

Your correct. Just look at all the overpopulated cesspits of the world where everyone has too many kids?

That's not Australia though. Our birthrate is below replacement.


See ya's.