We need to save money! Quick, fire women on maternity leave!

Romanian lawmakers are currently trying to make it legal to fire a woman while she is on maternity leave. This, after reducing maternity leave from 24 months to 12 and forcing nearly 90,000 women to return to work next year (yes, it's applied retroactively. So the women who are already on maternity leave will have it cut short). So even though they haven't done it yet, they most probably will give it a good ol' try, even though it's illegal according to European law and a completely fucking awful idea.

This is just the most recent in a slew of questionable and occasionally downright cruel decisions. It started with cutting salaries by 25% and pensions by 18%. Government employee? Teacher, police officer, etc.? Fuck you. Elderly and most probably sick? Well, you're already not getting enough money, so double fuck you!

Disabled? Government no longer pays for your aid workers-- hell, why not? It never paid for any medical equipment or prostheses you ever needed, so this'll just be consistent. Triple fuck you.

And now they're going after mommies.

Oh, fuck you, you rich, sociopathic fucks.

Look, I know they need to cut back wherever possible just to slow down the rate at which our economy is circling the drain, but it's incredible how callous they've been throughout the process, targeting the most vulnerable members of society FIRST and working their way UP the food chain. As far as I know, not one single politician has had their own salary cut, even though they're paid an obscene amount of money and most of them are independently rich already. A political party already suggested such a measure, for the salaries of the Presidency, Parliament and Government employees to be reduced by 50% in exchange for pensions to remain as they were. Nothing came from that suggestion.

At this point, I think it's pretty clear the Romanian government is little more than a cabal of supervillains.

Ugh, that's sickening.

I've always thought that politicians should be forced to live on the average wage of their constituents. Perhaps then they'd stop cutting like this.

Azzandra wrote:

Romanian lawmakers are currently trying to make it legal to fire a woman while she is on maternity leave. This, after reducing maternity leave from 24 months to 12 and forcing nearly 90,000 women to return to work next year (yes, it's applied retroactively. So the women who are already on maternity leave will have it cut short). So even though they haven't done it yet, they most probably will give it a good ol' try, even though it's illegal according to European law and a completely fucking awful idea.

You know, firing someone while they're on leave is pretty goddamn shitty. But having to keep someone on the payroll for a whole year (and it used to be two?) when their absence forces other employees to take on their work, or forces the employer to hire redundant employees... yeah, I can understand why some people might want to ditch that particular burden. Especially after a few minutes' research, Romania doesn't include unpaid maternity leave.

So... not giving somebody two years off with pay could only be cooked up by the Evil League of Evil, apparently. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Firing someone during that period, though, that just isn't right. If they're legally and/or contractually promised that time, they should get it without having to worry about getting screwed over for it. The right thing to do would be to tweak the existing parental leave law so that it works better for everyone.

But seriously.

12 months off with pay. The horror.

Penguin wrote:

12 months off with pay. The horror.

They don't usually get full pay for that period, though. Usually it's something like 50-75%, depending on where the mother works.

And things in Romania are expensive, dude. Prices here are anything from double, to seven or eight times what they are in Western Europe, where people get paid a hell of a lot more money.

Penguin wrote:

12 months off with pay. The horror.

Wow Penguin, I love that you say that like it's a fucking vacation for the woman or something, you piece of shit.

A view not at all influenced, I'm sure, by how the vast majority of parents insist that having children is the apex of their lives, an experience they wouldn't trade for anything, despite the time, money and effort involved in taking care of them, and how people who don't want children are just naive and don't know what they're missing.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Penguin wrote:

12 months off with pay. The horror.

Wow Penguin, I love that you say that like it's a fucking vacation for the woman or something, you piece of shit.

And you're dignifying that kind of ignorance with an answer, because...?

Jesus. wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Penguin wrote:

12 months off with pay. The horror.

Wow Penguin, I love that you say that like it's a fucking vacation for the woman or something, you piece of shit.

And you're dignifying that kind of ignorance with an answer, because...?

And you're asking me that because...?

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jesus. wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Penguin wrote:

12 months off with pay. The horror.

Wow Penguin, I love that you say that like it's a fucking vacation for the woman or something, you piece of shit.

And you're dignifying that kind of ignorance with an answer, because...?

And you're asking me that because...?

I dunno. I sort of figured that by now you'd have learned to ignore statements like that from Penguin. He's sort of a one trick pony when it comes to this sort of thing.

Azzandra wrote:

They don't usually get full pay for that period, though. Usually it's something like 50-75%, depending on where the mother works.

Nevertheless, they're still getting guaranteed and -for now- protected paid time off to take care of their own business, and 12 months is a lot better than you'll find pretty much anywhere else on the planet.

Quote :

And things in Romania are expensive, dude. Prices here are anything from double, to seven or eight times what they are in Western Europe, where people get paid a hell of a lot more money.

Perhaps, but paying someone to not work for you for a whole year is really damn expensive too. It might seem more reasonable to increase the pay for decreased time. I'm not surprised that it was reduced to 12; I'm surprised it was ever that high, let alone twice that, to begin with.

But in any case, attempting to save an economy by cutting people off from money is like trying to put a fire out by pouring gasoline on it. Economies tend to run a lot better when people can actually buy and sell things.

Penguin wrote:

Azzandra wrote:

They don't usually get full pay for that period, though. Usually it's something like 50-75%, depending on where the mother works.

Nevertheless, they're still getting guaranteed and -for now- protected paid time off to take care of their own business, and 12 months is a lot better than you'll find pretty much anywhere else on the planet.

On your continent, perhaps in Europe, it's a slightly different matter. Essentially, employers are usually obliged to keep your job open at the very least, and 16-30 weeks is the most frequent amount of time.

It's shitty that employers are laying women off.

Quote :

Quote :

And things in Romania are expensive, dude. Prices here are anything from double, to seven or eight times what they are in Western Europe, where people get paid a hell of a lot more money.

Perhaps, but paying someone to not work for you for a whole year is really damn expensive too. It might seem more reasonable to increase the pay for decreased time. I'm not surprised that it was reduced to 12; I'm surprised it was ever that high, let alone twice that, to begin with.

Again, if you look at Europe, you'll notice that long maternity leave is the norm. When you scroll down to the States it's shocking to see that women get absolutely nothing

Quote :

But in any case, attempting to save an economy by cutting people off from money is like trying to put a fire out by pouring gasoline on it. Economies tend to run a lot better when people can actually buy and sell things.

This, this I agree with. Look at what happened to Ireland.

ZoZo wrote:

On your continent, perhaps in Europe, it's a slightly different matter. Essentially, employers are usually obliged to keep your job open at the very least, and 16-30 weeks is the most frequent amount of time.

Uh, I'm pretty sure 12 months is still a lot better than 16-30 weeks.

ZoZo wrote:

Again, if you look at Europe, you'll notice that long maternity leave is the norm. When you scroll down to the States it's shocking to see that women get absolutely nothing

You get nothing and your pay gets worst.

XLT-100852.0 wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

Again, if you look at Europe, you'll notice that long maternity leave is the norm. When you scroll down to the States it's shocking to see that women get absolutely nothing

You get nothing and your pay gets worst.

Depends on the employer. Some (like mine) run FMLA leave concurrently with paid leave as part of collective bargaining.

FMLA only obligates the employer to: 1) continue to provide the employee whatever benefits they normally receive (such as health insurance) and 2) hold the employee's position open for them to return. If the employer wants to provide additional benefits on top of the FMLA leave (such as pay), they may do so.

saeku wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

On your continent, perhaps in Europe, it's a slightly different matter. Essentially, employers are usually obliged to keep your job open at the very least, and 16-30 weeks is the most frequent amount of time.

Uh, I'm pretty sure 12 months is still a lot better than 16-30 weeks.

Yeah. Going by that list, a handful of European countries require a year or more: Albania, Bulgaria, Germany, Lithuania, Norway, Romania, Russia, Slovania, and Sweden. So yeah, getting a deal that good is pretty rare.

ZoZo wrote:

Again, if you look at Europe, you'll notice that long maternity leave is the norm. When you scroll down to the States it's shocking to see that women get absolutely nothing.

Again, most of it is not nearly 12 months or more. And in the US, women do get three months of maternity leave, albeit unpaid. However, as Spotts has pointed out, that's the bare, legally-required minimum. Many employers do offer paid maternity leave as an employee benefit.

Penguin wrote:

Azzandra wrote:

They don't usually get full pay for that period, though. Usually it's something like 50-75%, depending on where the mother works.

Nevertheless, they're still getting guaranteed and -for now- protected paid time off to take care of their own business, and 12 months is a lot better than you'll find pretty much anywhere else on the planet.

Quote :

And things in Romania are expensive, dude. Prices here are anything from double, to seven or eight times what they are in Western Europe, where people get paid a hell of a lot more money.

Perhaps, but paying someone to not work for you for a whole year is really damn expensive too. It might seem more reasonable to increase the pay for decreased time. I'm not surprised that it was reduced to 12; I'm surprised it was ever that high, let alone twice that, to begin with.

But in any case, attempting to save an economy by cutting people off from money is like trying to put a fire out by pouring gasoline on it. Economies tend to run a lot better when people can actually buy and sell things.

Shit's probably so expensive because they have to waste so much money on useless employees. They have to pay someone to not produce anything for 24 months (or 12 or 18 or whatever it is at present). Then they have to price stuff high enough to cover that cost.

And if Romania is anything like America, the government workers are the most overpaid wastes of space in the country.

Azzandra wrote:

Romanian lawmakers are currently trying to make it legal to fire a woman while she is on maternity leave.

Makes you wonder why they only shot the Ceaucescus when the government was toppled in '89.

Chris91 wrote:

Makes you wonder why they only shot the Ceaucescus when the government was toppled in '89.

They only shot the Ceausescus because the people who were behind the revolution were also high-ranking party members and even though we've exchanged labels to "democracy", we're still being governed by, essentially, the same people as before '89 (or their relatives and proteges.)

I'm too lazy to click links/google/etc. Is there paternity leave in there as well, or are they only targeting women? (Or do men not get time off with their babies?)

myeerah wrote:

I'm too lazy to click links/google/etc. Is there paternity leave in there as well, or are they only targeting women? (Or do men not get time off with their babies?)

Well, I googled it and it turns our dads can get 5 days paternity leave, plus another 10 if he finished a child-rearing course. 'Cause raising children is wimminz work, apparently? And men need special training to cope? I dunno. It's messed up.

myeerah wrote:

I'm too lazy to click links/google/etc. Is there paternity leave in there as well, or are they only targeting women? (Or do men not get time off with their babies?)

No idea, but parental leave for fathers is terrible in most countries. Lovely, lovely socialist Sweden being an exception.

Really, though, I do think men should have a lot more time off. Knocks a big factor in gender discrimination right out of the window if men also get a year off for reproducing.

ZoZo wrote:

myeerah wrote:

I'm too lazy to click links/google/etc. Is there paternity leave in there as well, or are they only targeting women? (Or do men not get time off with their babies?)

No idea, but parental leave for fathers is terrible in most countries. Lovely, lovely socialist Sweden being an exception.

Really, though, I do think men should have a lot more time off. Knocks a big factor in gender discrimination right out of the window if men also get a year off for reproducing.

I'm not sure if the Family and Medical Leave Act is necessarily maternity leave, but it grants any employee in America the right to up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in the event of the birth, or even adoption, of a child, regardless of gender I believe. Which seems fair, employee gets time to get his shit in order and the employer doesn't have to pay him until he gets back to being productive.

ZoZo wrote:

myeerah wrote:

I'm too lazy to click links/google/etc. Is there paternity leave in there as well, or are they only targeting women? (Or do men not get time off with their babies?)

No idea, but parental leave for fathers is terrible in most countries.

I noticed that Canada, at least, allows the couple to choose which parent can take the leave in whatever amount (up to 50 weeks total):

Quote :

In 2000, parental leave was greatly expanded in Canada from 10 weeks to 35 weeks divided as desired between two parents (this is in addition to 15 weeks maternity leave).

...which I think is pretty neat.

Some people seem to think that during a maternity leave the mothers get paid for doing nothing. But I'd say that birthing and raising new tax-paying and working citizens is quite an important job. In a society where women have the right to make their own choices regarding reproduction, the financial riskiness matters a lot in how willing they are to make babies. And if they just can't afford to, the population drops and law-makers start wringing their hands about their poor economy. And take it out on those who reproduce. What goes around, comes around...

Well, you can have it in two ways:

1) Women get no maternity-related benefit. If they want to raise kids and all thet shit, it's up to them to fund their bizarre lifestyle.
2) Employers must pay wages and benefits to women on maternity leave, keep their position for when they return to work, and manage with the understaffing or find a temporary substitute.

Guess what? The outcome is pretty much the same. In the first case women will be fired once they are on maternity leave; in the second case they won't be hired in the first place. Either way, you end up with disproportionately high female employment, and an impoverishment (?) of the working class because half of the family cannot get a paid job.

In Italy (where compulsory maternity leave is 4 months at 80% of the wage), a common praxis is that when you get hired, you have to sign a resignment notice with the date left blank. If you get pregnant, out comes the notice. Over the years some workers have tried to bring the matter into court, with poor results.
An attempt made to defend workers, by introducing modules that were numbered by the ministry, lasted less than a year before being revoked (yay Berlusconi).

I don't see many solutions without the State (in any country) intervening to make up for the monetary loss of the employers (tax cuts for hiring women etc). Some societies might be less affected than others, eg because the ratio of working women is low anyway, or because working mother somehow manage with short leaves and assistance from the "extended family" (raises hand: my parents babysit for me after daycare). But there's still a long way to go, and it's going to get worse as

BTW, how's the state of kindergartens in Rumania? A fellow mom in my kindergarten was telling me that she can't find a full-time job because she has to pick up her son at 15:30 (which is awful as the most common working time is 8:00-17:00), while back in her home country they work till 17:30.

Sunatic wrote:

Some people seem to think that during a maternity leave the mothers get paid for doing nothing. But I'd say that birthing and raising new tax-paying and working citizens is quite an important job.

Not to mention the economic return for the whole society, given that kids need formula, meals, diapers, toys, school books, mopeds, gap years hitch-hiking in Europe... old dotards have fewer and cheaper needs.