In many civilized parts of the world, a female employee getting pregnant will mean disruption during the pregnancy to accommodate doctor's visits and health issues, and then months of paid leave PLUS having to pay to backfill their position with a temp, plus the costs of recruiting and ramping up said temp.
That's a huge hit for an early stage startup to take.
There are regular doctor's visits during pregnancy, yes, but that's a few hours a month. Surely even the smallest startups can absorb that kind of "disruption".
And typically, since parents know well in advance when and how much leave they'll need to take, the team can plan around the leave and how to take over that work in someone's absence. In most cases, you'll have 5-6 months to prepare.
I work for a small startup - fewer than 20 employees - and two of our team members are married. They had a baby and were both out for month (the mom took more time after that), and everything continued to function just fine because we'd planned for it. And if we needed them, they were just an email or text away.
Finally, parents can be some of the most efficient workers on a team, and are great candidates for startups. They are experienced in time management and balancing multiple tasks and stakeholders.
s/pregnant/cancer/ and then ask yourself if you would feel comfortable inquiring about medical history during the hiring process.
Most seem to have become disconnected with this reality in the era of our massively inflated economy (and tech industry).
It will be interesting to see the absolute meltdown that occurs when the next recession rolls around/investment moves on from tech.
My advice is this: companies need to suck it up. We live in a society with rules and laws for a reason. If your business can't exist under those rules and laws, then it doesn't belong in society. Ventures that are detrimental to society simply shouldn't be allowed.
You should try visiting one of them.
That's all I have to say on this matter. I will not be posting further.
If one stretches such an analogy, one could reason that paid sick leave is discriminating against healthy people. Not many people would agree with that one.
As you've stated, a sensible medical policy for everyone would be good. I would imagine that Google has a one.
So that part is more like medical leave than parental leave (even though you're also parenting at the time).
Is offered or is forced to take?
It's just too bad that there's no way to offer an equivalent benefit for women without partners to provide them the same sort of support.
Not that there's any simple solution to that. Maybe in a society that believed in social safety nets some sort of home aide could be available during the first few weeks.
It's not partner leave, it's paternity leave.
> some sort of home aide could be available during the first few weeks
Men don't take paternity leave solely to be 'home aide' - they're taking the time to bond with their new children.
@rconti suggested that equal paternity leave might be unfair because of the additional physical costs that women pay to give birth; I was disagreeing with that, saying that if anything paternity adds value for those women.
Paternity leave even adds value for women who will never have children, because it undercuts any argument that prefers hiring men over women because of parental leave.
The only women it doesn't add much value for are those without partners. "Unfair" is probably the wrong term. They're simply put at a disadvantage relative to other mothers as a result.
How on earth are they put at a disadvantage that someone who does not exist, and so does not need the benefit, does not get that benefit?
And more broadly is it nice to talk about someone else getting a benefit that they need as being putting people who do not get it at a 'disadvantage'?
Are you disadvantaged that people who can't walk get wheelchairs?
Women without partners or whose partners don't get leave have to face that time alone.
It's not a disadvantage in a competition. It's an additional obstacle to overcome that not everyone has to. I think it's a shame we can't give every mother the chance to have that physical assistance and moral support after giving birth.
(Of course, before we address that, maybe we should focus on making paid maternity leave universal. Imagine giving birth (pushing a watermelon out of your private parts or having it cut out of your abdomen) and then having to return to a physically demanding minimum wage job immediately after so you can still pay the rent and buy food? While being the sole caregiver for a baby who wakes you every 3 hours for feeding. I don't know how they do it. My friends who gave birth naturally were advised by their doctors not to even try to walk more than around the house for the first 6 weeks after, to allow for proper healing.)
Which is why California provides both equal paid bonding leave for parents (biological or adoptive) and paid pregnancy disability leave based on actual disability (with standard rules for uncomplicated cases) for those carrying a child.
I don't have kids but I've often thought if I could get 6-12 months off for having a kid it would change the equation from impossible burden to work around to actually a pleasurable experience to learn/grow/bond/etc.