Hacker News Reader

Comment by bko | Hacker News Reader

> This isn't a model. its not a study, its a metric collected from the UK for the last 20 years.

And absolutely nothing else changed in the UK in the last 20 years that may affect this number? Logic would tell you the disincentive exists. Looking at aggregate country data over 20 years doesn't tell you anything about a single policy.

> Employers that don't facilitate it are punished, either by employment tribunal, or people leaving to join somewhere that does.

That's a lot of employers to keep track of. In terms of people leaving for jobs that do offer paid parental leave only works for those wishing to take parental leave. If someone does not wish to have children, she would be willing to take a higher salary in lieu of a company that provides generous parental leave.

View on HN

> And absolutely nothing else changed in the UK in the last 20 years that may affect this number?

Explain why this matters? The data demonstrates that you can increase parental leave while also reducing employment discrimination and improving conditions. That's the real world outcome.

> Logic would tell you the disincentive exists.

Surely logic would tell you to give more weight to real world outcomes than to imagined mental models about how others "should" behave?

I'd question why you think people should think that way in the first place.

Hmmm, so it seems like the signal we'd expect to see in the time series data is either (1) tiny, and completely buried in the noise, or (2) as you suggest, is large but more than completely canceled out by some other, unnamed, contemporaneous signal(s).

Either way, seems like a net win for women!

> And absolutely nothing else changed in the UK in the last 20 years that may affect this number? Logic would tell you the disincentive exists. Looking at aggregate country data over 20 years doesn't tell you anything about a single policy.

The main argument against paid parental leave is that is will cause wage gap to grow. I don't see the data backing that up.

Yes, there have been other landmark cases in the courts about equal pay.

> That's a lot of employers to keep track of. In terms of people leaving for jobs that do offer paid parental leave only works for those wishing to take parental leave.

You see this is where I think we differ. Here in the UK parental leave is part of a few measures that are aimed at flexibility. There is the right to flexible working (ie working non standard hours) Working from home (which is implied rather than a legal obligation) All of these in 2019 were part of a movement to make work a bit less shit. I had a number of employees who were childless that we enabled hybrid working. So that they could avoid coming in hungover, or work non standard times from abroad. Or just not come in with a cold and get everyone ill.

When a company advertises its "benefits" (this was pre covid) they used to use parental leave as a signal that they had a more relaxed working atmosphere.

For me, I've found that happy employees are loyal, more productive and willing to forgive mistakes. I have tried to make sure that those I manage feel like they have some level of work security, which rewards me as a manager with better productivity and lower staff turnover.

I used to try and be a bit like malcom tucker (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjKHPv7b3fQ) it doesnt work as well as just being reasonably caring.

> she would be willing to take a higher salary in lieu of a company that provides generous parental leave.

again this is not a british thing to do. A right is a right, opting out of a right to get more money undermines everyone. I mean sure you can come back two weeks after giving birth, (I know someone who came back after a month) but you're not going to get more money for it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com