Bob Ross
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:48:03 GMT -5
Posts: 5,883
|
Post by Bob Ross on Jan 28, 2015 16:02:40 GMT -5
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,910
|
Post by zibazinski on Jan 28, 2015 16:03:10 GMT -5
I will next year
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 16:33:55 GMT -5
Worse than the marriage penalty is the no kids penalty.
No dependant deduction.
No child care deduction.
No education expense/education savings deduction.
What do you get?
Taxes to support the schools your non-kids don't go to (30% of our property taxes).
Taxes to support the parks and rec programs your non-kids don't particiapte in.
Taxes to support the low income breakfast, lunch, and school break feeding programs that your non-kids won't benefit from.
The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent who is at parent/teacher conferences.
The expectation that you will make sure that the project with the tight deadline is completed while the parent picks up their child from day care before it closes and goes home.
The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent who is at home with a sick child.
The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent on maternity leave/parental bonding leave/new adoption leave.
A smaller pay check so that your employer can provide a bigger medical care subsidy for employees raising families/subsidize on site child care facilities/sick child nursing programs/adoption assistance/fertility treatments, and the like.
Seems like a pretty high price to pay to support the lifestyle decisions that other people make.
|
|
Peace Of Mind
Senior Associate
[font color="#8f2520"]~ Drinks Well With Others ~[/font]
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:53:02 GMT -5
Posts: 15,554
Location: Paradise
|
Post by Peace Of Mind on Jan 28, 2015 16:43:46 GMT -5
Worse than the marriage penalty is the no kids penalty. No dependant deduction. No child care deduction. No education expense/education savings deduction. What do you get? Taxes to support the schools your non-kids don't go to (30% of our property taxes). Taxes to support the parks and rec programs your non-kids don't particiapte in. Taxes to support the low income breakfast, lunch, and school break feeding programs that your non-kids won't benefit from. The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent who is at parent/teacher conferences. The expectation that you will make sure that the project with the tight deadline is completed while the parent picks up their child from day care before it closes and goes home. The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent who is at home with a sick child. A smaller pay check so that your employer can provide a bigger medical care subsidy for employees raising families/subsidize on site child care facilities/sick child nursing programs, and the like. Seems like a pretty high price to pay to support the lifestyle decisions that other people make. Yeah, I never understood why those that utilize all of these services get the tax break. Don't get me wrong - I don't mind helping to pay for these services for their kids and I've used them too in the past as a kid. But I just don't get the logic of that particular tax break.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 16:51:39 GMT -5
Worse than the marriage penalty is the no kids penalty. No dependant deduction. No child care deduction. No education expense/education savings deduction. What do you get? Taxes to support the schools your non-kids don't go to (30% of our property taxes). Taxes to support the parks and rec programs your non-kids don't particiapte in. Taxes to support the low income breakfast, lunch, and school break feeding programs that your non-kids won't benefit from. The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent who is at parent/teacher conferences. The expectation that you will make sure that the project with the tight deadline is completed while the parent picks up their child from day care before it closes and goes home. The expectation that you will cover the work of the parent who is at home with a sick child. A smaller pay check so that your employer can provide a bigger medical care subsidy for employees raising families/subsidize on site child care facilities/sick child nursing programs, and the like. Seems like a pretty high price to pay to support the lifestyle decisions that other people make. Yeah, I never understood why those that utilize all of these services get the tax break. Don't get me wrong - I don't mind helping to pay for these services for their kids and I've used them too in the past as a kid. But I just don't get the logic of that particular tax break. Back when my four siblings and I were growing up, there was no dependant deduction, no child care deduction, no educational expenses/educational savings deduction. If you had kids, you footed the bill. All of these tax breaks are just a way politicians have bought the votes of people who made the decisions to become parents. At the expense of non-parents. The unfortunate thing is that today, becoming a parent is truly a lifestyle option as opposed to the days before widely available birth control. And let's not get into a discussion of other programs designed to benefit children, such as WIC and the like.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 16:56:56 GMT -5
Yeah, I never understood why those that utilize all of these services get the tax break. Don't get me wrong - I don't mind helping to pay for these services for their kids and I've used them too in the past as a kid. But I just don't get the logic of that particular tax break. Back when my four siblings and I were growing up, there was no dependant deduction, no child care deduction, no educational expenses/educational savings deduction. If you had kids, you footed the bill. All of these tax breaks are just a way politicians have bought the votes of people who made the decisions to become parents. At the expense of non-parents. The unfortunate thing is that today, becoming a parent is truly a lifestyle option as opposed to the days before widely available birth control. And let's not get into a discussion of other programs designed to benefit children, such as WIC and the like. Well, WIC is technically a farm subsidy program. I get being upset about the tax breaks to parents, but I'm a little baffled by the having to cover for them if they miss work part. Wouldn't you have to do that for any coworker regardless of why they miss? I only get X amount of days off a year. If they weren't for sick kids or snow days at school I'd just book a cruise or something.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Jan 28, 2015 17:12:58 GMT -5
I earn significantly more than does DH, so we pay a huge marriage penalty. I'm ok with that as DH is worth it. We have one child, who until this year, was in a private school. So for this year, yes I thank those who help "subsidize" DD's education (and unless you attended private school yourself it's just playing it forward IMHO). My medical premiums are about $900 a month (my employer already scaled them to earnings before ACA and I agree with this). My family is relatively healthy and our deductibles/OOP cover most of our actual expenses so yes, we subsidize others. I don't get any kind of tax "credits". My household effective Federal rate is somewhere between 23 and 25%. I'm in a pretty narrow bracket income/tax rate wise but can't really do much about it. I have NEVER had anyone cover for me because of child issues - my specialized role/position simply doesn't allow it. I work more late nights and weekends then do most of our single people. Right now I have more co-workers taking FMLA for parent care issues than child care issues. My park district has more senior/adult programs in the current guide than child programs. Our township also has a senior center and senior bussing. For DD I get an additional personal exemption and that's it. Daycare is not deductible and my employers (except for one) did not offer pre-tax Flex spending. Back when I was growing up there wasn't these amazing medical advances that allowed certain conditions of ageing to be treated effectively. People died much more frequently from strokes, heart attacks, and cancer than they do today. So older people are living longer today at the expense of younger people who are actually paying taxes. After all, those treatments were not figured into the morbidity tables when the current retirees tax rates were calculated. And let's not get into a discussion of how the vast majority of senior collect more in SS/Medicare then they ever paid in. (See how that can work both ways? )
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,087
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Jan 28, 2015 17:13:07 GMT -5
Back when my four siblings and I were growing up, there was no dependant deduction, no child care deduction, no educational expenses/educational savings deduction. If you had kids, you footed the bill. All of these tax breaks are just a way politicians have bought the votes of people who made the decisions to become parents. At the expense of non-parents. The unfortunate thing is that today, becoming a parent is truly a lifestyle option as opposed to the days before widely available birth control. And let's not get into a discussion of other programs designed to benefit children, such as WIC and the like. Well, WIC is technically a farm subsidy program. I get being upset about the tax breaks to parents, but I'm a little baffled by the having to cover for them if they miss work part. Wouldn't you have to do that for any coworker regardless of why they miss? I only get X amount of days off a year. If they weren't for sick kids or snow days at school I'd just book a cruise or something. It depends on the job and what is going on. I've worked at jobs where the childless folks were expected to work every holiday/weekend because the people with kids "have kids and can't be expected to work CHristmas/Thanksgiving/Easter/etc". In the military, we had assignments frequently given to people who were childless even though it was the person with the children's turn. Why? "Because they don't have kids so they are able to go". It was very aggravating. What made it worse was that people with kids/dependents got extra money for being separated (Family Separation Allowance) if they actually had to deploy/go overseas without their family. There was no such allowance or accommodation for those who were single and who were stationed thousands of miles away from their families (mom, dad, grandma, cousins, etc).
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 17:20:57 GMT -5
Back when my four siblings and I were growing up, there was no dependant deduction, no child care deduction, no educational expenses/educational savings deduction. If you had kids, you footed the bill. All of these tax breaks are just a way politicians have bought the votes of people who made the decisions to become parents. At the expense of non-parents. The unfortunate thing is that today, becoming a parent is truly a lifestyle option as opposed to the days before widely available birth control. And let's not get into a discussion of other programs designed to benefit children, such as WIC and the like. Well, WIC is technically a farm subsidy program. I get being upset about the tax breaks to parents, but I'm a little baffled by the having to cover for them if they miss work part. Wouldn't you have to do that for any coworker regardless of why they miss? I only get X amount of days off a year. If they weren't for sick kids or snow days at school I'd just book a cruise or something. Nope, this is time away from work in addition to the normal vacation or sick day allowances that are available to all employees. Happens at every company I've worked for. Parents leave early for kid activities and the like and the non parents are expected to answer the phone calls, answer the questions, and resolve the problems that the parent would have dealt with had they been at work. (Some state now require that employers now allow parents to take paid (I believe) time off work (in addition to vacation/sick time) to attend school meetings, such as parent/teacher conferences. As far as I know, no state requries employer to provide non-parents a comparable amount of paid time away from work.) And, if you are an exempt employee, as I have been all my working life, the overtime that you need to spend at work because you've been covering for a missing parent comes out of your personal time, with no additional compensation. In fact, studies show that parents generally receive higher compensation, raises, and bonuses than the people who must cover for the missing parents. Suspect the compensation inequity has a lot to do with employer perceptions of who "needs" money to support their family and who "does not", and the fact that the compensation decision makers are often parents themselves.
|
|
quince
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 23, 2011 17:51:12 GMT -5
Posts: 2,699
|
Post by quince on Jan 28, 2015 17:34:42 GMT -5
Before I had kids, my views were a lot like Tskeeter's.
Now that I have a kid, my views....haven't changed a bit.
I never really minded paying taxes, though. I don't think all the breaks for kid-havers is right, but when I wasn't a kid-haver, I didn't mind paying.
I don't mind paying now.
I thought that marriage penalty really shows up when two people make like incomes? It's generally a benefit when there's a huge income gap? I made 1/6th of what my husband did last year. Being married didn't hurt. (The fact that what we paid in taxes last year is equal to the amount we spent the year before hurts a little, though.)
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jan 28, 2015 17:44:39 GMT -5
I know spending $25,000/year in childcare to get a $1,200K tax credit has been one of the best financial moves I have ever made.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 17:45:48 GMT -5
I earn significantly more than does DH, so we pay a huge marriage penalty. I'm ok with that as DH is worth it. We have one child, who until this year, was in a private school. So for this year, yes I thank those who help "subsidize" DD's education (and unless you attended private school yourself it's just playing it forward IMHO). My medical premiums are about $900 a month (my employer already scaled them to earnings before ACA and I agree with this). My family is relatively healthy and our deductibles/OOP cover most of our actual expenses so yes, we subsidize others. I don't get any kind of tax "credits". My household effective Federal rate is somewhere between 23 and 25%. I'm in a pretty narrow bracket income/tax rate wise but can't really do much about it. I have NEVER had anyone cover for me because of child issues - my specialized role/position simply doesn't allow it. I work more late nights and weekends then do most of our single people. Right now I have more co-workers taking FMLA for parent care issues than child care issues. My park district has more senior/adult programs in the current guide than child programs. Our township also has a senior center and senior bussing. For DD I get an additional personal exemption and that's it. Daycare is not deductible and my employers (except for one) did not offer pre-tax Flex spending. Back when I was growing up there wasn't these amazing medical advances that allowed certain conditions of ageing to be treated effectively. People died much more frequently from strokes, heart attacks, and cancer than they do today. So older people are living longer today at the expense of younger people who are actually paying taxes. After all, those treatments were not figured into the morbidity tables when the current retirees tax rates were calculated. And let's not get into a discussion of how the vast majority of senior collect more in SS/Medicare then they ever paid in. (See how that can work both ways? ) Captain, I'd like to point out that we all had parents. So we're all likely to deal with issues surrounding aging parents. None of us had the option to choose whether we had parents or not. It comes as a package deal. However, we can choose whether to become parents, or not. The same logic applies to senior parks and rec. programs vs. kids programs. All taxpayers hope to become seniors. However, for taxpayers to become kids again and particiapte in kids parks and rec prgrams doesn't seem to be an option. (If you try to pull that one, you'll probably find yourself jailed as a potential pedofile.) As far as SS is concerned, many of us will receive less in SS benefits than we would have received had we been allowed to invest our SS/medicare withholdings in the investment of our choice. SS is about wealth redistribution from wealthy retirees to poorer retirees (my after tax SS benefits from a $80K income will be surprisingly similar to my retarded BIL's after tax benefits on a $20K income), and income and from short lived retirees to long lived retirees. It's not about old people getting more in social security benefits than the present value of their contributions.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jan 28, 2015 17:46:01 GMT -5
Well, WIC is technically a farm subsidy program. I get being upset about the tax breaks to parents, but I'm a little baffled by the having to cover for them if they miss work part. Wouldn't you have to do that for any coworker regardless of why they miss? I only get X amount of days off a year. If they weren't for sick kids or snow days at school I'd just book a cruise or something. Nope, this is time away from work in addition to the normal vacation or sick day allowances that are available to all employees. Happens at every company I've worked for. Parents leave early for kid activities and the like and the non parents are expected to answer the phone calls, answer the questions, and resolve the problems that the parent would have dealt with had they been at work. (Some state now require that employers now allow parents to take paid (I believe) time off work (in addition to vacation/sick time) to attend school meetings, such as parent/teacher conferences. As far as I know, no state requries employer to provide non-parents a comparable amount of paid time away from work.) And, if you are an exempt employee, as I have been all my working life, the overtime that you need to spend at work because you've been covering for a missing parent comes out of your personal time, with no additional compensation. In fact, studies show that parents generally receive higher compensation, raises, and bonuses than the people who must cover for the missing parents. Suspect the compensation inequity has a lot to do with employer perceptions of who "needs" money to support their family and who "does not", and the fact that the compensation decision makers are often parents themselves. And once again I count my lucky stars that I chose a good profession & a good employer. I would be bitter too if I had to deal with this type of stuff.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 17:46:01 GMT -5
Well, WIC is technically a farm subsidy program. I get being upset about the tax breaks to parents, but I'm a little baffled by the having to cover for them if they miss work part. Wouldn't you have to do that for any coworker regardless of why they miss? I only get X amount of days off a year. If they weren't for sick kids or snow days at school I'd just book a cruise or something. Nope, this is time away from work in addition to the normal vacation or sick day allowances that are available to all employees. Happens at every company I've worked for. Parents leave early for kid activities and the like and the non parents are expected to answer the phone calls, answer the questions, and resolve the problems that the parent would have dealt with had they been at work. (Some state now require that employers now allow parents to take paid (I believe) time off work (in addition to vacation/sick time) to attend school meetings, such as parent/teacher conferences. As far as I know, no state requries employer to provide non-parents a comparable amount of paid time away from work.) And, if you are an exempt employee, as I have been all my working life, the overtime that you need to spend at work because you've been covering for a missing parent comes out of your personal time, with no additional compensation. In fact, studies show that parents generally receive higher compensation, raises, and bonuses than the people who must cover for the missing parents. Suspect the compensation inequity has a lot to do with employer perceptions of who "needs" money to support their family and who "does not", and the fact that the compensation decision makers are often parents themselves. This isn't how it is where I work. At least not for the hourly people. We get either 80 or 120 vacation and 40 hours of sick time a year and there is no extra for anyone, anything above and beyond that better be FMLA or some other approved leave of absence or you'll accrue occurrences. Six of them in a rolling 12 months mean you're out the door. Now, SALARY people may slip out early for this and that for their kids, but I know just as many single ones of those that take 2 hour lunches at the gym and leave early too. We are allowed 8 hours of UNPAID time for school related functions, but I never take it unpaid because I am not one of those higher compensated parents either.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 17:46:52 GMT -5
I know spending $25,000/year in childcare to get a $1,200K tax credit has been one of the best financial moves I have ever made. And your daycare provider is probably paying taxes on that 25K.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 17:48:29 GMT -5
Nope, this is time away from work in addition to the normal vacation or sick day allowances that are available to all employees. Happens at every company I've worked for. Parents leave early for kid activities and the like and the non parents are expected to answer the phone calls, answer the questions, and resolve the problems that the parent would have dealt with had they been at work. (Some state now require that employers now allow parents to take paid (I believe) time off work (in addition to vacation/sick time) to attend school meetings, such as parent/teacher conferences. As far as I know, no state requries employer to provide non-parents a comparable amount of paid time away from work.) And, if you are an exempt employee, as I have been all my working life, the overtime that you need to spend at work because you've been covering for a missing parent comes out of your personal time, with no additional compensation. In fact, studies show that parents generally receive higher compensation, raises, and bonuses than the people who must cover for the missing parents. Suspect the compensation inequity has a lot to do with employer perceptions of who "needs" money to support their family and who "does not", and the fact that the compensation decision makers are often parents themselves. This isn't how it is where I work. At least not for the hourly people. We get either 80 or 120 vacation and 40 hours of sick time a year and there is no extra for anyone, anything above and beyond that better be FMLA or some other approved leave of absence or you'll accrue occurrences. Six of them in a rolling 12 months mean you're out the door. Now, SALARY people may slip out early for this and that for their kids, but I know just as many single ones of those that take 2 hour lunches at the gym and leave early too. We are allowed 8 hours of UNPAID time for school related functions, but I never take it unpaid because I am not one of those higher compensated parents either. Apparently your observations differ from my experience.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jan 28, 2015 17:52:51 GMT -5
This isn't how it is where I work. At least not for the hourly people. We get either 80 or 120 vacation and 40 hours of sick time a year and there is no extra for anyone, anything above and beyond that better be FMLA or some other approved leave of absence or you'll accrue occurrences. Six of them in a rolling 12 months mean you're out the door. Now, SALARY people may slip out early for this and that for their kids, but I know just as many single ones of those that take 2 hour lunches at the gym and leave early too. We are allowed 8 hours of UNPAID time for school related functions, but I never take it unpaid because I am not one of those higher compensated parents either. Apparently your observations differ from my experience. A lot of it would depend on the type of job. Certain jobs need someone there (retail, healthcare). My job, if I'm out for the afternoon, then my calls go to voicemail or get forwarded to my phone. Then I can deal with it the next day or work from home after the kids go to bed. Except for an extended absence like maternity leave, no one takes over my job when I'm gone. It just waits until I come back, especially if we are talking about taking an hour to go to a parent/teacher conference.
And we don't have extra time off for parents. They get the same as everyone else.
|
|
cktc
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 19, 2013 22:15:31 GMT -5
Posts: 3,202
|
Post by cktc on Jan 28, 2015 17:53:34 GMT -5
No marriage penalty for me. Given, I'm not married. I do find it interesting that none of the examples had above the line deductions. If the government is going to take all your money if you get married, it might be time to consider a retirement account!
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jan 28, 2015 17:54:29 GMT -5
but I'm a little baffled by the having to cover for them if they miss work part. Wouldn't you have to do that for any coworker regardless of why they miss?
Not really. If I am out of work on vacation, I've usually cleared things up so that no one needs to do anything for me. Even when I was sick (including the last day of work I worked before I wound up in the hospital with my infection), I was working up to the point where I had completed what needed to be done. I very rarely left early from work with work left undone for the day.
I'm salaried, so I worked until I was done for the day. Some days I could leave early, but more days than not I was in the lab until late. And there was a bitch of a 2 year period where I saw 2 am in the lab more than I would like.
However, I worked with a woman who had to be out of the lab at 4 on the dot (regardless of what time she came in), to pick up her son from school. I would imagine either me or our third coworker completed a good half of her experiments while she was employed by the lab. If something was happening (like a freezer going down) where all hands were called in to help, she got a pass. It got old.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,385
|
Post by movingforward on Jan 28, 2015 17:54:44 GMT -5
I am childless and don't mind paying taxes for schools. Educating society, in general, is important IMO. I do have a problem with the way a lot of the school systems spend tax payer dollars though, especially in my state. I suspect people with or without kids have the same issue with this.
The child tax credit does bother me a bit (only because I want more money - lol) and I can get over it.
At my workplace everyone gets the same amount of PTO. I don't care what people use it for... they can use it because their kid is sick, because they want to go on a luxury cruise, or stay home eating a giant Hershey bar while binge watching The Walking Dead. No one gets any "extras" just because they have kids. People can make-up time if they want to leave early and not use PTO. I don't really care... as long as everyone is pulling their own weight it makes no difference to me.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 17:55:18 GMT -5
Nope, this is time away from work in addition to the normal vacation or sick day allowances that are available to all employees. Happens at every company I've worked for. Parents leave early for kid activities and the like and the non parents are expected to answer the phone calls, answer the questions, and resolve the problems that the parent would have dealt with had they been at work. (Some state now require that employers now allow parents to take paid (I believe) time off work (in addition to vacation/sick time) to attend school meetings, such as parent/teacher conferences. As far as I know, no state requries employer to provide non-parents a comparable amount of paid time away from work.) And, if you are an exempt employee, as I have been all my working life, the overtime that you need to spend at work because you've been covering for a missing parent comes out of your personal time, with no additional compensation. In fact, studies show that parents generally receive higher compensation, raises, and bonuses than the people who must cover for the missing parents. Suspect the compensation inequity has a lot to do with employer perceptions of who "needs" money to support their family and who "does not", and the fact that the compensation decision makers are often parents themselves. And once again I count my lucky stars that I chose a good profession & a good employer. I would be bitter too if I had to deal with this type of stuff. Actually, I did choose a good profession (accounting) and good employers (Where I worked for over 20 years is regularly recognized as a great place to work. For working mothers. For ethnic minorities. For GLBT employees. I would even say if was, on the whole, a good place to work for a childless, white male.) It's just that there are commonly inequities in how employers and managers treat parents vs. how they treat and what they expect of non-parents. Mardi Gras Audrey's description of what happens in the military is exactly the type of things that happen to non-parents in the private sector. My observation is that many, if not most parents do not recognize these inequities in the workplace. Or, are they in denial about the existance of the inequities because they benefit from them?
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,138
|
Post by giramomma on Jan 28, 2015 17:57:16 GMT -5
Captain, I'd like to point out that we all had parents. So we're all likely to deal with issues surrounding aging parents. Really? What about siblings that have moved far away. BIL lives 1500 miles away. He's never going to deal with his aging parents in a way that will affect his job. Neither will his wife. What about our family, where if we can keep DH working part time, we will do so, so that he's available to take care of aging parents, and I can keep working and not need to take time off? Funny, that's been our approach with how we handle our kids needs too? There's lots of inconsiderate people at my office that don't have the child (their kids are in college) or aging parent excuse. One department won't let folks know when their taking off until the night before, if that. Generally their vacation time is top secret, and that can really mess up my work flow. Or I have to work harder/faster to make up for them being out. So, I'm wondering how this is so much better? ETA: I also worked during all three of my maternity leaves so that I didn't saddle my co-workers with extra work. I'm the first young(er) woman to have children in my department in like a decade. Because I didn't take advantage of leave, etc. other women that have recently had children have been able to negotiate work place flexibilities. If I was a crap employee, there'd be less flexibility.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 10:46:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 17:57:47 GMT -5
My job is the same as Angel's if I don't do it, it's there staring me in the face the next day. It doesn't get handed off to someone else.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jan 28, 2015 18:02:38 GMT -5
Captain, I'd like to point out that we all had parents. So we're all likely to deal with issues surrounding aging parents. Really? What about siblings that have moved far away. BIL lives 1500 miles away. He's never going to deal with his aging parents in a way that will affect his job. Neither will his wife. What about our family, where if we can keep DH working part time, we will do so, so that he's available to take care of aging parents, and I can keep working and not need to take time off? Funny, that's been our approach with how we handle our kids needs too? There's lots of inconsiderate people at my office that don't have the child (their kids are in college) or aging parent excuse. One department won't let folks know when their taking off until the night before, if that. Generally their vacation time is top secret, and that can really mess up my work flow. Or I have to work harder/faster to make up for them being out. So, I'm wondering how this is so much better? When I moved to TX, I was out of work 6 weeks dealing with my dying mom in NY. Both of my sibs had families and could not spend that amount of time, but as the single person (despite the fact that I lived the furthest away), I got to shoulder the burden of it. It's very likely I'm going to get to do it for my dad - and I am twice as far as I was back then. It is not about distance, but the person who has the ability to deal with the problem.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,138
|
Post by giramomma on Jan 28, 2015 18:09:43 GMT -5
That's fine. I'll rephrase. Not all children have the ability to deal with an aging parent. So, therefore, we are not all likely to deal with aging parents in a way that will affect our jobs. ETA: In our case it will not only be distance, but ability. My (future) SIL is looking to have kids, but she so saddled with student debt, she shared that they can't afford to pay for daycare once they have a child(ren). She is hoping her parents will watch any children she has for free. BIL and his SO can't afford the future they want. They aren't going to be able to leave everything for really any amount of time to take care of DH's folks. Which is fine. This is what we've understood all along. I'm sure we're not the only family with siblings where the care of aging adults will really only fall on the shoulders of one sibling, and not all of them.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 18:10:52 GMT -5
Captain, I'd like to point out that we all had parents. So we're all likely to deal with issues surrounding aging parents. Really? What about siblings that have moved far away. BIL lives 1500 miles away. He's never going to deal with his aging parents in a way that will affect his job. Neither will his wife. What about our family, where if we can keep DH working part time, we will do so, so that he's available to take care of aging parents, and I can keep working and not need to take time off? Funny, that's been our approach with how we handle our kids needs too? There's lots of inconsiderate people at my office that don't have the child (their kids are in college) or aging parent excuse. One department won't let folks know when their taking off until the night before, if that. Generally their vacation time is top secret, and that can really mess up my work flow. Or I have to work harder/faster to make up for them being out. So, I'm wondering how this is so much better? I'm sure that the impact of aging parents on various family members will differ, depending on how close they live to their parents. But, we all have parents and will most likely deal with aging parents in some fashion or another. (Boy am I thankful for my sister, BIL, and nephews, who live a few miles from my parent's house and keep and eye on things. But, it was me who used my three weeks of vacation time and flew from Chicago to the west coast to help care for Mom after she had a major stroke.) As far as people at your work being inconsiderate of others, I don't think that is a function of their being or not being parents. I think it's more a question of the workplace expectations your employer has established. It appears that your employer is willing to tolerate this lack of consideration among coworkers.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 26,210
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
Member is Online
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Jan 28, 2015 18:11:59 GMT -5
And you wonder why I have stayed single for the last 32 yrs - to avoid the marriage tax
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jan 28, 2015 18:12:42 GMT -5
And once again I count my lucky stars that I chose a good profession & a good employer. I would be bitter too if I had to deal with this type of stuff. Actually, I did choose a good profession (accounting) and good employers (Where I worked for over 20 years is regularly recognized as a great place to work. For working mothers. For ethnic minorities. For GLBT employees. I would even say if was, on the whole, a good place to work for a childless, white male.) It's just that there are commonly inequities in how employers and managers treat parents vs. how they treat and what they expect of non-parents. Mardi Gras Audrey's description of what happens in the military is exactly the type of things that happen to non-parents in the private sector. My observation is that many, if not most parents do not recognize these inequities in the workplace. Or, are they in denial about the existance of the inequities because they benefit from them? Well you didn't choose a good profession or employers when it comes to this issue or you wouldn't be complaining. Your job obviously has shorter deadlines than mine if a person leaving for 2 hours means others have to pick up the slack.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 18:14:18 GMT -5
I know spending $25,000/year in childcare to get a $1,200K tax credit has been one of the best financial moves I have ever made. No one said it was a smart financial move on your part. But you had sex and I get to pay part of the $1,200 tax credit you get as a result of having sex. That's not feeling very fulfilling to me.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jan 28, 2015 18:16:08 GMT -5
And you wonder why I have stayed single for the last 32 yrs - to avoid the marriage tax You must have figured out that the marriage tax isn't what gets paid to the IRS. It's really what your spouse spends and how annoying they can be.
|
|