From: forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona)
Subject: Re: "Liberal" - A Misnomer
Organization: gte
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:04:18 GMT

In article <2414@unet.UUCP>, heidi@wolf.net.com (Heidi Wolf) writes:
> jason@ab20.larc.nasa.gov (Jason Austin) writes:
> >
> >For example, a bill in the works now will force business to
> >provide long term maturnity leave; this is an expansion of government
> >to take more control of private business.  Bush has vetoed this bill
> >in the past and will probably veto it again.  
> 
> 
> The bill mentioned above is the Family Leave Act, which would
> affect businesses with 50 or more employees.  The "long term
> maturnity [sic] leave" being considered is in fact 12 weeks.  
> That's 3 months.  About a month after your child smiles at you
> for the first time, and while you're probably still getting up
> at least once in the middle of every night for feedings, you'd
> be heading back to work.  Probably doesn't feel too "long term" 
> to most parents in that situation....

Aaaaw, how sad.  Lemme tell ya something, buddy: I've had two 
children and haven't taken more than 3 days off for either.  And
I was getting up *every* time for the first 2 weeks, but I could
still work.  What the hell do you think this is, heaven?  Life
is tough and life can be miserable -- so what?  It is not the 
place of gov't to make life "easy."  

Furthermore, 90% of businesses already allow 45-90 days 
maternity leave.  The few that don't cannot afford to do so.

> The Family Leave Act would also allow people to take off some
> time (I don't know how much) to care for ailing family members.
> I believe this provision of the bill is a response to the fact
> that many people of working age have aging parents, who may
> need help from their grown children if they fall ill.  (It may
> also be applicable to parents who have children in day care;
> can anyone provide further details of the bill?)

The terms I've heard are "family emergencies" and "care for sick 
family members."  

The problem with this bill is that it will force a lot of small
companines out of business -- it costs money to hire temp workers
and you always loose production.  Many small businesses are on
the brink of failure right now (between the high tax rates and
the slow economy, what do you expect).  Additional federal 
blunders, such as the Family Leave Act, will only server to
push us into a real depression.

Most businesses will give a person time off for family emergencies.
Granted, it won't be 3 months, but that long of a period could
be damaging to companies with 50 - 500 employees.  

I *might* be abel to support the bill if it were for comapnies
with more than 1000 employees.  (if 10 of 1000 employees are out,
the damage is minimal but if 10 of 50 employees are out, the 
business will probably suffer economic loss and may well fold.)


-- 
"25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with
no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy.  However, 4 out of 5 US murders are 
committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?"   -  Andrew Ford
gtephx!forda@enuucp.eas.asu.edu  OR  !uunet!samsung!romed!enuucp!gtephx!forda
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:4995 alt.politics.bush:4784