SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On Tuesday, August 4th, Neflix announced on their blog that they would begin offering new parents a progressive parental leave policy:
...Today we're introducing an unlimited leave policy for new moms and dads that allows them to take off as much time as they want during the first year after a child's birth or adoption.
The Boston Globe picked up the story earlier today and compared Netflix's new policy to Google's, which offers 18 weeks of paid maternity leave and 12 weeks of "baby bonding" time. The Boston Globe also notes:
The US and Papua New Guinea are the only countries among 185 nations and territories that hadn't imposed government-mandated laws requiring employers to pay mothers while on leave with their babies, according to a study released last year by the United Nations' International Labor Organization.
This new policy "covers all of the roughly 2,000 people working at [Netflix's] Internet video and DVD-by-mail services, according to the Los Gatos, California, company."
However, not all media voices are pleased with this change. Suzanne Venker, author of the recent book The Two-Income Trap: Why Parents Are Choosing To Stay Home, writes for Time :
Offering new parents full pay for up to one year is akin to putting a band-aid on a gaping wound. The needs of children are huge, and they do not end at one year. On the contrary, they just begin. Taking a year off of work to meet those needs merely scratches the surface.
What does Soylent think? Should companies offer new parents lengthy paid leave after they bring a new bundle of joy into the world, or do generous policies do more harm than good?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 06 2015, @06:21PM
That is not a new phenomenon. How do you think the word "okay" came in to being and entered common use?
Whether this is good or bad I do not know and have no opinion.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday August 06 2015, @06:38PM
I don't think there's much inherently bad about it. For some reason I just find it very irritating. Dilution of the meanings of words would be a bad point as would the fact it might make the text harder for some readers to understand. These phrases generally bloat out an article as well which wastes RAM, time and sometimes paper. Ah that's probably one of the reasons they do it. It stuffs their word count whilst avoiding repetition of words.
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?