37 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Not every business is the same. It's not a problem for a deli to hire someone two days after an employee leaves on mat leave but try replacing a legal secretary that knows your cases intimately or a personal assistant that literally runs your operation. The loss of that person can be detrimental to a business and a temporary hire will likely only partially fill his/her shoes especially with the full awareness that in due course he/she will be out of a job. On the flipside sometimes the temporary worker will be a better match for the employer but once the previous employee returns to temp must give up his/her position.

I'll post this link again. Everyone interested in this topic has to read that article.

There is, however, plenty of expense that comes with managing an employee’s year-long absence, starting with finding a temporary replacement. Job advertising costs, plus the fees for a recruiter to scout for candidates, review resumés, interview, do reference checks and negotiate the offer terms are just the beginning. Add to that training expenses for the newcomer. And if there’s an overlap between the temporary and the outgoing employee to ease the transition, companies pay double wages and EI contributions for that period. “Even if an internal person fills a mat leave, there’s the domino effect within the organization,” says Margaret de Gruchy, a recruitment and retention specialist in B.C., “because while Sally is filling the temporary position, Sue has to fill Sally’s job, but then who will fill Sue’s job?”

[jonny]

Not every business is the same. It's not a problem for a deli to hire someone two days after an employee leaves on mat leave but try replacing a legal secretary that knows your cases intimately or a personal assistant that literally runs your operation. The loss of that person can be detrimental to a business and a temporary hire will likely only partially fill his/her shoes especially with the full awareness that in due course he/she will be out of a job. On the flipside sometimes the temporary worker will be a better match for the employer but once the previous employee returns to temp must give up his/her position.

This is true. Procreation is expensive and maternity leaves are a fact of modern day Canadian society. A good friend of mine just got back from a 6 month paternity leave, which his employer had to deal with.

Mike, you're identifying that maternity leave is a cost of business. Great, but what do you want done about it? The government forking over cash to the law firm for the duration of the legal secretary's maternity leave sounds an awful lot like the government helping the law firm cover their own business expenses.

Where I work, we recently had a new hire quit after two days on the job. We spend thousands on recruiting, interviewing and debating this hire only to have them provide almost zero productive work for us. Should we be compensated for this cost of business by the government? I don't think so.

[VicHockeyFan]

I didn't mean to intimate that I thought you were saying the employer should fire the pregnant employee.

Employee recruitment and training are costs of any business. Personnel come and go. It is backwards to think of a woman becoming pregnant and taking maternity leave as a loss of productivity for the business, and I think this is the last place we need another government program.

I'm not sure if it's backwards, or reality. People wonder why there are few women in higher positions in large corporations, I say that's easy to answer, they have kids, and 99% of the time the woman stays home after they are born to care for them, not the male of the household. They lose years where a similar non-kid person keeps gaining experience and expertise in their field.

How far OT is this thread now?

[sebberry]

Bigger businesses can probably absorb the costs more easily than small businesses.

I'm not too concerned about the law firm losing the lunch lady for 6 months, but if you're operating any one of the many small businesses in town struggling to find enough regular hours for your employees then mat leave can be a serious issue.

I don't think the government should be paying the wages of the replacement, but surely eliminating the employer's portion of CPP/EI contributions would help, if just a little.

[Mike K.]

Bigger businesses can probably absorb the costs more easily than small businesses.

I don't think the government should be paying the wages of the replacement, but surely eliminating the employer's portion of CPP/EI contributions would help, if just a little.

That's a step in the right direction.

Mike, you're identifying that maternity leave is a cost of business. Great, but what do you want done about it? The government forking over cash to the law firm for the duration of the legal secretary's maternity leave sounds an awful lot like the government helping the law firm cover their own business expenses.

If the latter was the result of someone leaving on maternity, then yes, I think there should be something available for employers to draw from when an employee leaves for maternity and costs are incurred to find a temporary replacement.

I'm not going to get into where you work, that's up to you to disclose, but your organization represents the upper echelon of companies in this region. The vast majority of employers do not have the means or the wherewithal to headhunt the perfect employee that must be temporarily hired to fill a crucial position in their small business when an employee leaves on maternity.

[jonny]

I'm not going to get into where you work, that's up to you to disclose, but your organization represents the upper echelon of companies in this region. The vast majority of employers do not have the means or the wherewithal to headhunt the perfect employee that must be temporarily hired to fill a crucial position in their small business when an employee leaves on maternity.

I understand, but again, I don't know what the government is supposed to do about this. Even my large organization struggles to fill in for employees on maternity leave, and in almost every instance we do so through internal reshuffling or temporary assignments.

As far as Alchemy is concerned, I'm not so sure a hair stylist in training is so hard to replace.

[Mike K.]

There are a variety of programs currently in place that assist employers in some sectors with wages, like research and development grants that are the reason for many local tech jobs around Victoria (some of these tech companies could never afford to hire people if they paid a full wage).

This system of grants could be extended to companies who have employees on maternity leave which could then help them cover the cost of a full time temp. It would be a big help for an employer who could hire a temporary worker and expense the costs of their training knowing that they're only paying $0.50 on the dollar on their wage. Of course this would probably only apply to certain industries and certain sectors -- service sector workers are (typically) easier to find and temporarily replace than, say, a professional.

Just an idea.

[Langford Rat]

Once the 17 weeks of mat leave expires the new mom can then go on a further 35 weeks of EI- paid parental leave. A few years ago my company hired a young woman for a fairly important position within our organization. We went through an extensive training period with her and shortly after she had become proficient on her own, she informed us that she was going on Mat and Parental leave. She wasn’t “showing” at the time of her interview and wasn’t about to offer up the info that she was pregnant We were faced with replacing her for one year. During these leaves we were compelled to treat her as a regular employee in all respects. We have a very comprehensive benefit package that we continued to pay on her behalf: basic medical, extended medical, life insurance, long-term disability insurance, contributions to her RRSPs, etc. We hired and trained her replacement with the understanding that it was only a temporary position (for about one year). We remained in contact throughout her leave and just as the leave was about to expire she sent us her letter of resignation. She had decided to become a “stay at home” Mom. Being a good Mom, she made sure she had taken full advantage of our benefits package (all the family dental work completed to the max, eye glasses for the other kids and such). Her replacement had already secured another position, out of province (which we were unable to talk her out of) in anticipation of being displaced and we started the whole process again. The “stay at home Mom” was working for another company within a month of her resignation…..

[jonny]

^ That sounds like a pretty extreme case. Definitely not a classy move on her part. One of those things that is within her legal rights, but not ethical or the right thing to do. In a small town like Victoria it's never good to burn bridges like that.

That being said, a man could do the same thing if he chose to go on paternity leave.

[Sparky]

I had a male employee do that. He used the EI funds to subsidize his family while he started his own personal service business. ARG!!

[theboss]

Tyshynski ordered the respondents to pay LaCouvee $7,500 as damages for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect

How can you effectively give out money to someone based on feelings?

Here's a real gem from our fair city about the B.C Human Rights Tribunal.
http://fullcomment.n...ugging-dispute/

[Mike K.]

^wow.

[VicHockeyFan]

How can you effectively give out money to someone based on feelings?

Who knows. It never used to be the base of a civil case, hurting someone's feelings.

[Dimitrios]

Once the 17 weeks of mat leave expires the new mom can then go on a further 35 weeks of EI- paid parental leave. A few years ago my company hired a young woman for a fairly important position within our organization. We went through an extensive training period with her and shortly after she had become proficient on her own, she informed us that she was going on Mat and Parental leave. She wasn’t “showing” at the time of her interview and wasn’t about to offer up the info that she was pregnant We were faced with replacing her for one year. During these leaves we were compelled to treat her as a regular employee in all respects. We have a very comprehensive benefit package that we continued to pay on her behalf: basic medical, extended medical, life insurance, long-term disability insurance, contributions to her RRSPs, etc. We hired and trained her replacement with the understanding that it was only a temporary position (for about one year). We remained in contact throughout her leave and just as the leave was about to expire she sent us her letter of resignation. She had decided to become a “stay at home” Mom. Being a good Mom, she made sure she had taken full advantage of our benefits package (all the family dental work completed to the max, eye glasses for the other kids and such). Her replacement had already secured another position, out of province (which we were unable to talk her out of) in anticipation of being displaced and we started the whole process again. The “stay at home Mom” was working for another company within a month of her resignation…..

Yeah, that sounds like she took advantage of your company, but also points to a leave package too easily abused. In the prov gov (BCGEU), parental leaves get topped up a bit above EI (nowhere close to the federal union rate, mind you), but must sign an agreement that you will return to work for a minimum of 6 months after returning.

[pherthyl]

Yeah, that sounds like she took advantage of your company, but also points to a leave package too easily abused. In the prov gov (BCGEU), parental leaves get topped up a bit above EI (nowhere close to the federal union rate, mind you), but must sign an agreement that you will return to work for a minimum of 6 months after returning.

This is a good policy. If you don't come back to work you have to pay back some money I believe...

[pherthyl]

Once the 17 weeks of mat leave expires the new mom can then go on a further 35 weeks of EI- paid parental leave. A few years ago my company hired a young woman for a fairly important position within our organization. We went through an extensive training period with her and shortly after she had become proficient on her own, she informed us that she was going on Mat and Parental leave. She wasn’t “showing” at the time of her interview and wasn’t about to offer up the info that she was pregnant We were faced with replacing her for one year. During these leaves we were compelled to treat her as a regular employee in all respects. We have a very comprehensive benefit package that we continued to pay on her behalf: basic medical, extended medical, life insurance, long-term disability insurance, contributions to her RRSPs, etc. We hired and trained her replacement with the understanding that it was only a temporary position (for about one year). We remained in contact throughout her leave and just as the leave was about to expire she sent us her letter of resignation. She had decided to become a “stay at home” Mom. Being a good Mom, she made sure she had taken full advantage of our benefits package (all the family dental work completed to the max, eye glasses for the other kids and such). Her replacement had already secured another position, out of province (which we were unable to talk her out of) in anticipation of being displaced and we started the whole process again. The “stay at home Mom” was working for another company within a month of her resignation…..

Sounds like a crappy experience. Although I wonder if maybe there are some issues in the company if she would rather quit and find a different job than go back to one she already had secured...

[LJ]

.

I'm not too concerned about the law firm losing the lunch lady for 6 months, but if you're operating any one of the many small businesses in town struggling to find enough regular hours for your employees then mat leave can be a serious issue.

Well wouldn't you take that as a perfect time to mention that due to lack of work you are going to have to lay someone off?

[Sloth]

Slightly irrelevant to the larger topic at hand, but I can't help chiming in to say that I had an absolutely horrific experience at Alchemy. I won't go into details (for my own privacy reasons), but one of the employees there SEVERELY screwed up a personal service on me, which had a very ugly and painful result, which I had to live with for over a month (I'm talking about much more than a "bad haircut", by the way).

They said sorry but refused to return even a dime of my money. In short, given their business practices, I'm not totally surprised that they would fire a pregnant woman.