Zuckerberg To Take 2 Months Paternity Leave To Give His Kid a Better Outcome (techcrunch.com) 164
theodp writes: TechCrunch reports that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg will take two months off from Facebook for paternity leave. Why? "Studies show that when working parents take time to be with their newborns, outcomes are better for the children and families," Zuckerberg explained in a FB post on Friday. "At Facebook we offer our U.S. employees up to 4 months of paid maternity or paternity leave which they can take throughout the year." No word on why the child will only get 50% of that time — maybe that's what the gains chart suggested as a good tradeoff — or if expectant parents who apply to send their children to Zuckerberg's new Primary School, which aims to "help children from underserved communities reach their full potential," will be expected to make a similar commitment.
And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Good on him, who cares. Next?
Re:And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Good on him indeed, this means several things:
He's a big-shot CEO who can delegate. Great
This sort of things is not reserved for women. Fathers should take time off too. Great
The workplace is not the be-all and end-all of all things. Kids are important too, they are our future. Great
Re: (Score:2)
Meh... (Score:2)
...a billion dollars will go a long way towards a "better outcome".
C!=C (Score:4, Interesting)
I believe this is a case of correlation rather than causation. Taking paternity leave is likely to be correlated with being a good dad, but it seems unlikely that it is the paternity leave itself that causes that. Newborns crave human contact. But until the are about 6 months old, they don't really care who that human is. Besides, for the first 2 months, they spend 20+ hours a day sleeping.
When my kids were born I arranged to work from home 2 days per week, and wrote code while the kid was sleeping. We saved money on daycare, and I treasure the memories of spending time with the babies, but I doubt if my kids are really doing any better because if it.
Re: C!=C (Score:1)
So you don't think that learning the non verbal communication with you child and growing your sense of empathy for another caregiver's workload would improve the future outcome? Sometimes the child benefits from improvements in the *caregivers* putting in time to improve their skills and the general environment.
Re: (Score:2)
When my kids were born I arranged to work from home 2 days per week, and wrote code while the kid was sleeping. We saved money on daycare, and I treasure the memories of spending time with the babies, but I doubt if my kids are really doing any better because if it.
Of course they are doing better because of it...
Because YOU are a better Dad... YOU have empathy for them, for your wife, and you have memories of your children at that age, you'll always be there for them in ways that Dad's who WEREN'T there won't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: C!=C (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If todays Kids are our Future, what a terrifying Future it will be.
Re:And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, it is in writing. But can they actually take the time off. A ridiculous number of people can't even take their vacation time because of the fear they will be asked to stop bothering to come into the office.
And they won't say "we're letting you go because you took vacation time", because would be illegal, just something like "we want to move in a different direction, one without you on our team."
Re:And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:2)
Absolutely. We have gone to great lengths to establish legal precedent that employers can fire you for any reason, no reason and even faulty reasons with no consequence to them.
Re: And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:3)
It doesn't matter if you give a shit - it only matters if you view ads and post comments. You've done your part for the day to encourage such stories.
But topically, there's a subset of IT where you're supposed to "understand" that you shouldn't ever expect to be a good father, spend meaningful time with your kids - "because you're in IT". That's not importance, it's abuse. Many nerds who don't know how to stand up for themselves could use a role model like TheZuck to point to. In my limited experience,
Re: And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Zuckerberg is hardly what I'd consider a positive role model, unless you feel screwing over millions of people by selling their personal information to the highest bidder while simultaneously looking down on them all as plebs is a virtue.
Re: And people on slashdot give a shit, why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
"I hardly consider Zuckerberg a positive role model. But he's been a heckuva lot better than other people who've been in his position (Rockefeller, Morgan, Gates, etc)."
No he isn't. He's just as bad, or worse. Just because you're got some kind of facebook stockholm syndrome doesn't mean the rest of us should just fall in line and consider him a decent member of society. He's garbage that abused a lot of people to get where he is, and he continues to abuse those people.
Re: (Score:2)
"Zuckerberg is hardly what I'd consider a positive role model"
Doesn't mean one shouldn't praise him for what he does right. Setting an example like this for parents, who have the chance to take paternity leave, qualifies for such praise.
(Disclaimer, I am not on F***book).
Re: (Score:2)
Well some people to this day like to point out that he build the Autobahn.
But I think I just call Godwin on you. Seriously.
NO NO NO (Score:2)
if you go through the whole process of fathering children you have a bunch of reasons to do a Good Job
1 Automaitc Minions
2 Kids are great for hidden vectors (and Females get a +15 on Social Engineering)
3 Make sure they are on YOUR SIDE
4 Enabling Backup/longer term planning
im sure there are more geek reasons if one thinks
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
it's news in the US because you need to be the billionaire CEO of a powerful company in order to even GET paid paternity/materinity leave, let alone two months of it.
If youre not from the US i can see why this wouldnt be news, since only 3 of the worlds 198 nations dont require paid leave for having children.
two being 3rd world shit holes.
the the third the US.
but I repeat myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Just in case someone is wondering, this is true, read this [nydailynews.com].
Though spoiled is a likely side effect... (Score:5, Insightful)
In related research, children born to billionaire parents are statistically likely to experience better outcomes than those below the poverty line.
Re:Though spoiled is a likely side effect... (Score:4, Interesting)
In looking for a study to back those assertions up, I immediately found an article from earlier this year reporting on a recent study which reported the opposite results [washingtonpost.com], i.e., that time spent with children didn't matter. I haven't read through it yet, but here's a link to the study in question. [wiley.com] (PDF Warning)
I'm all for workers getting maternity or paternity leave if they want to spend time with their newborns, but we shouldn't delude ourselves into why we're doing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Which does raise an interesting point as to whether or not the effect is due to spending additional time with children or is merely a byproduct of the fact that those who can take time off to spend with their children are far more likely to be wealthy, which is more responsible for the outcome.
Is wealth a direct cause, or just another correlate?
More likely I think, parents who care enough to take time off work are going to be better parents.
Its a bit like parenting books. Whether they have useful advice or just repeat what you know, the sort of people who read parenting books are going to be better parents.
But what is a good parent? Other studies have found that kids growing up in a house with lots of books do better, independently of whether the parents read much to their kids.
So much of what we
Re: (Score:3)
I immediately found an article from earlier this year reporting on a recent study which reported the opposite results [washingtonpost.com], i.e., that time spent with children didn't matter.
You did not look very hard - that article is talking about something very different, kids 3 to 11. Babies and toddlers need a lot more attention than older kids.
It seems quite possible we are neglecting our babies, and overindulging older children who could be more independent, e.g. ride a bicycle, walk or catch a bus to school, friends and soccer instead of being chauffeured everywhere.
Re: (Score:3)
You did not look very hard - that article is talking about something very different, kids 3 to 11. Babies and toddlers need a lot more attention than older kids.
Not only that. The article implies that extra time with kids is mostly detrimental when parents are stressed during that time. Extrapolating to infants, where Moms of newborns tend to be really stressed, it seems like having an extra hand (like a father) around would significantly reduce maternal stress, which the quoted study implies would be a good thing.
Re:Though spoiled is a likely side effect... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I think there's an opposite effect going on. I'd say the children born to wealthy parents, but not unbelieveably so, have the best chances. Being the child of Zuckerberg or Gates means you're growing up in a very unique position which isn't necessarily good for a child's development. It becomes hard to have "normal" social interactions, you have a completely out of whack understanding and relationship with money, etc. This goes even more so as a teenager, where the other teens will know who your parents are, which will heavily color their interactions with you. Plus, many of those parents tend to be extremely busy and it's very well known that parental presence is one of the most important factors in a child's development.
It all depends on what 'normal means. I'm sure there are plenty of other rich or rich enough brats in this child's future social circle that 'normal' will just have a different meaning - as our 'normal' is different than the 'normal' of those born on the streets of, for example, Somalia.
Re: (Score:2)
In related research, children born to billionaire parents are statistically likely to experience better outcomes
Um, not necessarily. That's why Bill Gates and Warren Buffett talk about giving away all their money to charity before they die.
I think you are grossly overestimating the average outcome of a child born into a family below the poverty line.
Missed opportunity (Score:1)
Zuckerberg could have found a look-alike and paid him to play "father" for 2 months. Will the kid see a difference? Makes a nice study.
Why is this news? (Score:1)
Why is this news? Don't most parents take (m|p)aternity leave when they have newborns?
Re: (Score:3)
If they can afford it, yes. How many can these days?
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
I took out 19 months with our firstborn - from when he was 4 months old.
Of course, I'm Swedish. Anyone who would only take two months would be seen as quite uninterested in their children.
(In Sweden you get 480 days per child, to be divided as you see fit between mother and father. 120 of those days are however locked, divided up as 60 each, to each parent. You get 80% of your salary during parental leave, capped to a maximum which is far far below what anyone in "IT" makes)
Re: (Score:1)
But at least you get money. And let's be honest, it's enough to get by on it. People ain't so lucky in more "conservative" run countries.
Ain't it interesting? Conservatives are hell bent on babies being born. But after they're born, they don't give a shit about them anymore.
Re: Why is this news? (Score:2)
They are also 'hellbent' on personal responsibility and avoiding unwanted pregnancies, last I checked.
You may see a moral equivalence between 'contraception' and 'abortion', other's don't - some folks (like your parents) think of that developing fetus in the girl you slept with as their future grandchild, not a 'mistake'...
Re: (Score:2)
Our system isn't as generous as yours (Iceland), but it's still worlds beyond what America offers (no paid leave, and only rather limited unpaid leave to mothers).
I'm of mixed feelings. On one hand, I think it's a great thing to do for parents and for the kids. On the other hand, as someone who's infertile, it's kind of frustrating. I never complain to anyone in person, absolutely not. But I see all of my coworkers in their 20s and 30s having one child after the next and spending a large chunk of their time
Re: (Score:2)
On the topic of can vs cannot, the same benefits are of course available for those who adopt.
Another question would be regarding those who choose vs don't choose to become parents, and there I see it as a question of society spending money on investing in itself.
(As to those who think it's a walk in the park to be on parental leave ... everyone I know, including myself, considers coming back to work to be a very welcome vacation ... )
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, because one just goes out and adopts - it's not like it's a multiyear process, often full of heartbreak, to get a child who more likely than not will grow up with identity issues and spend a lot of time seeing you as "not their real parent". I've been a stepmother before. It was a pretty heartbreaking experience. You know, they start crying over something and you try to console them and they start crying I want my mommy, and you reassure them that you're there for them, and they start crying, no, *MY*
Re: (Score:2)
Our system isn't as generous as yours (Iceland), but it's still worlds beyond what America offers (no paid leave, and only rather limited unpaid leave to mothers).
I'm of mixed feelings. On one hand, I think it's a great thing to do for parents and for the kids. On the other hand, as someone who's infertile, it's kind of frustrating. I never complain to anyone in person, absolutely not. But I see all of my coworkers in their 20s and 30s having one child after the next and spending a large chunk of their time on the job... off the job.... often taking their leave in vacation homes or overseas.... I mean, I understand why the time is given, I totally sympathize... but underneath it sort of feels unfair to people who can't have children, to have such a massive benefit for those who can.
Perhaps the solution would be to make things more fair, not necessarily by taking away parental benefits but by granting you and others benefits due to your personal circumstances.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there you have it. Here in the US we'd rather have our children raised by wolves, because we have to fill all those privatized prisons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bless your heart.
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
I took 4 days, cause that's all the vacation time I had and in the US no one is going to pay you
Re: (Score:3)
Music streaming service Spotify announced it will offer six months of paid parental leave to full-time employees.
Guess which country spawned Spotify?
http://time.com/4120828/spotif... [time.com]
Re: (Score:2)
But it makes the news there. In many many other places around the world paid parental leave is simply a given. Also why is it restricted to full time employees?
Re: (Score:2)
So we can get furniture, entertainment and communication but no surveillance?
*sigh* See? Typical socialist thinking. They just don't know what people really want!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Interesting)
If they can afford it, yes. How many can these days?
I got my ass handed to me for missing half a day for the unanticipated and rather sudden onset labor of my firstborn, so.... certainly not all of us.
GP may be from a nation with scandinavian-like healthcare.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I was a bit of a poor young cunt myself.
Re: (Score:2)
If you didn't stab the bastard in the back when the opportunity presented itself, I hope you do when it does.
Re: (Score:3)
I got my ass handed to me for missing half a day for the unanticipated and rather sudden onset labor of my firstborn, so.... certainly not all of us.
In most sane western countries that would be grounds for taking your employer to court. Although I do know someone in Australia who also got into trouble, but he did so because he called in sick rather than take a separately accountable section of leave specifically intended for such purposes. I should mention the guy was an American expat, clearly not used to the fact that in some countries employees have some rights.
Re: Why is this news? (Score:2)
Really? My boss never has a problem when I just don't show up for work for half a day... Perhaps you should have called the boss while your partner was in labor, or were you heavily invested in reminding her to 'breathe'?
Re: (Score:2)
Really? My boss never has a problem when I just don't show up for work for half a day... Perhaps you should have called the boss while your partner was in labor, or were you heavily invested in reminding her to 'breathe'?
Nope...that was me at the wheel of the Skylark, above the speed limit with the emergency flashers on, hoping to get pulled over so I could use the line.
Re: Why is this news? (Score:2)
Ouch.
I was laid off a week before the due date of my second child.
I am Canadian. Birthing a child in a hospital doesn't cost anything.
We ate into most of our savings due to newborn costs (diapers, formula, etc). On the plus side we received plenty of free mildly used clothes from my neices.
From there I focussed my time into my side business and made it my full time job. I was so put off by dedicating years of my life to a business then when I needed the employment most, they let me go.
Looking back it was pr
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
Why is this news? Don't most parents take (m|p)aternity leave when they have newborns?
I guess this is why this really is news that matters. Because paternity leave is a very rare thing in the US. You may live in Europe where this being news sounds like nonsense, which more Americans need to realize. Less than 15% of US employers offer paternity leave, and that is almost entirely exclusive to white collar professions. Paternity leave tends to be about two weeks here, as opposed to months in more progressive European countries.
Re: Why is this news? (Score:2)
And what percentage of the workforce is employed by that 15% of employers? For example, the US Gov't would count as ONE employer, yet they employ some 4 million workers...
There are very few 'blue collar' jobs in America, our manufact
Re: (Score:2)
And what percentage of the workforce is employed by that 15% of employers? For example, the US Gov't would count as ONE employer, yet they employ some 4 million workers...
I couldn't find the stats for fathers, but overall only 11% of workers are covered by paid family leave policies (source [whitehouse.gov]). Since paid maternity leave is more common than paid paternity leave, the numbers for fathers would be less than 11%.
[...] why must your employer provide healthcare, paternity leave, and retirement planning? Are US Citizens incapable of taking care of their own needs?
With income inequality growing at an alarming rate, yes most citizens are incapable of taking care of their own needs. That is why safety net programs exist. Highly skilled and paid workers like myself, and probably yourself given your lack of sympathy, have careers where
lolwut? (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, what? I clicked on this in my Twitter feed without looking, thinking it was going to be the Onion.
Re: (Score:2)
He has a penis. It works.
Until the DNA test, nothing could be less certain.
Must be nice to be at a wealthy company (Score:2, Insightful)
It's great when all these very wealthy/successful companies can afford to just hand out massive benefits , but for the majority of companies that are no way as successful (and also provide most of the jobs in the USA), they simply can't afford to pay people for months while not working
Re:Must be nice to be at a wealthy company (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that in every other developed country in the world, this is considered a basic human right that *every* company, small and large, can somehow afford to "hand out".
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
While there are certainly some countries that have guaranteed maternity leave, and are struggling, there does not seem to be any correlation between the two:
- Germany has 14 weeks at 100%, and 156 weeks at 67% to be shared between the parents, a 4.5% unemployment rate, and is considered to be doing far better economically that the USA.
- Norway has more than 35 weeks at at least 80%, a 4.1% unemployment rate, and is doing ok.
- Even dipping into less-well-off countries it is hard to find what you are talking
Re: (Score:3)
You say that like not having to work is a bad thing.
The GP thinks not having to work is a great thing. It's paying for other people to not work that bothers him.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a competition thing. If nobody is required to do it, then one company that cuts paid maternity/paternity leave gains a competitive advantage and can price its products lower. Other companies then have to follow suit to remain economically competitive. Eventually nobody has paid maternity/paternity leave anymore. The ones which refused to give it up were eliminated from the marketplace due to being unable to compete.
If you r
Re: Must be nice to be at a wealthy company (Score:3)
The math in 'every other developed country' is the same as here - offering these types of benefits increase labor costs and and reduces employment opportunities.
How many months of paid paternity leave do Foxconn workers in China get?
How much free health care do Mexican factory workers get?
When an Indian woman that works in a sweat shop sewing together t-shirts gets pregnant, how much paid time off does she get?
Re: (Score:2)
That's the deal. The company gets a supply of educated, healthy workers in exchange for providing them with certain mandatory stuff. If the company can't afford it then it can't expect society to just keep giving it all those benefits for free. Both sides have to keep up their end of the deal.
Re: (Score:2)
These benefits should be at the federal level. In my country Venezuela here's what happens:
You get paid vacations, 15 days per year, one additional day per year worked
Maternity leave is paid and up to 8 months, and can be divided in pre maternity and post maternity. Women mix them up with their vacations to extend the time with their babies.
Companies must provide a daily food allowance benefit (sounds good on paper, but inflation is so high, it doesn't do much)
Every company with at least (20 employees i thi
Re: Must be nice to be at a wealthy company (Score:2)
The economy is just a little messed up in Venezula last I looked... Maybe you should re-think that as a positive example.
Oh, and don't confuse the government 'offering' paternal time off with government 'forcing employers' to offer paternal time off. Politicians like to take credit for forcing employers to offer benefits at the employer's expense.
In some cases countries do offer 'unemployment'-type paternity benefits that amount to a fraction of the workers normal pay.
Re: (Score:2)
You are right, our economy isn't just a little messed up, it's very much a lot or most of it. However i do think our labor laws are better than in the US, at least in the matter of the worker's rights.
Unpaid vacations should be banned.
Re: (Score:2)
15 days vacation isn't much... In the UK, like most of Europe, you get 28 days plus public holidays minimum, although there is no mandatory increases.
If you get sick on your holiday, or there is a tsunami or something, it doesn't count.
Re: (Score:1)
ever actually look at other countries?
if 195 of the worlds 198 countries can afford it, why is the US so special that it alone among advanced nations cannot afford it?
What I'd like to know (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
When companies have super sweet benefits like this they usually use contractor positions to get out of giving them company wide.
That's funny from what I recall companies with a large number of contractors do so out of externalising risk (contracting out entire departments to a single other company), or employ contractors AT THE REQUEST OF THE PEOPLE.
Yes that happens quite a lot. I was considering switching to becoming a contractor at my last job because the benefits the company provided were not very relevant to me and not something I intended on being able to cash in on, like a fuel card, despite the fact I cycle to work. Same goes
Take It Down (Score:2, Insightful)
If Zuckerberg really wanted to give his kid a better outcome, he'd dissolve Facebook immediately and give all his money to the EFF.
Why do you want to know why? (Score:2)
TechCrunch reports that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg will take two months off from Facebook for paternity leave. Why?
I'll take a wild stab-in-the-dark and guess that it's to help look after his kid. But actually, the answer is (Zuckerberg's posts - his choice - notwithstanding) "none of your business."
No word on why the child will only get 50% of that time
Yeesh. What makes you think you're owed any "word" on this?
The reasoning is absurd (Score:3)
He should take the time, but the stated reason why he's taking the time is just silly. I really hope that it was written by a PR person and not Zuck himself.
Not everything a person does needs to be "backed by studies" as some sort of optimal behavior. It is his kid, not an A/B test opportunity.
Who refers to their child as an "outcome"? (Score:3, Funny)
Good (Score:1)
Maybe he'll leave the rest of the world alone for a little while. You do have to feel bad for the kids, though.
Poor billionaire (Score:4, Interesting)
I got 12 months in Luxembourg, like everybody else.
Re:Poor billionaire (Score:5, Funny)
I only got 8. The judge took pity on me.
If Mark Zuckerberg were a normal person... (Score:2)
If Mark Zuckerberg were a regular person, I could see taking only half the time offered initially, reserving the right to take the additional time if
A/B Testing: Marissa Mayer Took Two WEEKS Leave (Score:2)
Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer took a measly two weeks maternity leave [nydailynews.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Yahoo would have been better off if she became a stay at home mom.
In related news (Score:3)
Uhm..? (Score:2)
What a bunch of B.S. (Score:2, Interesting)
For hundreds, perhaps thousands of years, fathers never took time off when their kids were born. One can also make the case that the fathers of the "Greatest Generation" (both the parents and the children of that generation) never took time off and yet they were the greatest generation. By the same token, one can make the case that this current crop of breeders are total pu$$ies.
Re: (Score:2)
For hundreds, perhaps thousands of years, fathers never took time off when their kids were born. One can also make the case that the fathers of the "Greatest Generation" (both the parents and the children of that generation) never took time off and yet they were the greatest generation. By the same token, one can make the case that this current crop of breeders are total pu$$ies.
For hundreds, perhaps thousands of years, we had no real medicine and thought that a good stink was good for keeping the demons away. No doubt those people would think that we who bathe regularly are total pussies too.
Just because it was done in the past doesn't mean that it was a good thing.
How about his employees? (Score:1)
I'd be more impressed if he was offering the same benefit to his employees.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd be more impressed if he was offering the same benefit to his employees.
So be impressed. You could even have read the summary which stated "At Facebook we offer our U.S. employees up to 4 months of paid maternity or paternity leave which they can take throughout the year."
As the 'up to' could mean that the claim is actually bullshit, I googled for a few seconds and found this:
"A Facebook spokesman, Slater Tow, said in an e-mail that the company offers four months of paid leave to both mothers and fathers, including same-sex couples, as long as they are full-time employees. The
Sure, my kid'll stomp his (Score:2)
I know, he could be headed there to deal meth but I did have higher hopes for the kid. I don't think the Zuckerberg brood needs much more in the help department than anything more his billionaire parents can give him.
He won't ACTUALLY stop working (Score:2)
If you've ever known a business owner or executive, you know that they never stop working, even when on vacation or leave. To them, "vacation" means they only work 8-10 hours a day!
Re: (Score:2)
But How is Zuckerberg's Retirement Fund Doing? (Score:1)
This is the question that keeps me up at night. Does he even have a Roth IRA?
Re: (Score:2)
Jeff, you're supposed to be on paternity leave. Put down the computer and go tend to your wee bairn ya doss cunt.
Re: (Score:1)
An article about fuckenberg is the equivalent of a Kardashian news story, translated to Slashdot. So why shouldn't we react negatively to it?