Author
|
Topic: Paid Menstrual Leave
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 16 February 2005 06:44 PM
Very interesting article, robbie, on several counts.There are genuine reasons for focusing on the severe effects most women will experience at one time or another from their periods. But that article also lists other important and just generally human reasons for loosening up on leave for workers. The only argument against more flexible rules is this: quote: "Now is not the time to be making kite-flying claims like this on industry. There are so many pressures from China and other countries on the competitiveness of our industry," Ms Ridout said.She said such an ambit claim came on "top of improvements to leave entitlements across the country" and would "set bad precedents for the bargaining rounds that are to come early next year". Ms Ridout said such demands on industry would dampen productivity, place pressure on interest rates and accelerate restructuring plans.
Yeah, well, there are women in China, too. Let's get a global movement on to "dampen" productivity, grils. Just as a personal testimony: On the one hand, I don't like thinking of menstruation as an illness per se either. At the same time, it will have severe effects on most women at some/any time during their fertile years. When I was young, I barely noticed my periods, which is most common for younger women on the pill, but during my forties, eg, I would be close to disabled by them, running a fever for a couple of days, and never safe for more than 45 minutes or so without running for a change. It is exceptionally difficult to do most kinds of work under those conditions.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
unmaladroit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7325
|
posted 16 February 2005 07:04 PM
difficult on your co-workers too, i suspect. i think it's a win-win situation.if someone is in discomfort, they are usually disagreeable. i know for a fact that i take on the mood of the people that i work with. if those who are disagreeable have 12 days leave throughout the year, great. but to be fair - everyone should have 12 mental/physical health days per year, regardless of gender. i think guys get their period too, just without the physical aspect.
From: suspicionville, bc | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 16 February 2005 07:25 PM
That's the Catch-22, peppermint. Most women of my generation argued hard that our biology was irrelevant to our employability, and at the time, that seemed the fight that we had to have. We were facing generations of prejudice about women's "monthlies" and the accompanying feebleness and irrationality, and that prejudice had reinforced barriers against us in all but service employment. But overwhelming numbers of women have since demonstrated that we can do just about anything, depending on individual capabilities. At the same time, we need to recognize that masses and masses of men have been always been brutalized by their working conditions and the cold disregard for their humanity of their employers. It is time for the bosses to stop finding excuses to disemploy as many as they can and to intimidate as many others as they can with any myth they can find for firing or discriminating against anyone. Gee. An old line comes back to me faintly ... Something about workers of the world ... What was it we were supposed to do? [ 16 February 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|