Parenting & Family

Paternity Leave Question - Ontario

  • Last Updated:
  • Sep 14th, 2017 12:10 pm
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
15841 posts
4730 upvotes
Ottawa
wirebound wrote:
Sep 7th, 2017 1:16 pm
But you do seem to have issues since you think taking a legally rightful parental leave is 'pulling a fast one' on the employer.
Yes, I do becuase it's not an unexpected leave of absence.
Deal Addict
Dec 21, 2011
3222 posts
571 upvotes
London
vkizzle wrote:
Sep 7th, 2017 1:54 pm
Yes, I do becuase it's not an unexpected leave of absence.
But its a right of the employee and they are exercising it. I get what you're saying about the resources involved however as a hiring manager I'd never resent an employee for exercising that right. That's just wasted emotions, these programs are in place for a reason.

I also don't give medals for those who don't leverage the programs we have in place if they qualify for them.
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
15841 posts
4730 upvotes
Ottawa
snow00774 wrote:
Sep 7th, 2017 3:16 pm
But its a right of the employee and they are exercising it. I get what you're saying about the resources involved however as a hiring manager I'd never resent an employee for exercising that right. That's just wasted emotions, these programs are in place for a reason.

I also don't give medals for those who don't leverage the programs we have in place if they qualify for them.
My experience hasn't been positive and it's not directly related to mat leave.
Good thing I only have to deal with two direct reports; versus an entire department.
[OP]
Newbie
Sep 4, 2017
2 posts
DiceMan wrote:
Sep 6th, 2017 10:53 pm
Yeah, I got downvotes for my original response Confused Face. So here's some more downvote fodder.

I'm a father, I've been an employer, and I've been an employee (for most of my life). I find that many employees today tend to be overly entitled; interested only in their own best interests. Fair enough. Employers hire for their own self interests and if employees don't put in that effort to meet the employer's own needs, that seems to be an unfair relationship.

The Employment Standards Act (ESA) should be followed by all employers and those that don't and take advantage of employees are contemptible to me. If an employee does this to me (ie, parental leave weeks after hire), I'll follow ESA rules to the letter but don't expect me to have positive feelings for their dedication in fulfilment of my own needs. Advancement opportunities can be jeopardised.



Like I said, if that's your attitude then I'll follow ESA rules to the letter. But welcome to the mail room or whatever your job is for the duration of your stay at the firm unless you really prove yourself when you get back (and the onus is on you, not on me). I already know you're not going to bat for me so I'm not going to lift a finger more than I have to to go to bat for you. Welcome to 2017 where no one has loyalty to anyone.
You know, its a post like this that invokes straight up fear and is basically the reason now why I've changed my mind to try and switch jobs.

Here's the background. I'm currently in a job that I hate and I've been trying to switch jobs basically the whole year with little success. I've been a good employee who gets his work done, reliable and dependable. Let's get that out of the way.
I am expecting the birth of my child in the next few months. I want to join a new firm closer to my home, the opportunity is there to join now. I also want to exercise my legal right, come back strong and continue being a good employee for the new firm. Yet the attitude is that I am "low balling" the firm by joining and then taking my legal right to a leave for the birth of my child? So what, for my expected return I have to be degraded to the "mail room" and basically go out of my way to kiss as much extra butt so that I can please you and beg for forgiveness that I've inconvenienced you for having a family? Its interesting you then say that you'd follow the ESA rules "to the letter" if that was my "attitude" about it---however, you're automatically breaking following the act off the bat by punishing me for 1) taking my legal right for leave and 2) punishing me without cause for my return because it hurt your feelings.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 16, 2010
3943 posts
529 upvotes
Aurora
StarcadeCoyote wrote:
Sep 8th, 2017 12:07 am
You know, its a post like this that invokes straight up fear and is basically the reason now why I've changed my mind to try and switch jobs.

Here's the background. I'm currently in a job that I hate and I've been trying to switch jobs basically the whole year with little success. I've been a good employee who gets his work done, reliable and dependable. Let's get that out of the way.
I am expecting the birth of my child in the next few months. I want to join a new firm closer to my home, the opportunity is there to join now. I also want to exercise my legal right, come back strong and continue being a good employee for the new firm. Yet the attitude is that I am "low balling" the firm by joining and then taking my legal right to a leave for the birth of my child? So what, for my expected return I have to be degraded to the "mail room" and basically go out of my way to kiss as much extra butt so that I can please you and beg for forgiveness that I've inconvenienced you for having a family? Its interesting you then say that you'd follow the ESA rules "to the letter" if that was my "attitude" about it---however, you're automatically breaking following the act off the bat by punishing me for 1) taking my legal right for leave and 2) punishing me without cause for my return because it hurt your feelings.
Jesus StarcadeCoyote, you've emphasized that it was your "legal right" a total of three times in your post above. I get it. You know why? BECAUSE I WAS THE ONE WHO WAS FIRST TO RESPOND TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION TELLING YOU THAT IT'S YOUR RIGHT. I even said I don't know your circumstances. Some other hypersensative guy took offence which prompted me to elaborate my opinion. If you don't like it, then go ahead and follow someone else's opinion. I do hope that reading and context comprehension, the ability to gracefully navigate business communications, and the ability to understand other points of view are not among your professional shortcomings.
Deal Addict
Oct 1, 2004
4157 posts
269 upvotes
Toronto
Don't think anyone have problems with male workers taking parental leave, the main issue is with new workers get hired than taking parental leave right away because "it is their right" which also leaves the position occupied while hiring and training a temp for the duration.

Your hired for a position to start right away, take the pay and start contributing, not get hired and start a year later...
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
7771 posts
1252 upvotes
Edmonton
13 weeks coincides (typically) with your 3 month probationary period. If you're requesting parental leave within that time period they have no legal obligation to hold your position for you.

Some people are confusing EI (Federally regulated) and the ESA (Provincially regulated). You can still get parental EI provided you have the hours, but you won't necessarily have a job to come back to if you haven't put in the requisite time with the new employer.
Member
Oct 18, 2005
293 posts
33 upvotes
StarcadeCoyote wrote:
Sep 8th, 2017 12:07 am
You know, its a post like this that invokes straight up fear and is basically the reason now why I've changed my mind to try and switch jobs.

Here's the background. I'm currently in a job that I hate and I've been trying to switch jobs basically the whole year with little success. I've been a good employee who gets his work done, reliable and dependable. Let's get that out of the way.
I am expecting the birth of my child in the next few months. I want to join a new firm closer to my home, the opportunity is there to join now. I also want to exercise my legal right, come back strong and continue being a good employee for the new firm. Yet the attitude is that I am "low balling" the firm by joining and then taking my legal right to a leave for the birth of my child? So what, for my expected return I have to be degraded to the "mail room" and basically go out of my way to kiss as much extra butt so that I can please you and beg for forgiveness that I've inconvenienced you for having a family? Its interesting you then say that you'd follow the ESA rules "to the letter" if that was my "attitude" about it---however, you're automatically breaking following the act off the bat by punishing me for 1) taking my legal right for leave and 2) punishing me without cause for my return because it hurt your feelings.
If you want to be upfront about, state your intention to take paternity leave during your interview process. Let the chip fall where they fall.

Top