A Supreme Court nominee shows why many people get maternity leave wrong

A Supreme Court nominee shows why many people get maternity leave wrongA Supreme Court nominee shows why many people get maternity leave wrongAccording to one of his former law students, Donald Trumps Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, believes many women use their companies for maternity benefits and then leave the company after the baby is born.Gorsuch also allegedly believes that law firms should ask female interviewees about their intentions to have children to protect the company.On Sunday, the National Employment Lawyers Association and the National Womens Law Center posted a letter from Gorsuchs former student, Jennifer Sisk who wanted to raise concerns about how Gorsuch discounts the worth of working females.Sisk wrote that her ethics professors comments were disappointing because it implied that women intentionally manipulate companies and plan to disadvantage their companies starting from the first interview.These allegations are especially timely because Gorsuchs confirm ation hearings began Monday.In his opening statement on Monday, Gorsuch was frank about his shortcomings, As my daughter reminds me, putting on a robe does leid make me any smarter.When having babies is a threat to the companyGorsuchs comments occurredin SisksLegal Ethics and Professionalism class last April.To prepare his class for awork-life balance discussion, Gorsuch had them read a hypothetical scenario where a female law student applies for jobs at law firms because she has a large debt to pay off. The married student also intends to starta family.The question should the female law student disclose her family planning intentions to employers in interviews?In class, Gorsuch used this hypothetical as jump-off point to discuss his own personal beliefs.In Sisks retelling, Gorsuch stopped the discussion around the hypothetical and asked the class to raise their hands if they knew of a female who had used a company to get maternity benefits and then left right after having a baby.Wh en elend enough people raised their hands, Gorsuch allegedly said, Cmon guys.He said that all of their hands should be raised because we all knew women who purposefully used their companies. He did not use statistics to back up his claim of the many women.Making the assumptionthat all women had childbearing in their future, Gorsuch said law firms should ask female interviewees about their intentions to have children to protect the company.Some key mistakes about maternity leave and its effectsIts worthwhile to debunk some of Gorsuchs assumptions if a trained lawyer can make those mistakes, anyone can.The first and most important thing to consider is that very few women (or men) will gleefully give up an income unless they absolutely have to.The second is that having children, of course, does not hurt a womans ability to do her job, though it does affect her schedule due to childcare demands. For that matter, it should also affect fathers schedules. But studies have shown that having a babyfrequently hurts a womans ability to get promoted- the dreaded mommy track.Another major factor relatively few workplaces offer flexible work schedules for women and men who have new babies. That may make quitting unavoidable if the choice comes down to keeping a new infant alive or being in a seat for 40 hours a week. Even though 70% of American workers say flexible schedules are very important, workplaces have not caught up.In addition, balancing 40-hour workweeks with care of an infant less than three months old is nearly impossible without help, and childcare is expensive. Childcare can cost around $500 a month or mora, according to the Economic Policy Institute - and that doesnt count the costs in big urban centers, where it can rise sky-high.Employers cannot hire or fire women on the basis of pregnancyGorsuchs advice to companies to ask female lawyers about their family planning does not protect the company. It may actually open the company to future lawsuits.Under th e Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions guidelines, employers can legally ask applicants gender-related questions about pregnancy, but they cannot make hiring decisions based on an applicants answers.So employers arebetter off not asking at all. The EEOC generally discourages employers from asking these kind of questions because it can lead employers into legal hot water. The EEOC said itconsiders whether employers asked these questions in pregnancy discrimination lawsuits.Family planning is an issue for both women and menWhen it comes to family planning, the burden should not be on women alone. Sisk criticized Gorsuch for making the questions of commitment to work over family a question that only women had to answer.In his ethics class, Gorsuch did not discuss whatrole men should have in family planning. There are economic and personal benefits for everyone when paid family leave is an option it puts mora women in the workforce, and it increases middle-class family incomes.Mater nity leave isnt an individual issue its an economic issueThe Family and Medical Leave Act gives workers 12 weeks of unpaid family leave, but the United States currently does not federally mandate any paid family leave.The National Partnership for Women Families Womenargues that paid leave improves employee retention, saving employers money since turnover can be costly. An analysis into 27 case studies found that turnover cost companies 21% of an employees annual salary.In California, workers do get up to six weeks of partially paid family leave and it pays off for employers. California womenwho took leave were at least 6% more likely to increase their work hours 1-3 years after the birth of their child.Paid family leave there also also increased productivity. Employees who took time off when a new baby arrived or when a serious illness struck were less stressed than other employees. Less stressed workers mean more productive workers, Annette Bonilla, the Vice President and Director of Human Resources for Environmental Science Associates in California said.The government also benefits from robust family leave policies too. After New Jersey offered paid family leave to new mothers, less of its constituents needed government assistance. 39% of the mothers who took paid family leavewere less likely to receive public assistance and 40% were less likely to receive food stamps in the year aftera childs birth.Its a familyissuePartners who takepaid parental leave become more involved partners. This is the kind of work-life balance Gorsuch could have discussed.In an analysis of 10,000 children in the United States, a studyfound that fathers who took two or more weeks of leave were more likely to be involved in daily childcare activities later on in the childs life.Whenwomen are not solely responsible for childcare, they can participate morein the workforce.Mothers first, and workers secondFormer students of Gorsuch have come forward to dispute Sisks allegations. Will H auptman did not deny that the discussion happened but said that Gorsuchs tone was more matter-of-fact. In Hauptmans retelling, Gorsuch was just giving frank real talk, not displaying any animus against a career or group.But a second anonymous student confirmed Sisks account. This student said Gorsuchtold the class that many female lawyers became pregnant and Gorsuch questioned whether they should do so on their law firms dime.The Supreme Court provided a clear answer to Gorsuchs question.In a 2003 majority opinion, the late Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote whythe Family and Medical Leave Act needed to begender-neutral and apply to everyone. Treating women as mothers first, and workers secondreinforced a self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination that forced women to continue to assume the role of primary family caregiver, and fostered employers stereotypical views about womens commitment to work and their value as employees.The National Womens Law Center cited Rehnquists warning in their post about Sisks letter.