|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
10-21-2012, 04:11 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: On my boat
Posts: 9,703
|
Call me a caveman but I don't care if women are paid less.
Women 20-40 years old more than likely will need maternity leave & on average will have 2 or 3 kids.
Kids get sick, one of the parents has to stay home with them. Usually that's the mother.
How can this not be a factor when a company hires employees and negotiates salary/pay.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
10-21-2012, 05:16 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raider Ronnie
Call me a caveman but I don't care if women are paid less.
Women 20-40 years old more than likely will need maternity leave & on average will have 2 or 3 kids.
Kids get sick, one of the parents has to stay home with them. Usually that's the mother.
How can this not be a factor when a company hires employees and negotiates salary/pay.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
It's 2012 Ron , the guys get maternity leave too
It's pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
10-21-2012, 07:45 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
|
The top companies offer maternity for both sexes,even when adopting.
They give benefits to gay couples
They even pay for fat camp for porkers
Fatsos cost a lot for employers,way more than any pregnant lady.
There are meetings involving top CEO's discussing how hard it is to employ obese sacks of shiite.
Using Ronnies logic,they should get paid less just for being jellybellies.
|
PRO CHOICE REPUBLICAN
|
|
|
10-21-2012, 08:34 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 5,238
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Dangles
Using Ronnies logic,they should get paid less just for being jellybellies.
|
They absolutely should be paid less when compared to someone with an equal skill set. The obese (similarly to smokers) miss more days of work, contribute a significant amount to health care costs and are less productive than their thinner coworkers due to an significantly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many other diseases that will directly affect job performance in many workplaces.
|
|
|
|
10-22-2012, 08:54 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
They absolutely should be paid less when compared to someone with an equal skill set. The obese (similarly to smokers) miss more days of work, contribute a significant amount to health care costs and are less productive than their thinner coworkers due to an significantly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many other diseases that will directly affect job performance in many workplaces.
|
Bingo.
|
|
|
|
10-22-2012, 09:48 AM
|
#6
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,206
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
They absolutely should be paid less when compared to someone with an equal skill set. The obese (similarly to smokers) miss more days of work, contribute a significant amount to health care costs and are less productive than their thinner coworkers due to an significantly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many other diseases that will directly affect job performance in many workplaces.
|
They should be paid the same....as long as they are performing to the same level required by the person/company hiring them then it shouldn't matter what their weight is, or what their sex is.
Maybe Their health insurance contributions should be higher if they have high risk factors (i.e. smokers, drinkers, obesity)...but their pay should be given to them strictly on their performance. They do their job, they get paid.....
If they miss more days of work then you can fire them or dock their pay......
Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 10-22-2012 at 11:56 AM..
|
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
|
|
|
10-22-2012, 12:31 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 5,238
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
They should be paid the same....as long as they are performing to the same level required by the person/company hiring them then it shouldn't matter what their weight is, or what their sex is.
Maybe Their health insurance contributions should be higher if they have high risk factors (i.e. smokers, drinkers, obesity)...but their pay should be given to them strictly on their performance. They do their job, they get paid.....
If they miss more days of work then you can fire them or dock their pay......
|
Like I said above, smokers and the obese with the same skill set are statistically less productive than their healthier counterparts with the same skill set. There is a reason why many businesses (and health insurance companies) reimburse the costs of fitness club memberships - because it has been proven that people with an unhealthy lifestyle have a significantly higher costs of employment than their healthier coworkers.
"The most obese men take 5.9 more sick days a year; the most obese women, 9.4 days more. Obesity-related absenteeism costs employers as much as $6.4 billion a year, health economists led by Eric Finkelstein of Duke University calculated."
The costs of obesity cost us all | World of DTC Marketing.com
The obese are a slow-walking, heavy-breathing ticking time bomb. Statistically, it's not a matter of *if* they are going to miss work or under-perform, it is a matter of *when*.
There's a reason Obamacare allows employers to charge their employees who smoke or are obese 30-50% more for health care.
Insight: Firms to charge smokers, obese more for healthcare | Reuters
|
|
|
|
10-21-2012, 07:51 PM
|
#8
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,413
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
It's 2012 Ron , the guys get maternity leave too
It's pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Yeah, it's pathetic that I took a couple of weeks off when my son was born, and will again when my daughter is born to help my wife...
what a pussy I am I guess. should have stood in the waiting room with a cigar and then gone back to work 
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
10-22-2012, 03:46 AM
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Yeah, it's pathetic that I took a couple of weeks off when my son was born, and will again when my daughter is born to help my wife...
what a pussy I am I guess. should have stood in the waiting room with a cigar and then gone back to work 
|
It wasn't a personal assault Brian
Wow,,,touchy
Just saying our parents managed just fine as did my wife because I was self employed. I adjusted my schedule to help out but I couldn't afford to take 2 weeks .
A friend has a small company with 5 emoyees he was telling me that 3 of ther men will be out on maternity leave on the same 2 weeks
He was pissed and he didn't take time off because he couldn't when his kids were born
Not judging ....just saying
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 PM.
|
| |