By Zoe Zorka
Recently, Ivanka Trump, the infamous shoe designer turned presidential adviser, unveiled her plan to provide families of newborn children with six weeks (or more) of paid leave following the birth of a child.
While this policy drew the support of many mothers across the country (I mean, come on, everyone loves a paid vacation), she failed once again to not only provide but the murkiest of details (a trait that apparently runs in the family), but also failed to see the bigger picture and take into account far-reaching and unintended and probable effects of her proposed plan- especially with regard to women, the very demographic that she is trying to court.
Some major fallacies with the plan include:
Women Want Affordable Healthcare, First and Foremost
During the 2016 election, the Kaiser Health Tracking Poll found that amongst women, health care was one of the top issues that was important to female voters. (Family leave did not register as a top issue amongst voters of either sex.) Right now, the administration’s focus should be on working to provide all Americans (men and women) with affordable healthcare options before they begin to tackle paid vacations for new parents.
Her Plan Could Discourage the Hiring of Women
Typically employers look for an employee that will be with them for an extended period of time and who will not cost them more money than they are worth. While Ivanka is far beyond her child-bearing years, younger women in the workforce may very likely be discriminated against as an employer may be hesitant to hire an employee who he or she will be required to provide a paid vacation to in nine months (or less, considering women are not required to disclose if they are pregnant during an interview). In California, many women suffered as a result of such a program. The state instituted a six-week paid leave program in 2000, and research indicates a noticeable increase in young women's unemployment and unemployment duration lengthened by 4% to 9%.
Women-owned Small Businesses Would Likely Suffer
According to the National Association of Women Business Owners, “More than 9.4 million firms are owned by women, employing nearly 7.9 million people, and generating $1.5 trillion in sales as of 2015.” Many of these businesses are small businesses that operate on an already narrow profit margin.
Ivanka stated that “government benefits should not be a substitute for private-sector investment,” arguing that paid leave on a national scale requires participation and efforts from “private sector companies and state governments.” This would hint that she expects private employers to cover the cost of their non-working employees.
Suppose that a woman owns a restaurant and 20% of her gross sales go towards paying her 10 employees a bi-weekly combined amount of $10,000. Her profits for the period are $1400. One employee has a child and she is forced to not only spend time and money training a new employee, but has to pay that employee as well as the employee who is on vacation. This brings her payroll cost to $11,000 without increasing sales. If another employee were to take paid vacation due to the birth of a child, her payroll costs would increase to $12,000 and suddenly the business is in the red and is no longer sustainable.
Her Plan Could Divide Americans Even Further
Statistics show that our nation is heavily divided along racial, political, and religious ideology, but an unspoken (and often unmeasured) division is between parents and non-parents. While few reliable statistics exist for childfree men, the amount of childfree women is at an all-time high as “nearly half of women between the ages of 15 and 44 did not have kids in 2014,” according the U.S. Census Bureau’s Population Survey. The idea of paid leave for parents only has put an added strain on the tenuous relationship between parents and non-parents with many non-parents wondering why others should get a paid vacation when they do not. There is also much concern within the childfree community about picking up the slack from parents who already take time off when their children get sick, have appointments, or other situations.
Not Necessarily a Bad Idea
I don’t believe that Ivanka Trump is an evil person- a bit misguided at times, yes, but not evil. If Ivanka and the Trump administration are serious about taking care of American families by providing paid leave for new parents, perhaps they should set up some sort of system like social security in which a small set amount (with a cap) is deducted from individuals’ salaries from the time that they start working and throughout the course of their working years. When an individual wants to cash out a portion of that, whether it be for a new baby, a family emergency, or any other cause, they can do so. If they reach the age of 65, they can cash in their savings or have it disbursed with their regular social security payments.
This system would put the responsibility on individuals to properly plan for their future with the added support of the government for those not capable of managing their own finances. It would also put males and females on equal footing as an individual’s savings could only be used by that individual, thus lessening the disparity that often occurs in divorces in which one party financially benefits more than the other in the event of a split. Naturally, all current state and federal FMLA laws should still be applied when an employee chooses to take time off.
Perhaps this shall also be the younger Trump’s test of negotiation and diplomacy. Very rarely does a politician get what they want the first time around. If Ivanka can come up with a solution that is economically, socially, and logistically viable, this might just be one of the more positive legacies of the Trump administration.
