<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>

      <rss version="2.0">		
        <channel>
          <title>WashingtonWatch.com - H.R. 3158, The Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2006</title>
          <link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills</link>
          <description></description>
          <managingEditor>info@washingtonwatch.com</managingEditor>
          <generator>http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1</generator>
          
<item>
<title>Comment by Nilsa (April 1, 2008, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#31844</link>
<description>I strongly believe federal employess should have a separate, PAID, maternity leave category.  Why should we use the sick leave that is so hard to accrue?  Our male counterparts don't have that problem.  Let's face it, since women are the ones that can have babies, a separate maternity leave should be provided.  Because we only accrue 4 hours of sick leave a pay period, it takes a few years to build up the sick leave again....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">31844@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Kai (March 13, 2008, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#31405</link>
<description>I strongly believe that Federal employees deserve 8 weeks of paid maternity leave.  We have a lot of baby boomers in the Federal Government who are leaving in droves.  That means, in order to attract and retain the best qualified crew from the next generation, we NEED benefits like this one.  This is not only for our new parents, this is for the security and safety of our country.  Attract the best.  Keep the best.  This would be funds well invested....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">31405@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Aryanna (January 14, 2008, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#28560</link>
<description>I just had my second child (2 years and 20 days apart) and I have -220 hours of sick leave. Because I couldn't afford to take maternity leave and still pay my bills I had to go in the hole. Now if my children get sick or I do I have to use my annual leave to do so and I have only worked for the USG for 5 years. I only get 6 hours a pay. Please pass this bill so other mothers don't have to go through this!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">28560@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Rob (December 25, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#25414</link>
<description>I tend to agree with the women in the US Federal Government workforce, i.e., Elizabeth, Anissa, etc. The Federal Government sets all the regulations with the Department of Labor and maternity leave. However, because new empolyees only earn 4 hours of Annual and Sick Leave per pay period it is very difficult for them to accrue that much leave to care for a newborn. Because the maternity leave act is granted in the commercial sector and the Federal Government is using the pay for performance and critical jobs being contracted to small businesses it should be also grant 6-12 weeks to new mothers to care for their children without having to tap into their Annual or Sick Leave that they have been trying to accrue....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">25414@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Anissa (December 7, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#24338</link>
<description>I think it is horrible that we don't have PAID maternity leave already. I bet Kevin would change his tune if he tried to live without a wage for 4-12 weeks AND the extra expense of a child. Annual leave is for vacations and it's not fair that a woman have to save up or advance her vacation leave to have a baby! I just wonder how long ago this would have changed if men gave birth... PLEASE PASS THIS BILL!!!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24338@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Paul (November 17, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#23296</link>
<description>Kevin -three points:

1. The rest of the industrialized world actually has leave laws like this, just not the US. It isn't like we would be setting a &quot;precedent&quot; by doing so.

2. Such a process can be managed so that women have to put in a week or two of their sick time and then the USG kicks back an additional six or eight weeks for parental leave. That way people are at least invested in it a little. It would be nice if USG allowed spouses to transfer leave back and forth, but they don't.

3. The inequity here is that women who are federal employees and have children end up with basically no leave while their spouses, who are men, end up with lots, since they don't have to take it when children are born - nor can they transfer it to others. I note &quot;Kevin&quot; is a usually a man's name, perhaps your perspective is a little slanted on this....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">23296@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Elisabeth (October 31, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#22656</link>
<description>It is nearly impossible to save up 6-8 weeks of sick leave - this is what Federal employees have to use in place of Maternity Leave. Federal employees get 26 pay periods per year, earning 4 hrs. of sick leave per pay period. That only comes out to 2.5 weeks earned in a year!! Unless you can plan a baby 3 or 4 years ahead of time and never go to the doctor, Federal Employees really get the shaft on this one. Please give Federal Employees at least 6 weeks of Maternity Leave!!!!!!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">22656@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Revision by webmaster (October 22, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_HR_3158.html?rev=11603</link>
<description>&lt;p&gt;H.R. 3158 would provide that 8 of the 12 weeks of parental leave made available to a Federal employee under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, shall be paid leave.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc0&quot;&gt; Detailed Summary &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2006 [sic] - Allows federal employees to substitute any available paid leave for any leave without pay available for either the: (1) birth of a child; (2) placement of a child with the employee for either adoption or foster care; (3) care of a seriously ill family member; or (4) employee's own serious health condition.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Makes available as paid leave for any of the 12 weeks of leave an employee is entitled to for the above purposes: (1) eight weeks of paid leave and any accumulated annual or sick leave for either the birth of a child or the placement of a child with the employee for adoption or foster care; and (2) any accumulated annual or sick leave for the care of a family member or the employee's own serious health condition.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc1&quot;&gt; Status of the Legislation &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Latest Major Action: 9/7/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc2&quot;&gt; Points in Favor &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc3&quot;&gt; Points Against &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">11603@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Kevin (October 20, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html#22303</link>
<description>Pay federal Employees 2 months salary  after giving birth? I think this sets the wrong precedence for the rest of the working world. I do not believe my tax dollars should pay 2 months of a person's salary while they are on leave over and above their alloted vacation time. FMLA is there to protect their jobs to come back to, but they should not be paid for the time out....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">22303@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Revision by webmaster (September 18, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_HR_3158.html?rev=9951</link>
<description>&lt;p&gt;H.R. 3158 would provide that 8 of the 12 weeks of parental leave made available to a Federal employee under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, shall be paid leave.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc4&quot;&gt; Detailed Summary &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc5&quot;&gt; Status of the Legislation &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Latest Major Action: 9/7/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc6&quot;&gt; Points in Favor &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc7&quot;&gt; Points Against &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">9951@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Status as of September 7, 2007</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html</link>
<description>9/7/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">25575@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Status as of September 7, 2007</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html</link>
<description>9/7/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">28636@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Revision by webmaster (July 25, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_HR_3158.html?rev=5599</link>
<description>&lt;p&gt;H.R. 3158 would provide that 8 of the 12 weeks of parental leave made available to a Federal employee under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, shall be paid leave.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc8&quot;&gt; Detailed Summary &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc9&quot;&gt; Status of the Legislation &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc10&quot;&gt; Points in Favor &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc11&quot;&gt; Points Against &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">5599@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Revision by webmaster (July 25, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_HR_3158.html?rev=5600</link>
<description>&lt;p&gt;H.R. 3158 would provide that 8 of the 12 weeks of parental leave made available to a Federal employee under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, shall be paid leave.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc12&quot;&gt; Detailed Summary &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc13&quot;&gt; Status of the Legislation &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Latest Major Action: 7/24/2007: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --&gt;

&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc14&quot;&gt; Points in Favor &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;h2 id=&quot;toc15&quot;&gt; Points Against &lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">5600@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Status as of July 24, 2007</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_3158.html</link>
<description>7/24/2007: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24183@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
        </channel>
      </rss>
  		