- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Maternity Benefits
Posted by Carrie Alten from Orillia Canada on March 11, 1999 at 19:52:16:
In Reply to: Maternity Benefits posted by Mark Bossi on March 09, 1999 at 10:14:02:
I couldn‘t agree more. I am just off of maternity benefits and the top-up would have been nice. 10 weeks can be long.
The qualifying time for the CD has been changed to reflect that this time of leave is no longer ‘inactive‘ time and, of course, they are making maternity combats which is another issue entirely. I think that the changes have begun, just slowly.
Any type of leave other than for maternity purposes is either full pay or a top-up, regardless of time absent. The fact that maternity is only topped for equivalent four months, while the option exists to take a full six months, seems arbitrary.
It is too late for me but I hope that the CF will join the rest of the federal government.
Posted by Carrie Alten from Orillia Canada on March 11, 1999 at 19:52:16:
In Reply to: Maternity Benefits posted by Mark Bossi on March 09, 1999 at 10:14:02:
I couldn‘t agree more. I am just off of maternity benefits and the top-up would have been nice. 10 weeks can be long.
The qualifying time for the CD has been changed to reflect that this time of leave is no longer ‘inactive‘ time and, of course, they are making maternity combats which is another issue entirely. I think that the changes have begun, just slowly.
Any type of leave other than for maternity purposes is either full pay or a top-up, regardless of time absent. The fact that maternity is only topped for equivalent four months, while the option exists to take a full six months, seems arbitrary.
It is too late for me but I hope that the CF will join the rest of the federal government.
