Song Zhiping, a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, said in an interview that it is recommended to introduce a maternity welfare policy to help solve the problem of female employment difficulties.

Member Song Zhiping said that because companies are unwilling to bear the labor losses caused by women’s maternity leave and breastfeeding period, it is especially difficult for women to find a job after giving birth to a second child. “The state can consider introducing more second-child welfare policies and policies to solve the difficulty of women’s employment. Otherwise, it will blindly put pressure on enterprises. As a result, it may indirectly increase the factors that are unfavorable to women’s employment and reduce women’s employment opportunities.”

Committee member Song Zhiping suggested that the maternity leave should be extended to 3 to 6 years so that the children can get good care and education before going to kindergarten or elementary school; the admission fee for the second child should be reduced, and a certain subsidy should be given at the same time to reduce the support of the two-child family. Economic pressure caused by education expenditures; encourage companies to hire female workers, agree to leave women on maternity leave with no pay and continue to pay five social insurances and one housing fund, but the burden on the company must be reduced. The government can subsidize the company by returning the company’s total social security percentage.

Committee member Song Zhiping also suggested that kindergartens and elementary schools should be extended to 6 p.m. so that dual-employed parents can pick up and drop off after get off work, so as to prevent female employees from leaving their jobs due to the inability to pick up and drop off their children. At the same time, it can also reduce the cost of after-school care classes.

Source: China Women’s Daily


By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
7 months ago

Let me share my experience in a certain country in Western Europe. Maternity leave is 3 months. Yes, you read that right, the maternity leave is only 3 months. However, the minimum age that their local nursery can accept is 3 months old. The cost is divided into public and private. The public has to queue (one year in line), and the private is more expensive (from 800 euros/month), but only The mother must go to work, she must find a nursery school. In other words, the length of their maternity leave is mainly limited by the minimum age at which the child can be placed in a custodial institution. Therefore, the proposal to extend maternity leave to 3-6 years basically concluded that my brain was kicked by the donkey. To really solve the problem of finding jobs for women of childbearing age and the unstable job after childbirth, basic support should be started, such as vigorously developing and regulating infant care institutions. After all, they are basically from 3 years old, 0-3 years old. Most of the custodians are privately qualified, lack of supervision, and it is difficult to form a system. If you want women of childbearing age to be willing to have children, and for women after childbirth to increase their competitiveness, the most important thing is to stabilize the rear, not to extend maternity leave. What is the use of extending maternity leave? To put it bluntly, most private enterprises in our country will not comply (I didn’t say that this is right, but it is true). There are 10,000 ways for employers to let you take the initiative to work. The only thing that will comply is within the system, and the direct consequence is that most of the key positions of enterprises and institutions are occupied by pregnant women who do not work. It is still “difficult to handle things, difficult to handle things” when it is finally transferred to the masses of the people. Smile manually. In addition, let’s talk about the policy of encouraging childbirth in a certain country in Western Europe. More than 50% of the cost of production inspection is reimbursed, and the cost of production during the production period is almost fully reported. Vaccines and child protection are free. The childcare subsidy, which we call milk powder money, can be used to receive the child up to 18 years old. Family with one child, the price of milk powder is about 90 euros per month (15 euros per barrel for milk powder, 2 barrels a month; 25 euros per box for diapers, 75 tablets, and cheaper); for two children, 250 Euros per month; 500 Euros per month for three children (for a frugal family, 500 Euros can cover one month’s living expenses). I haven’t understood more than three. Families with three or more children can enjoy almost free public transportation and the guardian’s almost full tax refund. There are other well-established benefits. Did any CPPCC member mention it?

7 months ago

At the end of 2019, when I was 27 years old, the personnel reform of the headquarters in the capital city of Northeast Africa demanded the cancellation of prefecture and city accounting, all of whom would go to work in the capital city, or I would be transferred or fired. I have no ambitions and don’t want to leave my hometown. I chose to transfer to the sales position. From the first check-in after get off work to the peak hour, I am seven in the morning and 11 in the evening. Then for a year, civil servants and institutions went ashore. Earned some money and changed jobs that everyone thought was good. But this is definitely not an inspirational story. This is an extremely sad story. Because I dare not leave. Because I was unmarried and not pregnant at the age of 27, I really couldn’t find a job. Because even with four years of work experience in a listed company, my resume is still incomplete. Because I don’t want to go to work in a place where there is no one-time off every week and no five social insurance and one housing fund. Because I guess, even if I lower the bar, there will still be no feedback on the resume. In a first-tier city, 27 years old may not be considered old, but in such a small city, it is really old. No business wants you. Even companies that do not pay the five social insurances and one housing fund are unwilling to ask you, because even if they don’t have to give you maternity leave, they need to recruit people again, which is very troublesome. I certainly support maternity leave for 3 years and 6 years, but this cost must not fall on the enterprise. I graduated from a college of finance and economics. In the year of graduation, a state-owned enterprise came to the school to recruit. Our major, as long as it is a male student, as long as you want, even if you were still out of school at the time. As far as I know, the girl didn’t want one. The idea is good, but the supporting policies are not easy. The current employment environment for women is already very bad. If there is no one-size-fits-all solution, don’t let it worsen. Supplement: I suddenly thought of a question I saw some time ago, why is the proportion of female civil servants so large. Some say that girls love to study, some say that girls can sit on the bench, some say that girls seek stability… But there should be many like me who are forced to go to Liangshan. I turned over the previous answer some time ago. In the first year or two after graduation, I wrote an answer. I promised that I wouldn’t be able to take the civil service exam. I was passionate about it, but I didn’t expect that I want to be today. People.

7 months ago

It should be good. It may solve many problems. First, it will first solve the problem of going to school for a large number of people. Mainly girls. If maternity leave is three to six years, there is really no need to go to college. Otherwise, it may not be necessary for work. Because you have to get married quickly after graduation. At least 20 years after graduation from college. Marriage and childbirth are only six years away. At that time, it must be close to 30. Reborn a second child, another six years. Yes, thirty or forty. The knowledge that went to school before is outdated! Not as good as it is! This saves money and troubles, and at the same time solves the problem of shortage of educational resources. Second, employment. If this policy comes out, not to mention 100%, no matter how many 70% to 80% of women can give up their jobs. So jobs are enough. Third, resolve the current disputes between men and women. Now talk about male boxing and female boxing. The big reason is that women have jobs, and they are not as pleasing as the old society. If there is this policy, women will return to their families as long, long ago, and there will be no punches. Men may have three wives and four concubines. Four, there may be many more. Our boss’s office is broadcasting this proposal circularly. What do you mean? Although it is Goddess’ Day, I still do my best. For a while, I don’t understand what it means.

7 months ago

As a mother, I want to say, you can spare us! Now three or four months of maternity leave, when women of childbearing age are looking for a job, regardless of whether they are married or not, they are often hired to take a different position. If this is three to six years of maternity leave, I think no one dares to recruit female employees, right? For women, not working for three to six years will not only lose three to six years of income, but related experience and career interruption. Now society is developing faster and faster. Think about what your industry was like six years ago? And what is it like now? When it comes to parenting, I personally think that men and women have their own advantages, except for men who cannot breastfeed. From my experience of taking care of my baby during maternity leave, in fact, when the 6-week puerperium is over, I have fully recovered myself. After three to four months of maternity leave, I feel that my intention is more to take care of the baby who needs to breastfeed at any time. (Baby’s stomach is very small. Newborn’s stomach is only the size of grapes, so they will continue to eat.) After four months, most of the children’s intake and rest are gradually regular, even if breastfeeding, mothers can do it. Back milk. If you really want to resolve the conflict between childbirth and female employment, it is better to buy more public or government-subsidized childcare machines, so that mothers can leave their children when no one in the family can help with their children after ending their maternity leave. Buy it on a reliable and affordable childcare machine. If it is unrealistic for each unit to establish a nursery, then can office buildings, industrial parks, communities, and sub-districts participate in the co-creation institutions? Today’s office buildings are equipped with cafes and restaurants as standard, so can a part of the area be used as nursery schools? In this way, mothers can bring their babies to work, breastfeeding leave and lunch breaks can go to breastfeed their children, and then take their babies home after get off work. This can not only liberate women from parenting, but also release more positions suitable for women with parenting experience. Employers will also not treat female employees differently because female employees can return to work after the end of maternity leave without entanglement.

7 months ago

It is recommended that dads also take the same length of vacation. The benefits of doing so are: to solve the workplace discrimination that women suffer due to maternity leave, so that mothers can take maternity leave with peace of mind; allow fathers to fully accompany their children and enjoy family happiness; avoid The boy lacks masculinity because of the short time he spends with his father. When my father started to bring a baby, the style of painting gradually deviated from the video of Miss Psychology. China: At least 98 days of paid maternity leave, adjusted by provinces and cities; Japan: 14 weeks of paid maternity leave; South Korea: 90 days of full pay maternity leave; Russia: 140 days of full pay maternity leave, or 4.5 years of half pay maternity leave; the United States: Unpaid maternity leave for 12 weeks, adjusted by city, and company (Neflix: one year; Etsy: 26 weeks; Microsoft: 20 weeks; Facebook: 16 weeks; Google: 12 weeks); Sweden: 16 months Paid maternity leave; Norway: 12 months maternity leave with 80% of the salary, or 10 months maternity leave with 100% of the salary; United Kingdom: Maternity leave for one year, 90% of the salary for the first 6 weeks, and allowance for the next 33 weeks. No pay for the last 13 weeks; France: 20 weeks for the first child and 40 weeks for the second child; Germany: 10 months paid maternity leave; Italy: full paid maternity leave for the first 5 months and 30% of the salary for the next 6 months Maternity leave; Australia: 12 months of unpaid maternity leave. To sum up, the unpaid maternity leave in the United States stands out from the crowd of paid maternity leave. The shortest maternity leave is not paid. The only advantage is that it is easy for women to find a job. Maternity leave in Russia is by far the longest. If we implement maternity leave of 3 to 6 years, it will surpass Russia and become the country with the longest maternity leave in the world.

7 months ago

“Mom, what’s the use of you reading so many books? Don’t you keep giving birth and taking care of the children? This can be done without reading. Why do I have to work so hard to read?” Facing this question How should my mother answer? Seeing the committee’s suggestion to extend maternity leave to 3-6 years, it sounds very good. However, as a woman, I voted against it. First of all, when the employer heard about this long vacation, it was probably frightened. Originally, women do not have an advantage in the workplace. Once this happens, the career path for girls will only be more difficult. Don’t talk about men who are just a bit short, even if the world is so different, people will only want men, and abandon even very good women. Think about it, give birth to a child and take a long vacation for 3-6 years. During this period, even if the state subsidizes part of the paid benefits for women, the employer still bears part of the expenditure, spending 6 years of unpaid work, and raising idlers for 6 years. If a company has a group of women giving birth, that is not a literary figure? The enterprise is not a charity, and the income is not enough for the female workers. Who is willing to hire female workers? Moreover, it was hard to spend the cost to train a female employee to take up the job, and even take charge of the overall situation. Once she had a child on vacation, she needed to find someone to top her position immediately. That is to say, the cost of cultivating a person was a waste of time. , Will not play a role in the long-term development of the enterprise. Who is willing to spend the cost to train female workers? Don’t you encourage early births and more births? If a woman gives birth to three or four children, her maternity leave will last as long as 9-24 years. Haha, even if it was born from the age of 20, when the fourth child was born, it was 44 years old. In other words, a woman’s prime time is all her baby, and she basically makes no contribution to the employer. If she only came back to work at the age of 44 and left the society for more than 20 years, would she be able to do the job again when she came to the post? Then give her vocational training so that she can get back to work? Well, the problem is that training an aunt in her 40s is far more difficult than training a young man. The brain is not so flexible, and the hands and feet are not so refreshing. After so much time and energy training, the expected results may not be achieved in the end. Of course, it is extremely rare to have four births this year. However, even giving birth to a second child is a heavy burden for companies. Therefore, in the workplace, what do women have to look forward to? As far as enterprises are concerned, whether it is training talents or hiring expenses, once extra-long maternity leave is implemented, they will only say byebye to women. Yes, I wrote about enterprise here. This is because if they are civil servants, teachers or other state-owned units, they will generally strictly implement national policies. In private enterprises, let alone three or six years, even the current three months of maternity leave may not be granted to the majority of women. Then, the different treatment of women by different work units, in addition to further aggravating inequities, will also restrict women’s career choices, causing them to be more inclined to choose work departments with the word “national”. At the same time, it will trigger more fierce competition in job selection in departments with the prefix “national”. In other words, in a certain industry, women are particularly concentrated, is it a good thing? Didn’t some representatives say that kindergarten teachers should recruit more boys? Nurses also prefer men. If this policy is implemented, it will cause unexpected changes in a large area like an earthquake. Secondly, from a social perspective, it has exacerbated the contradiction of labor shortage and increased the country’s expenditure burden. Why do we encourage fertility now? Because of the serious aging and the serious shortage of labor, the work of young people is not enough to feed the huge group of elderly people. If young women who are originally laborers leave their jobs for a long time because of childbirth, wouldn’t this further exacerbate the labor shortage, and because the benefits of their paid vacations are subsidized by the state, wouldn’t this increase the country’s financial burden? Because no one works, so fertility is encouraged; because of fertility, women can’t work. Isn’t this falling into a contradiction? Moreover, for women, long vacations are not conducive to personal growth. If the implementation of long maternity leave, the only benefit is to solve a series of problems in raising children, and mothers can be liberated from work and take care of the children full-time. This is considered to encourage childbirth. Stimulus policy. As a mother, I certainly want to have more time to accompany my children to grow up. However, my mother is only one of my roles. I am still a promising young man. I hope I can live out my own value and make a difference in the workplace. I am also a wife who considers her husband. I know that he alone takes over the burden of the family’s hardships, and I hope that I will share part of the pressure for the family. Although maternity leave is still paid, it is estimated that it is only the basic salary, not too much. And for those who don’t contribute much throughout the year, I believe that the year-end award will not get a share. How much does this small income play in supporting the family? And how high is the cost of having children? At the age when I should struggle, I can’t choose ease! I am still a new woman who pursues independence, democracy and self-love. I don’t want to be despised by others because of the loss of economic strength. Just ask the full-time mother to know the pain of this. Taking care of children at home is so hard, but they are regarded as idlers who ask people for money and suffer contempt and disdain. I can’t bear this rolling eyes. Therefore, I have to make money to support my spine and domineering. I also want to set more valuable examples for my children. As a mother, not only the nanny who takes care of them. I also want to set a positive example for my children outside of life, such as hard work in the workplace, slash life, etc. Or, when my daughter asks me: “Mom, what’s the use of you reading so many books? Don’t you keep giving birth and doing housework and taking care of children? This can be done without reading. Why do I have to work so hard? How about reading?” How should I answer this question from my daughter? I don’t want to be speechless, but can use my actions and achievements to show her the meaning of reading and fighting. During the two sessions, the deputies and committee members worked hard to encourage everyone to want to live and live more. I am very grateful for this suggestion for the majority of women. However, compared to extending maternity leave, it is better to put the current paid maternity leave in place. I know that the sisters from the unit with the word “national” around me are taking full maternity leave, and there are also salary payments. In short, how the policy stipulates and how they follow the rules. However, if you go to a private enterprise, you don’t have this treatment. Some have only one month’s maternity leave, and some have only three months. Anyway, there are very few days of rest. In addition, whether they can receive treatment income depends on whether the unit has purchased maternity insurance. If the unit did not pay, they would have no income. Moreover, the most front-line staff such as restaurant waiters and supermarket employees, not to mention the benefits of paid vacation, even the five insurances and one housing fund are rarely in place. So, let’s cover the most basic protection to everyone, and let’s talk about higher-level and more powerful benefits. This is more practical for everyone.

7 months ago

Issues such as maternity leave and women’s employment seem to be a gender issue, but the essence is a class issue. Gender issues are embedded in the specific social class structure. Without changing the social class structure dominated by current capital, any policy that appears to be beneficial to women will be distorted and even have the opposite effect. Extending maternity leave seems to be a welfare policy for women, but for capital aimed at squeezing the maximum surplus value, this means that hiring women has to bear higher costs and obtain lower output, so they will be more Exacerbate the disadvantaged position of women in the job market. Therefore, to truly protect women’s rights, it is necessary to reflect on and change the social structure dominated by this capital. We, Committee Member Song, proposed this proposal. Can this be achieved? Quite the opposite. The key point of this proposal is that “women agree to stay on maternity leave without pay and continue to pay five insurances and one housing fund, but the burden on the enterprise must be reduced. The government can subsidize the enterprise by returning the total social insurance ratio of the enterprise.” The essence of maternity leave is paid. Leave, that is, when female employees are on maternity leave, the employer must pay the corresponding wages for pregnant female employees. However, according to Committee Member Song’s proposal, when employees take maternity leave, the nature becomes “without pay”, that is, they retain their positions and are not paid. So, does this maternity leave still make sense? Although it is said that the five social insurances and one housing fund must be paid as usual, the five social insurances and one housing fund are ultimately borne by the government, that is, the taxes paid by the people. More importantly, when the maternity leave is extended to 3 to 6 years, the so-called “retention at work” has no meaning. When you leave a job for 3 to 6 years, are you sure you can get it back? This is actually a means of dismissing pregnant female employees in disguise. So on the surface, this proposal is to fight for the rights and interests of women, but in essence it is to reduce the burden of capital and is an attempt to completely separate the burden of women during pregnancy from the enterprise. After carefully checking the identity of Committee Member Song, it seemed that he understood something at once.

7 months ago

I’m tired of looking at these kinds of issues. Isn’t it just a commonplace question: Who will pay for the cost of female childbirth? The cost of childbirth exists objectively and will not disappear automatically just because you spray a few warnings about having a child. It’s useless to shout slogans and play with feelings. The elephant in the room is there and can’t escape. When discussing “who will pay”, we must first make it clear: Who benefits from childbirth? Of course, whoever benefits should pay. First, it goes without saying that both husband and wife benefit. Second, the original family of the couple is also counted. Many grandparents are actively promoting birth, and now the average life expectancy is long. Grandchildren are often still alive after working as adults, and there are benefits both emotionally and materially. Third, if the population is to continue, it must be reproductive. People who will get old in the future will need new blood to feed and protect. Every citizen, whether he is born or not, benefits from group births, and of course the government also benefits. The problem now is: the third part is seriously missing. This part of our country’s maternity protection includes taxes, subsidies, trusteeship, labor laws, and maternal and child support facilities… Among the major powers in the world, it is equivalent to the bottom of the height of Guo Jingming and Yao Ming. The common people are not stupid at all. They have been talking about it for a long time. They just refuse to take the money out. The system and facilities are guaranteed to keep up. Then everyone will just look at the jokes. Zhihu has discussed several proposals, including increasing the proportion of male teachers, conducting differentiated education between men and women, retaining the status of fresh graduates for 5 years, letting veterans be teachers, and extending the maternity leave for women, and setting Confucius’s birthday as Teacher’s Day. There seems to be a variety of things, but the ultimate goal is only one: to strengthen patriarchy, deprive women of the opportunity to compete in the workplace as much as possible, drive them home, let them have children, and hope to increase the fertility rate without spending money. Regardless of whether it is right or not, the implementation will only make women think that choosing lower-class men to get married will not pay off, and they will intensify their efforts to choose a spouse. The reproductive resources and sexual resources will be concentrated in the upper-class. More and more, it is more and more difficult for lower-class men to marry a wife to support their families. If you are a middle-class or above male, you can naturally poke joy in secret; but if you belong to another 90% of men and cheer for these policies that fuel lower-class men, then I really don’t know what to say about you.

7 months ago

Recently, the suggestion of Song Zhiping, a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, has attracted attention and has been frequently searched. She suggested that the maternity leave should be extended for 3 to 6 years so that the children can get good care and education before going to kindergarten or elementary school; the admission and school fees for the two-children should be reduced, and certain subsidies should be given to reduce the financial pressure of the two-child families; Encourage companies to hire female employees, agree to leave women on maternity leave and continue to pay five social insurances and one housing fund. However, the burden on the company must be reduced. The government can subsidize the company by returning the company’s total social insurance ratio. It can be said that Commissioner Song drew a beautiful picture for women. The original maternity leave (128-158 days) was extended to 3 to 6 years. During the long maternity leave, not only was it possible to stay without pay, but also five social insurances and one housing fund. The admission fee for the first two children in kindergarten and enrollment fees are reduced, and the economic pressure is greatly reduced. If this vision can be realized, it is estimated that women’s willingness to give birth will increase immediately. But the first reaction of most female netizens was not surprise, but fright. Many people left messages in unison: Which company would dare to recruit women like this?

7 months ago

Childbirth has a cost. The higher the childbirth costs borne by enterprises, the more difficult it is for women to find employment, not only in China but also in the world. When companies hire employees, they need them to create economic benefits. Using the least cost to create the greatest benefits is the way for an enterprise to survive. As for female employees taking maternity leave, companies not only have to share the material costs of childbirth, such as paying for maternity insurance and wages during work stoppages, but also bear some hidden costs that are difficult to measure, such as work connection, manpower shortage, or shortage of personnel. The position led to the suspension of the project, finding the right person to do the work, etc. If you just extend maternity leave without touching on the economic costs and practical difficulties that the company has to pay, the company will definitely try to pass on the costs. The safest way is to hire fewer or no female employees. Judging from the interview, Commissioner Song had a clear understanding of this contradiction in reality. She mentioned that because female employees have to take care of their children, they often ask for leave and cannot travel on business, which indeed brings a lot of changes to the company. The state can consider introducing more second-child welfare policies and policies to solve the difficulty of women’s employment. “Otherwise, blindly letting enterprises bear the pressure, as a result, may indirectly lead to an increase in unfavorable female employment factors and a decrease in female employment opportunities.” It is also to avoid the cause. The inability to pick up and drop off the children caused female employees to leave. Committee member Song proposed to extend the school hours of kindergartens and elementary schools to 6 pm so that parents can pick up and drop off after get off work. But even if we understand the difficulties of enterprises and the embarrassment of women’s employment, we also advocate the need for the state to introduce more preferential policies. However, the core solution proposed by Committee Member Song is to extend maternity leave for 3 to 6 years, and at the same time provide five insurances and one housing fund for women on maternity leave. And so on, but the opposite is true. According to her suggestion, female employees can enjoy a few more years of happiness and their children can grow up healthily, but the company has to bear huge costs for it. In the past, public opinion called for the extension of maternity leave for six months to one year. Companies still complained that some female employees were afraid of losing their jobs. If maternity leave is extended for several years, employees can still get wage subsidies if they don’t work for 3 to 6 years. How many companies can afford it, and how many employees dare to take it? Of course, Committee Member Song also proposed to reduce the burden on enterprises. For example, the government can subsidize enterprises by returning the amount of the company’s total social insurance ratio. But compared to the tangible and intangible childbirth costs paid by enterprises, this part of the money can be described as a drop in the bucket. After all, let companies pay for the expanded reproductive benefits. This kind of “generous corporate generosity” proposal just looks so beautiful, but in fact there is no room for manipulation, and it is not good for companies or women. Whether the maternity leave can be extended and how long it can be extended depends on who will cover the cost of childbirth. It is neither realistic nor reasonable to allow enterprises to bear most of the costs. Women who give birth to women are not only the successors of the family, but also future taxpayers. They are the country’s human resources, which is good for the country, but in the short term, it is bad for the enterprise. According to the principle of whoever benefits, at least the state should be the party that contributes more to women’s fertility assistance. In reality, it is precisely that the public finances are not enough to bear, and the enterprises bear too much, which has caused female employees to be increasingly excluded from the workplace and suffer cruel “motherhood” punishment.
Regrettably, although the whole society is aware of the urgency of childbirth and women’s employment difficulties, the existing proposals still focus on individuals and enterprises, and we always hope that enterprises will take on more and more. Although this is also a way for enterprises to fulfill their social responsibilities, the performance of social responsibilities is not unconditional. A basic premise is that the survival of the enterprise itself cannot be endangered. Only when an enterprise survives and grows, can it be able to take on more social responsibilities. However, 95% of China’s small and medium-sized enterprises have an average life span of only 2.5 years. To survive, they must do everything possible to reduce costs and recruit more cost-effective employees. In fact, these companies have absorbed 80% of the employed population and created most of the jobs. They have fulfilled their utmost social responsibility, and they should not be demanded too much at once. Moreover, in recent years, domestic and international environmental changes, coupled with the impact of the epidemic, many companies are still struggling with life and death. Any additional burden may be the last straw to crush the camel. If the enterprise is killed, where will the employment, the maternity leave and subsequent maternity benefits come from? Childbirth is a family affair as well as a national affair, and should not only be a game between individuals and enterprises. The issue of childbirth costs cannot be solved by enterprises that promote their style and dedication. Whether it is a policy or a suggestion, it cannot be “generous”. If public finances cannot effectively share the cost of childbirth, it cannot fundamentally reduce the burden on the company. For female employees, extending maternity leave is not a boon, but a landmine. It means that they will suffer more severe workplace discrimination, and the ultimate cost of childbirth will be passed on to the individual. Without touching the existing cost-sharing mechanism, extending maternity leave for 3 to 6 years is tantamount to wishful thinking and idiotic dreams. It is just like sugar-coated arsenic, which is sweet on the surface, but it is really life-threatening. We need to be strictly vigilant.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x