| Breast-feeding--Employers
must make reasonable efforts to provide a work break
and an appropriate room, other than a toilet stall or
broom closet, for lactating mothers to pump breast
milk. (AB 1025 by Dario Frommer, D-Los Feliz) Above you see a summation of a new law
coming into play this year. I suppose that this is a
good thing. I was breast fed, and look how good I
turned out. All jokes aside; I do believe that
breast-feeding is a good thing. I’m just not
sure that we need this law.
First of all – while mother’s
milk may in fact be good for baby, I’m betting
that the advantage is lost when you remove the breast
from the feeding. This law is designed to allow mom
to squeeze off, a can of her milk, so a surrogate is able to dump
it into the kid later, while she’s out there earning
big bucks. Nobody seems to be considering the idea of
bonding that accompanies the natural feeding method.
Secondly, this law seems to be a set
aside benefit, aimed exclusively at the fairer sex.
They get a secret and private hideaway, paid for by
the boss’ investment dollars. They get extra
break time, which also comes out of the boss’
deep pockets. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t care about
the boss incurring a little extra expense, but it’s
been my experience, that when I save him bucks over
the course of the year, I get a bonus at the end. So
now I’m feeling some pangs of discrimination.
The bonuses are going to be consumed, plus there’s
nothing being set aside for us guys. I could feel
better if my wife was out there lactating at some
other dude’s expense, but if that doesn’t
happen, then I end up subsidizing another dude’s
right to build a family. If his wife wants to
lactate, he should get a second job to support his
kid and keep his bare-foot, and pregnant woman at
home.
I have a solution since I seem to be
getting left out of this windfall. If the gals need a
quiet place in which to lactate, as a corporate
benefit, I believe that I should at least be allowed
to watch, as my benefit.
|
®