1trailmaker

Do you just save the bashing for our PM and ball licking for any right wing You just said the other day "who the fuck tweets that shit" now its all good and cozy - JT shows up to respect our fallen and you say its a selfie time. Right Wing does nothing and you say its all good ONEWAY is strong in you grasshopper

dam that was funny

you are right - women should have their baby during lunch time and be back at work on time. there is no need to have any time off and if you wish to have time off QUIT. I get it sleepr you guys have made it clear -

you win 02sled - women in work force is bad and costs money to the employer - giving them EI payments costs employers billions a year - giving a father 6 months is even more cost to an employer.

Women in the work force is bad, having a baby and taking a year off bad (maybe 2 times in a lifetime) . Career men taking EI payments on a regular basis year after year is good and doesn't figure into any costs.

you said its costing more, you are wrong (yes its a year and not a month) 60k a year was the number I posted which is correct for 400 employees. Having a person go on EI costs nothing to the employer, you may state that a person having a baby might cost a company money by having to train a new person, but in most case that simply isn't true - give it a rest 02sled and anyone else thinking this costs companies money How is giving EI costing more than not giving it to them? I have been waiting for your explanation but you just keep spewing garbage about women leaving work Why do you keep bringing up government workers? you sound like a little child having a tantrum - try to stay on topic

actually they haven't posted one thing about EI costing the business money, all they posted was a women having a baby costs them money. EI doesn't cost them anything extra. Clearly they feel women shouldn't have babies or shouldn't be able to work in baring years sleepr keep the ball llicking going

I bet most women don't go back to their 100k a year job - so true

baby's should be illegal women should be at home making cookies instead of working and fucking over work places Employers should be able to fire any women for having a baby - nice post 02sled I get it now How did that company survive all those women in the workplace? here are the fees for the last 20 years http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/pyrll/clcltng/ei/cnt-chrt-pf-eng.html that is a savings of 60k for your fake made up Department - and is 400$ a month less per employee then in 1997 so 02sled your belief is there shouldn't be any EI collected for mothers

No links well over half the syrians are children so they are not allowed to work. Refugees have to apply for a SIN and work permit before they can get a job, that is why they are sponsored. Maybe they all got SIN and WP in the pocket of their free coat

Much lower rates? I doubt that. EI rates are 20% lower per employee than it was 20 years ago. Just this year rates are going down $150 a month per employee for an employer. There is nothing to complain about. Over a lifetime for a business say having 30 employees, how many times do you think a maturity would come up. I ask AC how many times he has replace Electrical engineer for a maturity leave? I bet never 02tool in your department how many people would be in the position to have a baby this year? none or is it 1 For a place like WalMart where this might come up many times, the added cost is zero the crying never stops

wow you are screwed if someone quits or gets ill - how do you manage. In your case I would suggest never hiring a women or a young man that might have a child

Majority of jobs are not real skills I think you are aware of that. Explain away

yet no one has posted how this cost a Canadian business money never mind costing BIG TIME and this includes you. EI pays the person off

you shouldn't have to pay, I think I made that clear - USA has a different way of doing things

lol ya we call it employment insurance up here. That fee doesn't change for a business in Canada, once a person is on leave you no longer pay their employment insurance - our system is very different from yours.

as I said in most cases no, but your blanket statement without any facts doesn't help the discussion. Explain how this cost a lawn care business BIG TIME MONEY

your post is worthless MoMoNothing - are you suggesting no leave at all? yes or no answer please

A business pays employment insurance which is a cost of doing business, no other costs - Making a business pay an employee plus the fill in person is really a stupid idea

in most cases NO it doesn't cost anything

care to explain or are you just going to post your typical useless post

if you say so

In Canada it costs the workplace nothing - and if you can compare a child to a goldfish then in your case yes. What is being proposed in USA isn't helping anyone, I agree there

if you say so, but how about explain how this stops hiring a women that isn't having anymore kids or have them at all. You wonder why the WHITE population is dwindlng?

Yet you ask me if I have sponsored anyone do you have a link to your claims that all these people are not working (the ones allowed to work) what about the other 225k we brought in last year? any concerns? And WRONG the guy you posted was a Christian (not muslim) - sorry 02sled I am not scared like you are