Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the light of the Supreme Court decision, many companies have come out and said that as part of their policy they will pay the travel expenses for a woman if she needs to travel to another state to get an abortion. Some also seem to be saying that they would pay for any legal fees for this as well.
Zillow was mentioned and not only will they pay for Abortion Travel, but for Travel for "Gender Affirming" care. Companies like Patagonia will apparently pay your bail if you get arrested in a Pro-Abortion protest.
How much of this is a concern for the Woman, and how much is political just straight-out Virtual Signalling?
Many of these companies are headquartered or have a majority of their employees in States where Abortions will still be allowed. This means that the pool of employees who would possibly need this would start out as small, and then figuring the number that would actually want to get an abortion, seems like they are trying to cater to just a handful.
Would these companies pay for the travel expenses if a person needed to get specialized Cancer Care out of State? Would they pay for a person to go to a State where Marijuana was legal if they needed it for medical use? Where do they draw the line? For some companies getting even basic health care is difficult, yet they have now made Abortion a "Company Policy".
Is abortion really that much of a concern that someone would select their employer based on this policy, or should I say they would not go to an employer that didn't have this policy?
You know the next problem is insurance. With this ruling now Governors might change laws in their state. It’s fresh news. Companies are saying that they are standing with the women or LBGTQ.
Who said anything about Tahiti? I do believe they're talking about sending women to states where abortion is legal.
Oh, I know. But why stop there? These benevolent corporations could be persuaded to open their wings a little wider, I'm sure. You know, all in the name of virtue...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinytrump
... Companies are saying that they are standing with the women or LBGTQ.
And companies shouldn't be "standing" for anything besides providing their product.
Oh, I know. But why stop there? These benevolent corporations could be persuaded to open their wings a little wider, I'm sure. You know, all in the name of virtue...
And companies shouldn't be "standing" for anything besides providing their product.
Why not? Wasnt that the whole purpose of Citizens United?
Oh, I know. But why stop there? These benevolent corporations could be persuaded to open their wings a little wider, I'm sure. You know, all in the name of virtue...
And companies shouldn't be "standing" for anything besides providing their product.
Why "shouldn't" they? How do you get to decide what any given company should do?
I'm sure you're OK with Chik-Fil-A standing for something.
Companies do have cultures and are owned and run by humans who have their beliefs of right and wrong.
Someone who is so wrapped up in abortion rights that they would choose where to work based on this sort of policy is certainly a leftist, and quite possibly one of the more shrewish kind. Smart companies will keep their mouths shut and let their petulant, always-annoyed, troublesome employees go to the virtue-signaling companies. Definitely a win for the smart companies to get rid of their whiny, never satisfied employees.
Someone who is so wrapped up in abortion rights that they would choose where to work based on this sort of policy is certainly a leftist, and quite possibly one of the more shrewish kind. Smart companies will keep their mouths shut and let their petulant, always-annoyed, troublesome employees go to the virtue-signaling companies. Definitely a win for the smart companies to get rid of their whiny, never satisfied employees.
Smart companies know that it is cheaper to pay travel expenses for abortion than to cover the healthcare of pregnancy, childbirth and weeks of family leave. Remember, many large companies are self insured. Pregnancy and childbirth would cost them more.
And BTW, people routinely review the perks a company gives when they review job offers from various companies.
In these uncertain economic times, I’d say it’s more of a marketing campaign if anything. They care about their bottom line above all else, and they know which views are more espoused by those who tend to have more discretionary income to throw at them for Patagonia jackets and trips to Disneyland (hint: Mississippi ain’t a major market for any of these companies).
Not having an additional name on a employee’s medical insurance benefit, not having to pay for maternity and bonding leave, less time off that will be needed for child activities. No wonder these companies are tripping over each other to come to the aid of a distraught woman in her hour of need trying to seek out an abortion
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
