企業(yè)在帶薪假上的軍備競賽并不像人們想象得那么瘋狂。盡管一些雇主——尤其是那些咨詢業(yè)和科技業(yè)的公司——近來公布了引人矚目的休假政策，但大部分雇主還是保持著沉默。

非盈利機構(gòu)Paid Leave for the United States（PLUS）的一項新報告試圖探尋美國排名前60的雇主的育嬰假政策。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，其中的33家并未公布相關(guān)信息。在這些公司中，有8家拒絕向PLUS透露自己的政策（剩下25家則根本沒有回應(yīng)PLUS獲取信息的要求），他們分別是：波音（Boeing）、聯(lián)邦快遞（FedEx）、霍尼韋爾國際（Honeywell International）、惠普企業(yè)（HPE）、印孚瑟斯（Infosys Limited）、萬豪國際（Marriott International）、TJX和沃爾格林（Walgreens）。

這些公司沒有解釋他們?yōu)槭裁床辉敢夤颊摺Ｈ欢琍LUS的創(chuàng)始人和執(zhí)行董事凱蒂·貝瑟爾表示，一些公司希望保密，或許是因為他們員工享受的待遇并不一樣。她說：“存疑的一點在于，他們可能對低工資員工存有歧視。”

沃爾瑪是美國最大的雇主，這也是唯一證實小時工不能享受帶薪育嬰假的公司（正式女性員工擁有12周帶薪育嬰假，男性員工則是2周）。然而，貝瑟爾認為，其他擁有大量小時工的許多公司也有類似的排除政策。

毫無疑問，帶薪假政策最誘人的公司——美國銀行（Bank of America）、德勤（Deloitte）和IBM都位列其中——都在努力競爭高水平人才。

小時工并不是唯一被忽略的群體。在PLUS能夠確認休假政策的27家公司中，有22家的政策并不公平，父親或養(yǎng)父母得到的假期要遠遠少于母親。有7家公司完全不提供陪產(chǎn)假，他們分別是AT&T、CVS、通用汽車（General Motors）、福特（Ford）、星巴克（Starbucks）、超價商店（Supervalu）和威瑞森（Verizon）。

只給母親提供產(chǎn)假，而不給父親提供陪產(chǎn)假，這不只是公司的疏忽而已。即將擔(dān)任總統(tǒng)的唐納德·特朗普在關(guān)于育嬰假的提案中，同樣只向母親提供這一假期。貝瑟爾認為這一現(xiàn)象在典型的企業(yè)政策中“根深蒂固”。

致力于爭取帶薪假的聯(lián)盟Family Values @ Work的執(zhí)行董事艾倫·布拉沃表示：“（特朗普的）計劃太短視了。它適用的人群太少，還不到一半。低工資的員工根本用不上它。我們不認為這是個解決問題的好方案。”

盡管布拉沃不同意特朗普的提議，但她認為提供帶薪假的責(zé)任不僅在于公司。她解釋道：“有許多公司，尤其是小公司，都希望確保自己的員工得到關(guān)懷，但他們能力不足。”把帶薪假的擔(dān)子全部壓在雇主身上，會讓小公司處于很大的劣勢，因為他們沒有足夠的資源來提供這樣的假期。

貝瑟爾同意，“最終，解決帶薪家庭假要靠國家的公共政策。”目前，美國沒有這樣的政策。美國也是經(jīng)濟合作及發(fā)展組織國家（OECD country）中唯一沒有這類政策的國家。

PLUS的創(chuàng)始人指出，在外國開展業(yè)務(wù)的公司——也就是說，排名前60的雇主中的大部分——都需要遵守他國法律，提供優(yōu)厚得多的家庭假。例如，即將成為父親的員工，在芬蘭可以得到11周的假期，這期間能獲得70%的薪水，而如果在美國，他一天假期也沒有。

貝瑟爾表示：“對這些公司中的絕大部分而言，提供帶薪假并不困難。他們已經(jīng)這么做了，只是在美國本土沒有這樣而已。”（財富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：嚴匡正

The paid leave arms race isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. While some employers—notably those in consulting and tech—have recently made splashy updates to their leave policies, the vast majority are staying quiet.

A new report from non-profit Paid Leave for the United States (PLUS) that aimed to parse the parental leave policies at the top 60 employers in the country found that 33 of them did not make the information publicly available. Of these, eight declined to share their policies with PLUS (the remaining 25 companies never responded to the non-profit’s requests to provide information): Boeing , FedEx , Honeywell International , HPE, Infosys Limited , Marriott International , TJX , and Walgreens.

The companies didn’t offer an explanation for their reluctance to disclose their policies. However, Katie Bethell, founder and executive director of PLUS, says that some may be opting to keep their policies quiet because they don’t offer the same benefits to all of their workers. “One thing that seems to be problematic is discrimination against low-wage workers,” she says.

Walmart , the largest employer in the country, was the only company to confirm that is excludes hourly workers from its paid leave benefits (salaried mothers get 12 weeks; fathers get two). However, Bethell believes that many other companies with large hourly workforces have similarly exclusionary policies.

It’s no accident that the companies that do have generous leave policies—Bank of America, Deloitte, and IBM 0.39% are among them—are those that compete for highly-skilled talent.

Hourly workers aren’t the only ones being left out. Of the 27 company policies PLUS was able to confirm, 22 have unequal leave, with fathers and/or adoptive parents receiving significantly less time than birth mothers. Seven companies offer no paternity leave at all: AT&T T 1.03% , CVS, General Motors @general m GM, Ford , Starbucks, Supervalu, and Verizon.

Offering leave to mothers but not fathers is not simply a corporate oversight. President-elect Donald Trump’s paid leave proposal also restricts paid leave to moms, something Bethell believes “has roots” in typical corporate policies.

“[Trump’s] program falls far short,” says Ellen Bravo, executive director of Family Values @ Work, a network of coalitions working for paid leave. “It would cover too few people—less than half. A low-wage worker simply wouldn’t be able to use it. We do not see that as the solution.”

Despite her disapproval of Trump’s proposal, Bravo believes that the responsibility to provide paid leave should not fall on the shoulders of corporations. “There are many businesses, particularly smaller business, who might want to make sure their employees are taken care of, but can’t compete,” she explains. Leaving paid leave up to the employer puts smaller companies at a major disadvantage, as they simply may not have the resources to provide it.

Bethell agrees that “ultimately, solving paid family leave will require a national public policy.” Currently, no such policy exists; the U.S. is the only OECD country without one.

The PLUS founder points out that the companies with operations in foreign countries—that is to say, most of them—comply with the laws in other countries that offer far more generous family leave. So an expecting father who is an employee in Finland, for example, would get 11 weeks of paid time off at 70% of his salary, while his American counterpart would get none.

“For most of these companies, providing paid leave isn’t much of a stretch,” says Bethell. “They’re already doing it—just not at home.”