Since the overturning of Roe, some corporations have chosen to exploit the PR aspects of the situation by proudly trumpeting the fact that they will pay for employees to travel for abortions. Obviously corporations can do this sort of thing if they want. However, as we've seen recently, corporate wokeness doesn't necessarily lead where they might have hoped.
I'm wondering about something else. If it costs an employer tens of thousands of dollars (maybe more) for an employee to take maternity leave, then isn't throwing $4,000 at women to abort, just a way to increase profits? Isn't this a way to look good in a P sense, while actually cutting expenses? I suspect that it's not the same across the board, but I suspect that at some point they'll start to appreciate the extra profit.
Disclaimer, I'm not against or criticizing corporations making decisions to maximize profits, that's what they should do. What I am criticizing is portraying themselves as doing one thing, while really being motivated by profits.
2 comments:
This is a angle suggested quite a bit by those commenting on the "trend". Even among any corporations who truly believe in aborting innocent children, it's hard to imagine the impact on profits plays no role whatsoever in the offer. How can it not given the disparity in costs between employees having a family versus having no family. It distracts from full devotion to the company to have any family which might require an employee's attention, when the company wants that attention directed toward itself.
Again, this isn't bad business except for the optics...which is why it's portrayed as providing the means for women to avail themselves of their "rights". From my perspective, it's bad optics either way. Shameful, in absolute fact.
I agree that it's hard to ignore the fact that it's much cheaper to have your employees kill than bear their children. The fact that they think they can turn this unsavory stance into good PR makes it worse.
Post a Comment