Dear Editor: I Cannot Support This Policy

Dear Editor,

This letter regards the Town of Whitehall's proposed Babies in the Workplace policy.

At the March Council meeting, I gave my thoughts on "Babies in the Workplace." The next day, I was asked if I would read the Town of Whitehall "Infant-At-Work Program" Draft Policy. I said I would and, after receiving it, thought to myself, "How can they already have "program guidelines" this detailed on this subject already typed? It is quite thorough. I understand Council members have been working on this policy for a couple of months already; a lot of time and thought went into this policy on the Town's part. However, I cannot support this policy!

I feel this policy would be a detriment to the effective functioning of the Town Office. The policy would, I'm sure, be permanent, which means this situation could, and most likely will, happen again. I also understand there is currently only a vague description of maternity time allowed. It is pretty apparent the policy, written at this exact time, is written keeping in mind employees who are currently pregnant. However, as I said at the last meeting, a PUBLIC agency, such as the Town Hall, should NOT be allowed to change/adopt policies to their needs whenever an issue arises.

Also, the Town Hall is not open to the public on Fridays. Why is this? The public office needs to reopen to the public on Fridays, and office hours should be expanded to either 4:30 PM or 5 PM daily to meet the needs of other working people in the town. This can easily be done with two office personnel. What is the purpose of this Friday shutdown for the public? Is it for the employees to catch up on their work without interruptions? IF so, having a baby/babies in the workplace would doubtlessly slow the workers' output even more.

Think about this: a person has nine months to find a babysitter. That person is entitled to 6-8 weeks maternity leave, yet the Town Hall wants to add up to another six months of allowing babies in the workplace. The baby/babies would be 7 ½-8 months old by this time! Then, as I stated before, if this were made a permanent policy, the town would most likely have this same situation occur again. If the Town adopts this policy, it will set precedence for the future. It's not a good policy for a public office!

I also understand the Town's need to retain its current employees because of their training, knowledge, and work ethics. I think a new policy should be plain and simple.

Example: Pregnant employees are entitled to receive a reasonable leave of absence for maternity. Reasonable, in the case of a normal pregnancy and delivery is deemed to be six calendar weeks, and this period of leave will be granted after the birth of a child, if requested. An employee is not required to obtain medical certification for this initial 6-calendar week of leave following the birth of a child. Accrued sick leave, donated sick leave, annual leave, and leave-without-pay may be used for this 6-calendar week period of leave. If there are extenuating circumstances, the employee may be entitled to receive eight weeks of maternity leave with medical certification. At the end of the 6-8 weeks maternity leave, a babysitter needs to come into play instead of bringing the baby into the workplace. When/if a babysitter is sick or can't keep a child for a legitimate reason for a day (or a couple of days), this would be a reason to allow a baby (infant) at the workplace.

NANCY WHEELER

Whitehall, Montana