It’s no secret that American parents face an uphill battle when it comes to securing adequate family leave. The United States is one of just six countries with no national paid maternity leave. And while a lucky minority (under 25%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) may have access to paid leave through their employer, that pay is rarely full pay and, at an average of six to 12 weeks, usually falls short of UNICEF’s recommended six months off following the birth of a child. Of course, some companies fare better than others in accommodating their employees desire to have a family, and one would reasonably think that a company that serves babies would be among the ranks of “the good guys” in this regard. But recently, Kyte Baby, a baby clothing brand, has come under fire for its treatment of an employee and her newborn preemie.
Kyte Baby employee Marissa Hughes adopted a preemie baby in late December.
After an arduous and sad fertility journey, which Hughes shared on her GoFundMe page, she and her husband Rawley decided to adopt. Their prayers were answered when Judah was born on Dec. 29 at just 22 weeks gestation weighing “barely over a pound.” They rushed to meet their new little guy, more than nine hours away from their home in Dallas, and knew that he would have a somewhat lengthy NICU stay.
Hughes’ request to work remotely was denied. Then she was fired.
At the time of Judah’s birth, Hughes had worked for Kyte Baby for under a year as a studio coordinator/point of contact for models. She knew that she would only be eligible for two weeks of maternity leave, per company policy. She told Today that she requested to be able to work remotely beyond that and notes that, initially, that plan seemed to be in place.
“We set up my entire schedule hour-by-hour and even set check-in dates going forward. I was under the impression we were creating a new schedule based on what had already been discussed and approved,” she explained. But Kyte Baby CEO Ying Liu, a representative for the company explained to Today, “did not feel [Marissa’s] job could be done remotely, and if [Marissa] could not return to the office after her maternity leave, then we would part ways.”
Hughes says she was fired following a Slack conversation with Kyte Baby’s HR manager hours after asking clarifying questions about the company’s maternity leave policy, highlighting that her not returning from her two-week leave was tantamount to resigning.
“I said, ‘I’m not resigning and I’m willing to work ... It was never my intention to quit,” Marissa told Today. “They were stumbling... Then they said, ‘We don’t want you to think you’re doing the wrong thing by choosing Judah.’”
Hughes’ story went viral after her sister shared the situation on Facebook Live.
A woman claiming to be (and, who by all appearances is) Hughes’ sister delved into the story, claiming that higher ups immediately bristled at Hughes taking any time off at all because she “didn’t have a baby.” Social media caught wind of the situation and did what social media does. Users on TikTok, Twitter, and other outlets expressed outage over Kyte Baby’s decision.
“The irony of @KyteBaby being a baby clothing line and not supporting time off for a new mom,” scoffs Twitter user @krissssyann.
“This is why laws need to be changed,” says TikTok user @rx0rcist, “because y’all were given the opportunity, in at at-will employment state like Texas, to do the right thing by your employee and y’all fumbled.”
Many parents of preemies and NICU babies posted throwback videos of their own fragile little ones with some iteration of “this is why I won’t buy from Kyte Baby,” highlighting the unique struggles NICU families endure.
Kyte Baby issued two apology videos after Liu’s first was poorly received.
Last week, Kyte Baby responded to the controversy in an apology video featuring Liu. The clearly scripted, carefully worded apology, which made liberal use of terms like “I wanted to sincerely apologize to Marissa for how her maternity leave was communicated and handled.”
“I like how your lawyer prepared that statement. So sincere,” one commenter responded flippantly.
“What’s gonna happen when it’s an employee who doesn’t have a good social media presence and is working in the warehouse?” asks another.
“I can’t imagine the stress & irreversible damage this new mom went through due to greed,” wrote a third. “Sickening that this is a brand for children. Shame on Kyte baby.”
That same day, she posted a second, less scripted but decidedly more frantic apology, admitting that her first apology was scripted and came off as insincere and insufficient in its conciliatory efforts, both toward Hughes and as a company.
The second video included Liu’s pledge to establish a more robust parental leave policy, which she hopes Kyte Baby can reveal in the coming weeks. She also said that Kyte Baby would continue to pay Marissa and that her job will be waiting for her whenever she would like to come back if that’s her wish.
Response to this second video was better but still tinged with skepticism.
Hughes will not be returning to Kyte Baby
Hughes and her family have seen Liu’s apology videos and, in a statement on Facebook Live (since shared to TikTok) thanking folks for their support — both financially and in prayer — of Baby Judah, who is doing well but who will likely be in the NICU until March or April.
She also said that she would not be returning to Kyte Baby (understandable).
“While we don’t think it would be appropriate for me to go back, we’re really encouraged to hear that there will be some changes made for current and future employees at the company.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment