The USA has a lot of catching up to do with the rest of the world then.

Six weeks paid leave is paltry compared to the vast majority of countries.

You're complaining to the wrong state.

That's a miserably low standard to hold ourselves to.

I guess that's like 3 months at 50%, assuming you can take another 6 weeks unpaid.

In Quebec, both parents get a combined total of 57 weeks, with some pay cut, paid through a provincial insurance program. As in, everybody gets it, and the employer isn't directly financially burdened by babies.

I agree, but isn't it better than nothing?

That's worlds better than what is available anywhere else in the US. The federal government allows you to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid family leave without losing your benefits (through FMLA), and while the employer can't replace you they don't have to return you back to your original position.

It's worlds worse than what is available everywhere else outside the US.

Yet another reason not to start a business in San Francisco. If the city wants new parents to have 6 weeks' leave, then it should pay that, not require businesses to pay for it. As it is, it's an unfunded mandate (and, really, a way of reducing everyone's wages, since employers will need to get some form of insurance to cover the risk of an employee leaving for a month and a half).

And of course, it makes life easy for large organisations like government and big business, while making things harder for small business (who have a higher variability due to lower number of employees).

This may seem insignificant and if so let me know, but the wording of this led me to believe SF was going to PAY for 6 weeks of maternity leave for everybody rather than making it mandatory that employers provide it.