- Valuing Parenthood Homepage
- Valuing Parenthood: Interim Paper Index
- Part A: Background - Working and Having Children in Australia
- Part B: International Context
- Part C: Objectives of Paid Maternity Leave
- Part D: Implementing a Paid Maternity Leave Scheme
- Also Available: A Time to Value: Proposal for a National Paid Maternity Leave Scheme
Foreword
It has been a long journey from the male breadwinner family of the 1907 Harvester judgment to the modern families of today. The transformation of families has been one of the most significant social changes since the Second World War and arguably over the entire century. Landmark decisions by governments and industrial tribunals have endorsed and encouraged social changes along the way.
Modern Australian families live in a new social paradigm, where a majority of mothers are in part or full time work. Women and men struggle with combining responsibilities to their work and their families, not wanting to forego either part of life. Many couples decide to delay childbirth while they meet work and training commitments, and some decide not to have children at all.
The confluence of the demands of biology and economic security means that today families are faced with bringing up children at the same time that they are paying off high mortgages or establishing themselves in increasingly competitive workplaces. The inexorable shift to both women and men contributing to the family income and the increase in sole parent families mean it is highly unlikely that the numbers of working mothers will decline. A sensible family policy needs to work within this new framework and a national paid maternity leave scheme is one legitimate policy response to this paradigm shift.
Women are an integral part of the Australian workforce. While significant progress has been made to remove systemic discrimination in the labour force, women continue to suffer disadvantage because of their responsibility for bearing and caring for children. The social revolutions of the last half century have seen tremendous change, but have not resulted in men taking equal responsibility for child rearing or domestic labour. In workforce terms, this is reflected in pay inequities: women still only earn 84 cents in the male dollar, when comparing average weekly ordinary time earnings. When all earnings are taken into account, the disparity is even greater. A national paid maternity leave scheme would go some way to addressing this disadvantage and compensate women for their loss of income resulting from family responsibilities. It also supports working women at a time of great vulnerability, the period surrounding childbirth. For this reason, paid maternity leave as a workforce entitlement is a starting assumption of this paper.
In developing this interim options paper I have consulted widely with employer and employee groups and a range of analysts, including critics, and many in the Commonwealth Public Service. They have generously given their time and knowledge and proposed a variety of approaches, informed and tested the arguments and proposed a range of options. I expect to further consult with these stakeholders over the next few months before the release of a final Options Paper.
There are a number of national objectives that a paid maternity leave scheme is potentially able to meet. Whether or not it can in fact do so depends on the nature of the scheme and for this reason the paper ranges widely; from the decline in fertility rates to the need to reduce indirect discrimination against women in the work force to the health and welfare needs of small babies and their mothers. Ambitious objectives generally require ambitious schemes and several such schemes are advanced in this interim options paper. The final paper is likely to be more specific in approach.
Currently Federal Government assistance for families is in excess of 10 billion dollars. The case for paid maternity leave requires government and the community to be satisfied that existing measures do not meet the objectives or fulfil the requirements of mandated paid maternity leave.
While at this stage realistic costings for a national paid maternity leave scheme are both premature and unavailable, a number of proponents of such a scheme estimate that certain options could cost in the vicinity of $300 million a year, modest compared with some current government assistance programmes for families. Again, the final paper will gather the available data to clarify costs.
It should be emphasised that most of those consulted in the preparation of this paper were concerned that an individual employer funded scheme would prove disadvantageous to women in employment and to commercial competitiveness generally.
Paid maternity leave is one measure that recognises the social realities of modern Australian families, and supports them in their choices. You are invited to propose other or better alternatives as part of the national discussion I trust we will now have.
Pru Goward
Sex Discrimination Commissioner