Chicago Global: Comparative Maternity Leave

Bloggers

Alexandre Zanotta
Alexandre Zanotta, L.L.M. '06, bachelor of law (JD equivalent - 2000) and masters of law (2005) from the Pontifica Universidade Catolica de Sao Paulo (Brazil). Researches such subjects as Corporate, Securities, Banking and International Law.
Dan Larkin
Dan Larkin, a corporate partner in the London office of Squire Sanders & Dempsey, focuses on developments, acquisitions and financings of real estate and infrastructure facilities.
David Evans
David Evans, JD '61, QC, MA, LLM Cambridge, retired as a Senior Circuit Judge in '03. Practiced as a barrister '65-'87, interested in most fields of law including International Law.
Eduardo Baeza
Eduardo Baeza, LLM' 05, is an associate at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP in New York, and researches such subjects as Public International Law, Human Rights Law and Corporations.
Eva Garcia Bouzas
Eva Garcia Bouzas, lawyer, researches such subjects as International Public Law, Human Rights and the Laws of war.
Fabio Polverino
Fabio Polverino, LL.M.'06, researches on antitrust law issues, especially merger control and cartels. He is also interested in telecommunication regulation, corporate law and governance.
Konrad von Hoff
Konrad von Hoff, LL.M.' 06, has special interest in employment law, international law, and law and economics and Germany.
Saul Levmore
Saul Levmore is Dean of the University of Chicago Law School.

September 22, 2006

Comparative Maternity Leave

It is well known that the United States has one of the least generous parental leave policies in the world. A current project of mine is to try to explain why this is so, and then to project the likely future path of law and private practice in this area. I am very eager for insights arising out of other countries' law and practices, and so I welcome readers' comments and observations.

I begin with a few observations, and then I will return in a subsequent post to a few theories. First, in the U.S. only recently has law required employers to hold jobs for employees who take leave to give birth, beyond that leave which they may have under disability clauses. Meanwhile, most other countries, ranging from rich ones to poor ones, promise paid leave for weeks or months. Some extend the leave to fathers, but for the present I focus on the most basic maternity leave. In some countries the cost of paid leave is shared between the government and the employer. My first observation is that the U.S. system is "upside down" compared to others, and can be seen either as regressive (in terms of income) or simply as designed to respond to market pressures against a backdrop in which there is an expectation of participation in the labor force by women. Thus, many private firms in the United States offer astonishingly generous leave (astonishing as compared with other countries) to highly paid employees. Many law firms give several months paid leave in the event of maternity, and yet paralegals or secretaries at the same firms may get only a few weeks of paid leave. In many other countries, indeed in most, the "paid leave" is capped at something like the social insurance wage. A banker or lawyer in the U.S. might get $100,000 worth of leave time; the secretary in the same firm might get $3,000; the delivery-person who works for a vendor to that firm might get $0 (or perhaps we should put some option value on the promise of the job held open, as required by law). Meanwhile, in many other countries all three persons would get the equivalent of perhaps $10,000. We might say that the private market perceives that generous maternity leave is a means of attracting women to high-end jobs, and perhaps of retaining them as well, while the political "market," or moral climate, in most countries is more egalitarian, to be sure, but not necessarily more generous in terms of overall cost or aggregate benefits.

It goes without saying that if private employers offer real (market wage rather than minimum wage or social insurance level) paid leave to enough employees, there is less political pressure for the social insurance approach. Note also that birth rates do not explain very much of the international variance. They explain a little, such as Scandinavian generosity, perhaps (longer leaves, with paternity included if not required), but not much.

I do not believe that any system ties its benefits to retention. Many systems have vesting periods, so that one cannot begin work and then very soon thereafter earn paid leave. But I do not think any requires that a portion of benefits be forefeited if the beneficiary does not return to work. I will return to this possibility - and to why we are likely to abhor it in a future post.

Posted by saul levmore on September 22, 2006 at 06:55 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/708061/6141625

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Comparative Maternity Leave:

Chicago Global

Categories

Recent Posts

About

Archives

Bloggers

September 22, 2006

Comparative Maternity Leave

TrackBack

Comments

Post a comment