A Time to Value - Part A
A Time to Value - Proposal for a National Paid Maternity Leave Scheme
Part A: Background
1. Introduction
1.1
Background
In August 2001,
the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) began a comprehensive
examination of the need or otherwise for a national paid maternity leave
scheme in Australia.
HREOC is an independent
statutory authority established under the Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth). It has a variety of functions
and powers to promote and protect the human rights of all people in
Australia.
HREOC administers
the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) (the Sex Discrimination
Act). The Sex Discrimination Act provides a framework for the investigation
and conciliation of complaints of unlawful acts of discrimination on
the grounds of sex, marital status, pregnancy, potential pregnancy and
sexual harassment. It also makes dismissal on the ground of family responsibilities
unlawful. A number of other functions necessary to deal with systemic
issues of discrimination are granted under the Sex Discrimination Act.
One of the objects
of the Sex Discrimination Act is to give effect to certain provisions
of the United Nations' Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) [1] which
says at Article 11(2):
[i]n order to
prevent discrimination against women on the grounds of marriage or
maternity and to ensure their effective right to work, States Parties
shall take appropriate measures:...
(b) To introduce paid maternity leave with pay or with comparable
social benefits without loss of former employment, seniority or
social allowances;
Australia has a
reservation to Article 11(2)(b), which means that it has not agreed
to take the measures required by this paragraph of the Article.
Another object
of the Sex Discrimination Act is to promote the principle of equality
between men and women. HREOC is concerned that Australia's reservation
to this Article, and the lack of comprehensive paid maternity leave,
disadvantages women by reason of their reproductive role. HREOC considered
that work on this topic was not only justified but necessary.
Paid maternity
leave was identified as an issue of concern and importance in HREOC's
1999 National Pregnancy and Work Inquiry. The Report of the Inquiry, Pregnant and Productive, recommended that the federal Government
provide funding for economic modelling and analysis to assess possible
paid maternity leave options.[2] Any economic modelling
of the viability and consequences of paid maternity leave that the Government
may have done has not been publicly released or made available to HREOC.
The Minister for Finance released costings of a range of paid maternity
leave schemes on 12 September 2002.[3] The detail of
these costings has not been made available to HREOC or the public.
1.2
Methodology
On 18 April 2002,
HREOC released an interim paper, Valuing Parenthood: Options for
paid maternity leave.[4] This paper was intended
to generate public discussion on the issue of paid maternity leave.
The paper reviewed the domestic and international context, outlined
possible objectives for a paid maternity leave scheme and identified
a number of possible options for a paid maternity leave scheme. The
interim paper also provided a comprehensive overview of current information
on existing maternity and parental leave arrangements. The information
in that paper remains relevant in considering the discussions, conclusions
and recommendations in this paper.
Written submissions
were invited in response to the interim paper and 257 submissions were
received. Submissions came from individuals, employers, employer groups,
unions, community and women's groups, health professionals and organisations,
academics and State and Territory Governments. Click
here to access a list of the submissions.
The Sex Discrimination
Commissioner and her policy staff also conducted targeted consultations
in metropolitan and regional areas of Australia with employers, employer
groups, unions, community and women's groups and interested individuals. Click here to access a full list of consultations.
HREOC received
substantial information on the experience of individuals, organisations,
and industries in relation to paid maternity leave. While the full extent
of this information is not included in this paper, it significantly
contributed to and informed HREOC's work on these issues. HREOC wishes
to thank all of those who contributed to this paper.
1.3
The community debate
1.3.1
Introduction
The response to
HREOC's interim paper has been overwhelming. The public has embraced
the opportunity to contribute to the policy debate on paid maternity
leave. They have engaged with the detail of paid maternity leave in
a way that is rarely seen in policy debates. The Government and the
community have taken the debate further - to the extent that Australia
is now in the midst of a national debate on the options for restructuring
the workforce into a more family friendly environment. The other striking
thing about this debate has been the willingness of so many women and
families to share their experiences of coping with the arrival of a
new child.
What has emerged
from the debate is a clear recognition of the fact that women and babies
do need support, particularly financial support, at the time of the
birth of a child and that there is a role for Government in providing
this support. For many of the individuals and organisations who spoke
to HREOC there was a relative willingness to accept a minimum paid maternity
leave scheme of 14 weeks to ensure that the scheme was affordable for
Government. However, for many people, the ideal support for mothers
and babies was much greater than this. There has also been widespread
concern that small business generally does not have the capacity to
fund paid maternity leave.
Another significant
feature of the process has been the willingness of major stakeholder
groups to engage with the debate. In conducting the consultations, HREOC
partnered with unions, employer organisations, large employers and women's
organisations. While there has not been agreement on every point, the
stakeholders have provided significant submissions and approached the
issue with good will. HREOC appreciates this engagement and the quality
of assistance provided.
The most contentious
issues in the consultations were:
- whether the
payment should be limited to women in the paid workforce or made available
to all women; - whether the
payment should be available to mothers only, or made to the primary
carer; and - the role of
employers in funding paid maternity leave.
1.3.2
Submissions
Seventy-three per
cent of submissions received supported the introduction of a national
system of paid maternity leave. In contrast, 16 per cent opposed the
introduction of such a scheme while a further 11 per cent were undecided
or neutral. These figures do not, however, indicate the complexity of
submissions in which support or opposition was sometimes conditional
on other factors.
Of those opposed
to paid maternity leave, 60 per cent were submissions from individuals
and 29 per cent were submissions from employers and employer groups.
The remaining 12 per cent consisted of Government, community groups
and an academic. The main ground for opposition was concern that employers
may be forced to pay for maternity leave, and the economic and employment
effects that may flow from this.
Those submissions
clearly in favour of paid maternity leave represented a much broader
range of groups and were more evenly spread between different types
of groups. Of these submissions, 38 per cent were received from individuals,
14 per cent were from women's groups, 12 per cent were from unions and
nine per cent were from employers and employer groups. In addition,
submissions in favour of paid maternity leave were also received from
academics, community groups, health professionals and organisations,
legal groups and Government.
1.3.3
Consultations
Between May and
July 2002, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner conducted 27 consultations
with employers, employer groups, women and community groups and unions.
The consultations were held nationwide in all capital cities and some
regional areas. A number of organisations partnered HREOC in conducting
the consultations. While the majority of consultations were group discussions,
forums were also held as were two round table discussions. One round
table brought together a range of academics in work and family issues,
demographics and population studies. The other brought together representatives
from unions, employer groups, women's groups and community groups.
A range of views
was expressed throughout the consultation process concerning the objectives,
structure and funding of a national scheme of paid maternity leave.
Click
here to access a full list of the consultations.
1.3.4
Public opinion
A high level of
public debate about paid maternity leave has been generated since HREOC
began its research last year. The media response has been varied and
a number of public opinion polls have been conducted to gauge public
support for the issue. The results of these polls suggest there is public
support for paid maternity leave.
In September 2001
Newspoll [5] showed 76 per cent of people surveyed
supported paid maternity leave. Fifty-five per cent strongly supported
it and 21 per cent were partly in favour. Support was slightly stronger
among women and substantially higher among younger people.
A Sun Herald Taverner
poll [6] conducted in May 2002 also showed overwhelming
support for paid maternity leave, with 75 per cent of those surveyed
agreeing that mothers should be paid while on maternity leave, and 23
per cent disagreeing.
An online poll
conducted by motherInc [7] showed that 77 per cent
of the 1000 women who responded to the poll believed that paid maternity
leave was essential. Twenty per cent agreed that the absence of paid
leave had been a major factor in their decision not to have more children.
Eighty-four per cent of respondents believed that fathers should also
be given the option of paternity leave, paid or unpaid.
Public opinion
was also sought concerning how maternity leave should be funded and
the rate of payment. The polls concluded that there was support for
paid maternity leave to be funded through a combination of sources.
For example, the September 2001 Newspoll [8] found
that 60 per cent of those surveyed believed that the cost of the paid
leave should be shared by employers and Government, 17 per cent said
the cost should be borne by Government alone and 12 per cent said employers
should pay for maternity leave. Altogether, 77 per cent believed the
Government has some role in funding paid maternity leave.
The Sun Herald
Taverner poll [9] showed 66 per cent of those surveyed
were in favour of maternity leave funded by a combination of Government,
business and employees, 17 per cent thought the Government alone should
fund it, while only eight per cent were in favour of an employer funded
scheme. Payment for three months was the preferred option for 24 per
cent of respondents, while 23 per cent supported a six month payment
and 17 per cent supported one year paid maternity leave. Only eight
per cent supported two months paid leave and three per cent supported
payment for one month. Varied responses were also given concerning the
rate of payment. Twenty-three per cent stated the payment should be
at half the basic salary, 22 per cent believed it should be two thirds
the basic salary. The minimum wage and full basic salary each received
20 per cent support from respondents. The majority response, 69 per
cent, was that payment should only be made to working mothers, while
26 per cent supported the payment being made to all women.
Fifty-two per cent
of women responding to the motherInc poll [10] believed
that it is the responsibility of the Government to fund paid maternity
leave. Seventy-five per cent of the remaining respondents believed the
payment should be split between employers and the Government.
Westpoll phone
surveyed 400 Western Australian voters in May 2002 [11] on the issue of who should pay for paid maternity leave. When asked
whether employers should fund paid maternity leave, 38 per cent were
in favour, while 56 per cent opposed an employer funded scheme of paid
maternity leave. When asked about a government funded scheme, 47 per
cent stated that they supported paid maternity leave funded through
the taxation system, while 48 per cent were opposed. Support for both
proposals was much higher: 56 per cent and 60 per cent respectively
among people under 35.
In addition to
polls measuring public opinion, a number of polls targeted at specific
groups were conducted. The Finance Sector Union of Australia, for example,
conducted a survey of its members.[12] Eighty-eight
per cent of the 182 members who responded to the survey agreed or strongly
agreed with the statement: "[i]t is important that everyone has
access to some form of paid maternity leave when they have a baby." [13]
The New South Wales
State Chamber of Commerce and NRMA Insurance conducted a survey of local
business in regional New South Wales in May 2002. [14] Seventy-seven per cent of the 781 businesses that responded did not
support "a mandatory scheme of paid maternity leave".[15] It is not clear whether this opposition was based on the concern that
employers may be forced to pay for such a scheme, or was a general objection
to paid maternity leave. Seventy-seven per cent of respondents also
answered yes to the question: "[w]ould you be less inclined to
employ a woman if your business was forced to pay maternity leave?".[16]
The Australian
Institute of Company Directors conducted a survey of members attending
its May 2002 Conference on the Gold Coast. [17] Sixty-one
per cent of women and 38 per cent of men that answered the survey answered
yes to the question: "[d]o you feel paid maternity leave should
be a standard condition of employment?". [18] Forty-three per cent of respondents considered that both business and
Government should pay for maternity leave. In addition, the survey found
that "[b]ig business appears willing to support and pay for paid
maternity leave, while recognising that small business needs government
support".[19]
1.4
About this paper
This paper is divided
into four parts and an appendix.
This part, Part
A, included an introduction to the paper and an overview of the process
that was followed in preparing the paper.
Part
B provides an overview of the present circumstances of Australian
families and the increasing financial and time pressures on mothers
and families. It also reviews existing maternity leave and financial
supports for mothers at the time of birth of a child.
Part
C sets out the objectives and benefits of a national paid maternity
leave scheme.
Part
D outlines community views regarding the possible structure of a
paid maternity leave scheme and details HREOC's preferred model for
a national paid maternity leave scheme.
The Appendix is a consultancy report prepared by the National Centre for Social and
Economic Modelling (NATSEM) of the cost of HREOC's preferred model for
a national paid maternity leave scheme.
1.
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women GA Res 180 (XXXIV 1970), 19 ILM 33 (1980). CEDAW was ratified
by Australia on 28 August 1983.
2. Recommendation 46, Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission Pregnant and Productive: It's a right not
a privilege to work while pregnant HREOC Sydney 1999, pxxvii.
3. Minister for Finance and Administration "Population
Ageing - Adapt to the Reality, Don't Defy it" Media Release 12 September 2002.
4. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Valuing Parenthood:
Options for paid maternity leave, interim paper 2002 HREOC, Sydney
2002.
5. Mike Steketee "Tax should pay mums' leave: Poll" The
Australian 5 September 2001, p1.
6. Sun Herald Taverner Poll "Paid leave: What you think" Sydney Morning Herald 5 May 2002, p4.
7. motherInc, Submission 196, p2.
8. Mike Steketee "Tax should pay mums' leave: Poll" The
Australian 5 September 2001, p1.
9. Sun Herald Taverner Poll "Paid leave: What you think" Sydney Morning Herald 5 May 2002, p4.
10. motherInc, Submission 196, p2.
11. Anne Burns "Baby leave bill for all: Poll" West Australian 15 May 2002, p4.
12. Finance Sector Union, Submission 161, pp5-9, Appendix 2.
13. Finance Sector Union, Submission 161, p6.
14. New South Wales State Chamber of Commerce, Submission 231, pp9-10.
15. New South Wales State Chamber of Commerce, Submission 231, p9.
16. New South Wales State Chamber of Commerce, Submission 231, p9.
17. Australian Institute of Company Directors, Submission 53, pp1-2.
18. Australian Institute of Company Directors, Submission 53, p2.
19. Australian Institute of Company Directors, Submission 53, p2.
