Paid Maternity Leave
There has been much discussion lately about the issue of paid maternity leave. Several inquiries into the subject have been held, including a Senate Inquiry. Below is a submission by the NSW AFA to the Workplace Relations Amendment (Paid Maternity Leave) Bill 2002.
The Australian Family Association, NSW, supports the concept of paid maternity benefit, not paid maternity leave. It is submitted on behalf of the AFA as follows.
The AFA believes that paid maternity benefit should be paid to all mothers and not only mothers in the workforce who wish to return to the workforce. To discriminate against mothers who wish to care for their children at home is to diminish the role that those mothers play and the work which they do. Being a homemaker is work and should be recognised. The majority of Australians believe that most mothers would prefer to be at home with their children. To implement a scheme which is only to provide paid maternity leave for mothers who elect to return to the workforce would be to create a scheme not to the benefit of most mothers.
The proponents of paid maternity leave assert that it is a proper reflection of the worldwide change in family structure which allows for the dichotomy of roles that women perform including their role as mothers and as workers. To introduce paid maternity leave allows mothers to return to the workforce without the financial impediment created by absence from work while having children.
The push for paid maternity leave is also purported to be a reflection of concern for falling birthrates.
If the chief concern motivating the debate on paid maternity leave is falling birthrates, then it makes no sense to address that problem only by limiting paid maternity leave to mothers who wish to return to the workforce. In Norway, which has addressed the problem of falling birthrates better than all other countries in the Western world the problem has been addressed by paying mothers US$6,000.00 each year for the first three years of the child's life.
In an article in the Age on 12 July 2002, Moira Eastman wrote: "British Sociologist Catherine Hakim has shown that on work-family issues, British women fall into three groups.
One is primarily attached to work and career, another to family and child rearing, and a third while attached to family and child rearing wants the option of part-time work. There is much evidence that Australian women also fall into these three groups".
The International Social Science Survey shows that by far the largest group is the one attached to family and child rearing. More than two thirds of Australians believe that mothers of pre-schoolers should not be in the workforce.
Sixty-nine percent of Australians said in 2001 that being a full-time homemaker was the ideal option for mothers with children under six. When asked what their personal choice was, 81% of women opted for full-time mothering.
The ISSS study's author, Melbourne University's Dr Mariah Evans, commented: "This data shows that full-time home making is the morally preferred option by most people and it is the one that most women give highest rating to as an option for themselves".
It is clear that for Australians, 81% of mothers of pre-school children are attached primarily to family and child rearing.
It is the AFA's position that the issue of paid maternity benefit ought to reflect the desires of those women who wish to be involved in full-time mothering. These women should not be discriminated against by policies which are loaded in favour of women who choose to return to the workforce.
The figures would seem to indicate that the numbers of women who would wish to avail themselves of this opportunity are first time mothers. The following figures ought be taken into account:
1. 15% of mothers who are in couple arrangements are in full-time employment;
2. 30% of mothers in couple arrangements are in part-time employment;
3. 52% of mothers with pre-school aged children are not employed outside the house.
It is the AFA's opinion that paid maternity leave which only goes to women who return to work discriminates against full-time homemakers. The principle should be that all mothers are treated equally. Maternity benefit should go to both those in the workforce and those who are full-time homemakers.
A 1997 survey by the Australian Institute of Family Studies found that 83% of women and 84% of men believe that mothers should not work full-time even when their youngest child is at school. Almost two thirds of the respondents felt that family suffered if women worked full-time.
Social policies which are designed to funnel mothers back into the workforce have been shown to have a detrimental effect on children. It is the opinion of the AFA that children thrive better when they are cared for by a full-time homemaker.
The AFA believes that the scheme should be a taxpayer funded scheme which recognises the benefit to the community of increasing the birthrate and the role that mothers play in the development of children. The payment should be made to all mothers.
The AFA believes that funding for a paid maternity benefit should be specifically addressed by a re-examination of taxation on superannuation funds. It is the view of the NSW branch of the Australian Family Association that all income taxation earned in respect of taxation on compulsory superannuation funds should be used as the source for funding paid maternity benefit.
It is the AFA's view that to impose the obligation of paid maternity leave on employers makes only one group of Australians responsible for Australia's declining birthrate. The declining birthrate is a national problem which should be addressed nationally.
Family Update, September-October 2002, p. 1