Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AD HOC REPORT
Parental and paternity leave –Uptake by fathers
Working Conditions
Produced for the European Commission in the context of negotiations on awork–life balance package for families and carers
European Foundationfor the Improvement ofLiving and WorkingConditions
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number*: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
*Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.
When citing this report, please use the following wording:Eurofound (2019), Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers, Publications Office of the European Union,
Luxembourg.
Author: Christine Aumayr-Pintar (Eurofound)
Research manager: Christine Aumayr-Pintar (Eurofound)
Eurofound project: Other research related to reacting to ad hoc information requests activity (171202)
Acknowledgements: The support of Sinéad Gaughan in the drafting of this report is acknowledged. The authors
wish to thank colleagues from the European Commission and Jorge Cabrita (Eurofound) for helpful comments.
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union
Print: ISBN: 978-92-897-1766-3 doi:10.2806/885558 TJ-06-18-197-EN-C
PDF: ISBN: 978-92-897-1768-7 doi:10.2806/753240 TJ-06-18-197-EN-N
This report and any associated materials are available online at http://eurofound.link/ef18087
© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2019
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not under the Eurofound copyright, permission must
be sought directly from the copyright holders.
Cover image © Eurofound 2019, Peter Cernoch
Any queries on copyright must be addressed in writing to: [email protected]
The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) is a tripartite
European Union Agency, whose role is to provide knowledge in the area of social, employment and work-related
policies. Eurofound was established in 1975 by Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1365/75 to contribute to the planning
and design of better living and working conditions in Europe.
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions
Telephone: (+353 1) 204 31 00
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.eurofound.europa.eu
Contents
Introduction 1
1. Overview of conditions for fathers’ entitlement to paternity and parental leave 2
Challenges in data collection 2
Sources of data 2
Compensation for paternity leave 8
Compensation for parental leave 8
2. National data on fathers’ uptake of paternity and parental leave 9
3. Main findings 10
Uptake of paternity and parental leave in relation to births 10
Proportion of men among parents receiving parental benefits 13
Propensity of fathers to take leave 14
4. Recent research into fathers’ uptake of paternity and parental leave 17
Reasons why fathers take or forego their leave entitlements 18
Obstacles and supporting factors 19
Individual and job-related factors 21
Findings from multivariate studies 22
5. Summary and conclusions 23
Bibliography 25
Annexes 30
Annex 1: Description of family leave and additional data 30
Annex 2: List of contributors 41
iii
Country codes: EU28 and NorwayAT Austria FI Finland NL Netherlands
BE Belgium FR France PL Poland
BG Bulgaria HR Croatia PT Portugal
CY Cyprus HU Hungary RO Romania
CZ Czech Republic IE Ireland SE Sweden
DE Germany IT Italy SI Slovenia
DK Denmark LT Lithuania SK Slovakia
EE Estonia LU Luxembourg UK United Kingdom
EL Greece LV Latvia
ES Spain MT Malta NO Norway
1
This report has been compiled in the context of ongoingnegotiations at EU level aimed at adopting a work–lifebalance package for families and carers. Eurofound wasrequested by the European Commission’s GenderEquality Unit in DG JUST to provide an update of theavailable data regarding paternity/parental leave forfathers. The idea was that the data would be developedfurther to feed into a Eurofound seminar on work–lifebalance taking place in Brussels on 16 October 2018.1
In its ‘Initiative to support work–life balance for workingparents and carers’, the European Commission presentsa list of legislative and non-legislative measures on howthe work–life balance of these workers – who are facedwith care demands and obligations in their privatesphere – can best be promoted (European Commission,2017a, 2017b). One of the specific objectives of theproposed Directive is ‘to increase take-up offamily-related leave and flexible working arrangementsby men’ (European Commission, 2017b, p. 2).
In this context, the proposed Directive enables thefollowing changes to leave entitlements which areparticularly relevant for working fathers:
£ The introduction of an individual entitlement topaternity leave of 10 working days, to be takenaround the time of birth and compensated for at aminimum of sick-pay level.
£ The revision of currently existing entitlements ofparental leave in order to provide for: i) the right forflexible uptake, such as part time or piecemeal;ii) four months of the leave being non-transferablebetween parents; and iii) payment of four months,compensated for at a minimum of sick-pay level.
The Commission also recommended, as one of thenon-legislative measures complementing the proposedDirective, improving the collection of EU-level data byEurostat on the uptake of family-related leave andflexible working arrangements by women and men,in cooperation with employment policy committees(SPC, EMCO) and in coordination with the EuropeanInstitute for Gender Equality (EIGE) (EuropeanCommission, 2017a).
At the time of drafting of the report (September 2018),the proposal was under negotiation with the Council ofthe European Union and the European Parliament. InJanuary 2019, the European Parliament and the Councilreached a provisional agreement on the proposal for aDirective on work-life balance. Regarding fathers’ leaveentitlements, the agreement establishes 10 days ofpaternity leave for fathers following childbirth to becompensated for at the level of sick pay. In addition,two months out of the already existing minimum of fourmonths parental leave shall be non-transferablebetween parents, together with the requirement thatcompensation for these two months shall beintroduced, the amount of which is to be determined byMember States.
During the course of editing this report, the EuropeanCommission also published new findings from aEurobarometer survey on work-life balance, which showthat only four in ten European men have taken paternityleave and three in ten have taken parental leave. Thetwo main reasons for not availing of their entitlementsare financial issues (21%) or the fact that the spouse hadalready used up the family entitlement (21%) (EuropeanCommission, 2018). While not intended to pre-empt themore rigorous efforts of compiling Europe-widecomparable statistics, this report looks into thecurrently available national statistics on the uptake offamily-related leave by fathers across the EU28 andNorway, without any attempt to harmonise the data orindicators. The information was compiled based on aquestionnaire distributed to the Network of EurofoundCorrespondents at the end of March 2018. The reportprovides a comparative overview of key features of thevarious leave arrangements available for fathers,including information on duration, compensation,eligibility and who pays, in addition to statisticsregarding the persons eligible and the number ofbeneficiaries captured in the data (see Table 1 andTable A1 in Annex 1).
Introduction
1 A modern agenda for work-life balance – online webcast.
2
All EU Member States now have in place a paidentitlement for fathers to spend time with theirchildren, either in the months around the time of thechild’s birth and/or after this time. Between 2016 and2018, the Czech Republic, Ireland and Cyprus were thelast Member States to introduce such an entitlement forfathers.
However, this is not an individual right for fathers in allcountries; in some countries, it is a family rather thanindividual right. Sometimes a father’s entitlement toit depends on the mother’s entitlement. Often,sub-periods of ‘parental leave’ or ‘childcare’ aretransferable between the parents, but as it is notalways possible for both parents to take the leave(at least for a short period of time), in some cases themother has to give her consent for the right to betransferred to the father.
Challenges in data collectionThe main challenge stems from the fact that all thenational systems of family leave are unique. Not only doschemes have different characteristics, but theterminology used in different national languages maybe subject to ambiguity in the context of aninternational comparison. For instance, only somecountries have a type of leave that is taken around thetime of the child’s birth, which is only available forfathers and is distinct from other family-related leave –and explicitly called ‘father’s’ or ‘paternity’ leave. Forinstance, this leave is called Vaderschapsverlof/Congé depaternité in Belgium, Congedo di paternità in Italy, Urlopojcowski in Poland and Tėvystės atostogos in Lithuania.Other countries have leave systems termed ‘parentalleave’ or ‘childcare leave’, which are accessible for bothparents but might have a certain number of days orweeks reserved for either parent – around the time ofthe child’s birth and afterwards (Föräldrapenning(Sweden); Licença parental exclusiva do pai (Portugal);or faedreorlov as part of barselsorlov (Denmark)). Somecountries use the national equivalent of the term‘maternity leave’, but still have transferable periods –often related to the age of the child – which fathers cantake (e.g. Prestaciones por maternidad (Spain); davkamaterské (Slovakia)). In other countries, such leaveperiods available to both parents are called ‘parentalleave’ (e.g. Elternzeit (Germany); Roditeljski dopust
(Croatia)) or have a more neutral term (for instance,Karenzurlaub, meaning ‘period of rest’ (Austria)) butthese are distinct from the leave periods around thetime of the child’s birth, which are exclusively reservedfor mothers and/or pregnant women.
In some countries, statistics can be obtained separatelyfor different sub-periods, while in other cases noseparate data is available for the different periods ofleave or entitlements. This means that periods of‘paternity’ and ‘parental’ leave and their uptake by mencan only be presented jointly, with data for fathers onleave sometimes being mixed with data on periods ofmaternity leave that are exclusively available tomothers.
Sources of dataThe most comprehensive overview of family leavesystems is provided on an annual basis by theInternational Network on Leave Policies and Research(Blum et al, 2017, 2018). Comparative tables areprovided by MISSOC (2018). Eurofound’s Working Lifecountry profiles contain a section for each countryprofile (under ‘Individual employment relations’) onstatutory maternity, paternity and parental leave,including a brief description and information onmaximum duration, compensation arrangements andfinancing (Eurofound, 2017a). As a comprehensiveaccount of all the leave arrangements would greatlyexpand the scope of this report, the next section willprovide a short overview only. Table 1 presents thefamily leave entitlements (or their constituent parts)available in each EU Member State and Norway, dividedinto ‘paternity’ and ‘parental’ leave – irrespective ofwhether there is separate national legislation in place.The first case contains typically shorter periods of leave,to be taken around the time of the child’s birth (or nottoo long thereafter), which are exclusively reserved forthe father, while the second contains leave which canbe taken by either parent. For further information, thereader should refer to the sources quoted above which,together with Table A1 in Annex 1 (which gives anoverview of different leave arrangements, nationalterms, administration of the data and information onwho is eligible and captured in the data), will providethe most important background information necessaryto interpret the data cited in the report.
1 Overview of conditions forfathers’ entitlement to paternityand parental leave
3
Overview of conditions for fathers’ entitlement to paternity and parental leave
Table 1: Paternity and parental leave – Duration and compensation for fathers
Paternity leave and/or benefits Parental leave and/or benefits
Austria Not available, with the exception of ‘Family time bonus’(maximum €700 for 31 days) – to be deducted from thefather’s daily rate of childcare benefit if he later takesparental leave.
Kinderbetreuungsgeld (benefit)/Karenz (leave) (1a–c)
Previous model (reflected in the data) up to 2017: fourflat-rate options (from €436 per month to €1,000 permonth) and one income-dependent model (80% of last netincome). For more details, see Eurofound’s Working Lifecountry profile. 1a–c relate to different sources and scopeof data – see Table A1 in Annex 1.
Belgium Vaderschapsverlof/Congé de paternité (2a)
10 days during the first four months after the birth. For thefirst three (mandatory) days, there is no change in salary.For the remaining seven days, the mutual fund pays 82% ofthe usual gross salary.
Ouderschapsverloof (2b)
Reduction of working time by 50%: €401.25 for workersunder 50 and €680.62 for those over 50. Reduction ofworking time by 20%: €136.12 for workers under 50 and€272.25 for those over 50. Temporary break of work(four months): €802.52.
Bulgaria Otpusk po bashtinstvo (3a)
15 calendar days of leave immediately after delivery of thebaby: 90% of the average gross wage or average dailycontributory income for up to 15 calendar days if there are12 months of social security contributions.
Otpusk poradi bremennost, razhdane i osinovyavane (3b)
The father can use the remainder of 410 days’ parentalleave with the consent of the mother once the child is sixmonths old: 90% of the average gross salary.
Otpusk za otglegdane na dete do 2 godishna vazrast (3c)
Leave for children up to two years old (two years and sixmonths for every additional child). It can be transferred tothe father, grandmother or grandfather. Flat rate: BGN 340(2015–2017); €174 from 10 October 2018.
Cyprus Άδεια πατρότητας (4a)
Two consecutive weeks, to be taken within the first 16weeks following the birth or adoption. The weekly rate ofmaternity allowance is equal to 72% of the weekly value ofthe insurance point of the insured person’s basic insurancein the relevant contribution year. The maximum coveredby the Social Insurance Services is €753.32 per week(2017).
Γονική άδεια (4b)
Unpaid. The total duration of parental leave is up to 18weeks, and 23 weeks in the case of a widowed parent.Parental leave is taken with a minimum duration of oneweek and a maximum duration of five weeks per calendaryear; for families with three or more children, themaximum duration is increased to seven weeks.
Czech Republic Otcovská dovolená and dávka otcovské poporodní péče(allowance) (5a)
As of February 2018, fathers are entitled to up to 70% oftheir salary (70% of the claimant’s reduced daily referenceamount) for seven calendar days of leave within six weeksof the birth, adoption or fostering of a child.
Rodičovská dovolená (leave) and rodičovský příspěvek(allowance) (5b)
Parental benefits up to child’s fourth birthday. Parentalallowance is paid to a parent until the youngest child in thefamily turns four, up to a maximum of CZK 220,000(€8,524). 70% of the claimant’s reduced daily referenceamount.
Germany Not applicable – see parental leave. Elternzeit (leave)/Elterngeld (benefit) (6a)
Up to three years after the child’s birth for each parent, 24months of which can be taken up to the child’s 8thbirthday: 67% of net earnings. Threshold: minimum of€300, maximum of €1,800.
ElterngeldPlus – from 2015 (6b).
Replaces a proportion of income if the parents reduce theirworking hours to care for their children (not in the data).
Denmark Fædreorlov (as part of Barselsorlov) (7a)
Two weeks’ paternity leave in connection with the birth.Full pay.
Forældreorlov (as part of Barselsorlov) (7b)
After the 14 weeks of maternity leave, the employer pays afurther 11 weeks’ leave, with both parents having the rightto four weeks each. The remaining three weeks’ leave canbe taken by either the mother or the father. The part of the11 weeks’ leave granted to each of the parents cannot beexchanged between them and, if not taken, the payment iscancelled. Full pay: 100%, but maximum is €530 per week.
4
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Paternity leave and/or benefits Parental leave and/or benefits
Estonia Isapuhkus (8a)
10 working days, with compensation based on averagewage (of the last six months prior to the paternity leave),up to a maximum of three times the Estonian mean grosswage.
As of July 2020, the duration of paternity leave will be 30calendar days and it will be remunerated on the samebasis as parental leave benefits.
Lapsehoolduspuhkus (8b)
The amount of the benefit per calendar month is 100% ofthe average income per calendar month calculated on thebasis of the social tax paid in the calendar year prior to thedate on which the right to receive the benefit occurs. Thereare thresholds: Maximum: three times the national averagewage; (8b-max); Minimum: level of the minimum wage(for parents who did not work or whose earnings werebelow) (8b-min).
As of 1 September 2019, the benefit will be 100% of theaverage income, calculated on the basis of the social taxpaid within 12 months prior to the pregnancy.
Greece Άδεια Γέννησης Τέκνου (12a)
Private sector: two days for each birth – full wage, paid bythe employer.
Γονική άδεια φροντίδασ παιδιούPublic sector: if both parents are employees, a jointdeclaration to their departments states which of them willmake use of the reduced hours or the parental leave,unless they use the joint declaration to state the periodsthat they will each use, which must be successive andwithin the time limits in the previous paragraph. If eitherspouse is employed in the private sector and is entitled tosimilar concessions in whole or in part, he or she is entitledto make use of the concessions referred to in paragraph 2insofar as his or her spouse does not make use of their ownrights or insofar as they fall short of the said concessions.
Article 53 of the Civil Service Code.
Γονική Άδεια Ανατροφής (12b)
Private sector: four months up to the child’s sixth birthday.Given to both parents under a private law job contract. It isan individual right of each parent and cannot betransferred to another person. Unpaid.
Spain Permiso por nacimiento (birth benefit) (9a)
Two days at the time of the birth, 100% paid for by theemployer.
Permiso de paternidad (9b)
As of 1 January 2017, four uninterrupted weeks (up from 13calendar days previously), as an individual right for thefather, to be taken any time during the maternity leave.
Prestaciones por maternidad (9c)
16 weeks, with extension to 18 weeks in the case of thebirth or adoption of a child with disabilities. A minimum ofsix weeks must be taken after the birth by the mother. Thefollowing 10 weeks can be shared between the mother andfather, either overlapping or only for one (depending onthe parents’ choice). 100% of the regulatory base.
Excedencia por cuidado de hijos (9d)
Leave until the child is three years old. Unpaid.
Finland Isyysvapaa/faderskapsledighet (10a)
54 working days of which 18 working days can be used atthe same time as the maternity leave: minimum €23.73 perworking day as of 2017, maximum 70% of income.
Vanhempainvapaa/föräldraledighet (10b)
158 working days after the maternal leave has ended, to betaken by either the mother or father or divided betweenthem. Minimum €23.73 per working day as of 2017,maximum 70% of labour income.
France Congé paternité et d’accueil de l’enfant (11a)
For a single child, fathers may take 11 consecutive daysafter the child’s birth including Saturdays, Sundays andpublic holidays. For more than one child, the leave consistsof a maximum of 18 days. The amount of the allowance,based on the illness allowance (indemnité journalière), wascapped at €86 on 1 January 2018 for unemployed andsalaried fathers, or €54.43 for a self-employed father.
In addition, the French Labour Code grants three days ofleave. Compensation is 100% (LC, Article L.3142-2).
Congé parental (11b)
The basic duration of parental leave for one child is oneyear, renewable twice, i.e. three years in total. Employeesdo not receive a salary during parental leave, but maybank the time saved in their working time account.
PreParE – Prestation partagée d’éducation de l’enfant
An allowance of up to €396.01(lump sum benefit) may beobtained for 12 months (6 months for each parent) to 24months from two children.
5
Overview of conditions for fathers’ entitlement to paternity and parental leave
Paternity leave and/or benefits Parental leave and/or benefits
Croatia No statutory paternity leave – see parental leave.
However, for fathers, paid leave of seven days is indirectlystipulated by the Labour Act (OG 93/14, 127/17), which inArticle 86 states:
‘During the calendar year, the worker shall be entitled tobe free from work with remuneration (paid leave) forimportant personal purposes including the birth of a child.Collective agreements, working regulations oremployment contracts can enable better regulations’.
Rodiljni dopust (maternity leave) (13a)
From 28 days before birth until the child turns six months.Following the obligatory 70 days after birth for the mother,the remaining maternity leave can also be taken by thefather, provided the mother agrees. 100% of averageearnings, with a ceiling of 120% of the budgetary base ratefor the first six months (HRK 3,991.20 or €5,328.16).
Roditeljski dopust (parental leave) (13b)
An employed or self-employed parent is entitled toparental leave (or ‘additional maternity leave’) after thechild reaches the age of 6 months, and they may use ituntil the child’s eighth birthday (for the first and secondchild). It may be used by both parents for an equalduration: eight months for the first and second child. Theleave may be used in one period or in more parts, twice peryear at most, each time for a duration of at least 30 days.70% of the budgetary base rate after the first six months(HRK 2,328.20 or €314).
Hungary Paternity leave (14a)
Five days, to be taken in the first two months following thebirth. 100% of the father’s average wage.
Gyermekgondozási díj (GYED) (childcare benefit) (14b)
After the maternity leave until the child’s second birthday:70% of the previous average daily earning, but capped at agiven percentage of the statutory minimum wage (in 2017:HUF 178,500/month, about €549).
Gyermekgondozást segítő ellátás (GYES) (childcareallowance) (14c)
After the second birthday of the child until their thirdbirthday: a non-mandatory flat-rate benefit equal to theamount of the minimum old-age pension (in 2017: monthlygross HUF 28,500, about €88).
Gyermeknevelési támogatás (GYET) (child-rearing support)(14d)
In the case of three or more children, from the thirdbirthday of the youngest child until their eighth birthday: anon-mandatory flat-rate benefit equal to the amount ofthe minimum old-age pension (in 2017: monthly gross HUF28,500, about €88).
Ireland Paternity leave (15a)
Two weeks. Standard rate: €240 per week (2018) or rate ofillness benefit, whichever is higher.
All employees are entitled to take it during the first 26weeks following the birth of a child.
Parental leave (15b)
18 weeks unpaid. Both parents have equal and separateentitlement to 18 weeks unpaid parental leave per child(for a child up to the age of 8).
Italy Congedo di paternità (16a, b)
Two obligatory days in 2017 (16a), and up to four days in2018 (it can be increased to five days if the father replacesthe mother in relation to the mandatory leave period).
Compensated for at 100%.
Congedo parentale (16c)
Six months per parent – individual and non-transferable,maximum 10 months; it can be extended to 11 monthswhen shared and when the father takes at least threemonths. 30% of basic remuneration up to the child’s 6thbirthday, unpaid afterwards.
Lithuania Tėvystės atostogos (17a)
In Lithuania, men are entitled to paternity leave from thedate of the birth of a child until the child is one month old(28 days).
100% of the allowance beneficiary’s reimbursedremuneration.
Vaiko priežiūros atostogos (17b)
Parental leave is granted until the child reaches the age ofthree. A maternity (paternity) allowance is paid for theperiod of a childcare leave after the end of maternity leaveuntil the child is one or two years old.
Option 1: duration until child turns one – 100% of theallowance beneficiary’s reimbursed remuneration.
Option 2: duration until child turns two – 70% of theallowance beneficiary’s reimbursed remuneration until thefirst birthday of the child; 40% until the second birthday.
Unpaid afterwards, until the child turns three.
6
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Paternity leave and/or benefits Parental leave and/or benefits
Luxembourg Congé extraordinaire (18a)
Up to 2017: two days (four for public servants), 100% paidby employers.
Since the law of 15 December 2017, the paternity leave is10 days.
Congé parental (18b)
Under the new system, the parental leave allowance,previously paid at a fixed rate of €1,778 per month,becomes a replacement income that is paid pro rata to theincome earned and hours worked by the parent takingparental leave, with minimum and maximum thresholds.The allowance cannot be less than the minimum wage(social minimum wage), which on 1 January 2017 was€1,998.59 for a full-time employment contract (40 hours),and its upper limit will be €3,330.98 (five thirds of theminimum wage).
Latvia Paternitātes pabalsts (benefit) (19a)
The father of a child is entitled to leave of 10 calendar days.This leave shall be granted immediately after the birth ofthe child, but no later than a two-month period from thebirth of the child. 80% of the average wage of thebeneficiary, derived from insurance contributions.
Vecāku pabalsts (benefit) (19b)
Benefit duration and amount are established according tothe chosen duration of receiving the benefit and also inconjunction with whether parents work or stay on leave:
£ Until the child reaches the age of 1 year – 60% of therecipient’s average wage subject to insurancecontributions
£ Until the child reaches the age of 1.5 years – 43.75% ofthe recipient’s average wage subject to insurancecontributions.
Malta Paternity leave (20a)
Private sector: one working day. Public sector: two dayspaid leave.
Parental leave (20b) (in the private sector, unless coveredby wage regulation orders)
Both male and female workers have the individual right totake care of a child for a period of four months until thechild has attained the age of eight. Parental leave can betaken in fixed periods of one month each. Unpaid.
Netherlands Kraamverlof (21a)
Fathers are entitled to two working days’ leave after thebirth, paid at 100% without ceiling by the employer. Threeadditional days could be granted via parental leave.
Ouderschapsverloof (21b)
Up to the eighth birthday of the child, parents can takeleave amounting to 26 times the length of the workingweek for the number of hours the employee chooses. Notpaid, unless part of a collective agreement.
Norway Pappapermisjon (22a)
Two weeks around the time of the child’s birth (paternityleave) (+ 10 weeks ‘Father’s’ quota – see parental leave);no statutory payment, but may be included in collectiveagreements or payment can be negotiated with employer.
Foreldrepengeperioden (leave) (22b)
Model up to 30 June 2018: the parental leave period afterbirth is divided into three parts: a leave period of threeweeks before birth and 10 weeks after birth exclusively forthe mother, a leave period of 10 weeks exclusively for thefather (‘Father’s quota’) and the common leave period(father or mother by choice) of 26 weeks. It is possible toextend the leave period from 49 to 59 weeks with a 20%reduction in allowance. In this case, the common leaveperiod is 36 weeks.
As of 1 July 2018: mother’s quota is 15 weeks, father’squota is 15 weeks, common quota 16 weeks. In addition,mother can take three weeks’ leave before the estimateddate of birth.
49 weeks with 100% pay or 59 weeks with 80% pay (basedon income, but income not exceeding 6 times the basicamount – in 2016 NOK 555,456 (approximately €58,400).
Poland Urlop ojcowski (23a)
14 calendar days, starting from the birth of the child untilhe or she is one year old. 100% of basic pay.
Urlop rodzicielski (23b)
Maximum 32 weeks after maternity leave. It can be dividedinto four parts, which can be used both by the mother andfather. One part of the leave has to last for at least eightweeks. 60–80% of basic pay (salary).
Overview of conditions for fathers’ entitlement to paternity and parental leave
Paternity leave and/or benefits Parental leave and/or benefits
Portugal Licença parental exclusiva do pai (fathers only parentalleave) (24a) – part of the parental leave regulation.
It is obligatory for the father to take 15 working days’exclusive parental leave, of which five days must be takenconsecutively immediately after the birth and 10 daysduring the subsequent 30 days. Another 10 days areoptional (24b).
Up to April 2009: father’s exclusive parental leavecorresponds to five compulsory working days and 15optional consecutive days. Since May 2009: father’sexclusive parental leave corresponds to 10 compulsoryworking days and 10 optional working days. Since 2015,father’s compulsory parental leave increased from 10 to 15working days. 100% paid, no ceiling.
Licença parental inicial (initial parental leave of 120/150days) (24c)
Parents can choose between two options (120–150 days,plus additional 30 days if the leave is shared) of varyingduration, with impact on the level of allowance:120 and150 days’ initial parental leave corresponds to a dailyallowance of 100% and 80% of the average daily wage –slightly more (83%) if the leave is shared. Minimumamount of €11 per day for those on low earnings.
Extended parental leave (24d)
For the extended parental leave of three months, thebenefit corresponds to a daily allowance of 25% of theaverage daily wage (or €5.2 per day minimum).
Social parental leave benefit (23e): parents who are notworking and do not have contributions for social securityare entitled to parental social benefit.
Romania Concediul de paternitate (25a)
Five days of paid leave, which can be supplemented with10 more days if the father has taken child-rearing classes –15 days in total.
100% of the average income of the last 12 months.
Concediul parental/pentru creşterea copilului (child-relatedleave as main beneficiary) (25b) or (child-related leave assecond beneficiary) (25c)
Up to the child’s second birthday, for the main beneficiary.
The legislation grants the second parent the right to atleast one month’s parental leave. The second parent caneither: 1) request at least one month of leave or 2)compensation and leave are suspended for the otherparent for the duration of the second beneficiary’s leaveand the first parent will have the choice of taking unpaidleave or going back to work. Paid leave – indemnity = 85%of the average net income of the last 12 months during thelast 2 years prior to the child’s birthday. Limits: RON 1,250(€267), RON 8,500 (€1,818).
Sweden Not applicable, see parental leave. Föräldraförsäkring (parents’ insurance)/Föräldrapenning(benefit) (26a)
480 days of paid leave, of which 90 days are reserved foreach parent. 390 days based on income (if previouslyemployed, this is often around 80% of wages), 90 days atSEK 180 (€17) per day.
Slovenia Očetovski dopust (27a) and (27b)
A father has the right to paternity leave up of to 90 days.(27ab) The first 15 days (27a) must be used by the time thechild has reached the end of its sixth month; the remaindermay be used in the form of full leave until the child hasreached three years of age. The level of paternityallowance for the 15 days taken by the father when thechild is born amounts to 100% of the father’s average pay.Since 2016, an additional five days are available to fathersand compensated for at 90% of average pay.
The father receives no allowance for the remaining 75 days(27b), although his social security contributions(amounting to the minimum wage) are paid for theduration of paternity leave.
Starševski dopust (27c)
130 days for each parent. The level of childcare allowanceis determined on the basis of 90% of the average pay whichthe beneficiary received in the preceding 12 months. Theallowance may not exceed two-and-a-half times the grossaverage pay.
Slovakia No statutory paternity leave, but the father can avail ofmaternity benefit and/or parental leave and benefit.
Materská dovolenka (maternity benefit) (28a) androdičovská dovolenka (parental leave) (28b)
Maternity benefit: 75% of daily average earnings can betransferred to the father after the child is six weeks old,provided that he takes care of the child personally.
The parental allowance is paid out to one parent only at aflat rate (€213 monthly), whereby parents may work – fullor part time.
United Kingdom Statutory paternity pay (29a)
Two weeks’ voluntary paternity leave. Paid by theemployer but 92% can be recouped. Same level asstatutory maternity or shared parental leave pay (flat rateor 90% of average weekly earnings, whichever is lower).
Shared parental leave (29b)
Since 2015, employed mothers can transfer all their leave,except for two weeks of mandatory leave, to the father.
The shared parental leave (ShPP) is paid at the rate ofGBP145.18 (approximately €163.90).a week or 90% ofaverage weekly earnings, whichever is lower. It is paid atthe same level throughout for 39 weeks.
Note: In this table, the Member States are listed according to the alphabetical order of their two-letter ISO code names. A code differentiatingthe type of leave/allowance is given in parentheses after the name of the leave: for example: Luxembourg – Congé extraordinaire (18a).See Annex 1, Table A1 for full listing of the codes and more information about the different types of leave in every country. Sources: National contributions from the Network of Eurofound Correspondents, Eurofound’s Working Life country profiles (2018),International Network on Leave Policies and Research (Blum et al, 2017) and MISSOC (2018).
7
8
Compensation for paternityleaveWhile paternity leave taken around the time of thechild’s birth is typically well paid – in the majority ofcases with no significant loss of earnings – the periodsare usually very short, ranging from a week or less(Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg,Malta and the Netherlands) to two weeks (Belgium,Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, France, Ireland, Latvia,Norway, Poland and the United Kingdom); and in a fewcountries, the period is over two weeks – see Table 2.
Compensation for parental leaveParental leave, in contrast, is typically less wellcompensated. In only around a third of the countries,the replacement ratio stands somewhere between 80%and 100%, but typically also with some upperthresholds and/or for shorter periods of the leave. Forexample: this is the case in Austria when parents choosethe income-dependent option; in Croatia, for the first sixmonths; in Estonia and Lithuania, when parents choosethe first option with the shortest duration; in Spain, forthe prestaciones por maternidad; and in Denmark,Norway, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden.Some countries have lower replacement ratios of
around 70%, including the Czech Republic, Finland,Germany, Hungary and Poland, while other countriesoperate a mixed model, with income-dependent orflat-rate options that may partially vary depending onthe duration chosen (Austria, Latvia, Slovakia,United Kingdom) or that pay out flat-rate benefits(Belgium, Bulgaria, France and Luxembourg, untilrecently) which can also turn out to be relatively low(particularly for those with higher wages). Italy has thelowest compensation ratio: 30% of basic remunerationuntil the child’s sixth birthday or, under certainconditions, related to income and previous uptake, untilthe child’s eighth birthday, when it is unpaid thereafter.For parents in Lithuania who choose a longer leaveduration beyond the first birthday of the child, thecompensation rate is 70% of the beneficiary’sreimbursed remuneration until the child’s first birthday,40% until the child’s second birthday and is unpaid untilthe child turns three.
Finally, in six Member States, parental leave that fatherscan take is not compensated. This includes Cyprus,Greece, Ireland, Malta, the Netherlands and Spain(for the excedencia por cuidado de hijos (9d)). In some ofthese countries, however, collective agreements mightenable some payments or employers might voluntarilypay for a certain time (see also Eurofound 2017a, forfamily leave clauses in collective agreements).
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Table 2: Paternity and parental leave – Duration and compensation for fathers
Duration
One working week or less Up to two working weeks More than two working weeks
High compensation rate:
80–100% of pay
Greece (12a)
Hungary (14a)
Italy (16a, b)
Luxembourg (18a) until 2017
Malta (20a)
Netherlands (21a)
Romania (25a) – unconditional
Belgium (2a)
Denmark (7a)
Estonia (8a)
Spain (9b) until 2016
Luxembourg (18a) – as of15 December 2017
Latvia (19a)
Poland (23a)
Bulgaria (3a)
Estonia (8a) – as of July 2020
Spain (9b) – as of January 2017
Lithuania (17a)
Portugal (24a, b)
Romania (25a) – conditional
Slovenia (27a)
Medium compensation rate:around 50–70% of pay
Czech Republic (5a) Cyprus (4a) Finland (10a)
Flat rates France (11a)
Ireland (15a)
United Kingdom (29a)
Unpaid Norway (22a)
Note: Working week is either five working days or seven calendar days. Source: Compilation based on Table 1.
9
The data availability on fathers’ uptake varies greatlyacross Member States and Norway and figures are notcomparable across countries. This is mainly due todifferences in the national leave systems, but also dueto differences in how the uptake is being measured.For instance, some offices provide data on yearlyaverages or snapshots of the number of recipients of anallowance at a certain point in time. While the data isavailable in a relatively timely manner, the approachusually does not allow the joining up of data on menand women as parents in cases in order to observe howthe leave was shared. Other statistics observe cohorts ofbabies or children over a time period. They record onlyafter the end of entitlement to leave if and to whatextent one or the other has availed of his or herentitlement. By design, such data is only available witha considerable lag time; it does, however, give a betterinsight into the question of equal sharing.
This report presents some rough comparisons based onthe following approach:
1. The data obtained from heterogeneous nationalleave systems, irrespective of their names innational terminology, are grouped into thecategories ‘parental’, ‘paternity’ or mixed types.
2. A small set of common indicators is extracted, suchas the shares of uptake by men among all parentsand in relation to the number of births and thelength of time spent on leave.
In addition, the report includes recent research findingsand further data on the characteristics of the fathers,and the determinants for fathers not taking up theirentitlements.
The mapping of available national statistics shows that,most commonly, such statistics are kept byadministrative bodies, usually the ones which arepaying out the benefit, and then often made availablevia national statistical offices. Normally, the data referto recipients of allowances, while unpaid episodes ofleave or data on those who are not entitled to paid leave(e.g. self-employed people in some countries) or data onleave periods paid by employers without anycompensation from national funds are not available.Some statistics refer to different sub-periods of theleave (e.g. until the child reaches a certain age), ordifferent phases or options (e.g. when it can be taken inblocks), while others only refer to the total duration ofthe leave, without further breakdown. Also, forcountries with a ‘universal’ benefit scheme, it is notalways possible to distinguish between benefits paid toworking parents to compensate them for theirforegone earnings while on leave and benefits paid tonon-working parents (such as the unemployed andstudents).
2 National data on fathers’ uptakeof paternity and parental leave
The following national statistics are presented in this report:
£ Number of male recipients of the allowance (Table A2 for paternity leave, Table A3 for parental leave, TableA4 for ‘mixed’ cases, all in Annex 1).
£ Number of men taking up paternity leave in relation to 100 live births (Figure 1).
£ Number of men on parental leave or number of benefits received by men on parental leave per 100 live births(Table 3).
£ Share of men taking a certain type of leave or a certain benefit in relation to all parents (Figure 2 andFigure 3).
£ Duration: average number of days spent on leave or for which the allowance was received, for men andwomen (Table A5).
£ Additional information on the features of the leave, who is eligible and who is covered in the data, andadministration of the benefits and provision of figures is summarised in Table A1 in Annex 1.
National statistics on uptake by fathers of paternity and parental leave
10
The number of fathers taking advantage of theirpaternity leave entitlements has been on the rise inmost countries over the past decade. The total numbersof men receiving paternity leave benefits went upsignificantly in Italy, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania(until 2016). Also, in Slovenia, Denmark and Spain thenumbers recently started to increase, following somedecline earlier, while in France the number of fathersgoing on paternity leave was in decline, with some smallvariation (depending on the source of data).
When looking at parental leave schemes andentitlements, a similar picture emerges: despite someexceptions (i.e. Latvia until 2013, the Czech Republicand Spain), the common trend across countries is thatof an increasing number of fathers taking advantage oftheir entitlements to parental leave. More data on thenumber of recipients are presented in Tables A2–A4 inAnnex 1.
Uptake of paternity and parentalleave in relation to birthsAs birth rates keep changing over the course of theyears, it is clear that relative numbers are moremeaningful in this context than absolute figures.Calculating the number of fathers per 100 live births
going on leave is relatively straightforward in the case ofpaternity leave, as these episodes by definition aretaken close to the time of the child’s birth.
Figure 1 shows the number of fathers on paternity leaveand/or obtaining paternity-related benefits around thetime of their child’s birth, for countries which have suchschemes and/or data separately available. Over time,these rates were relatively stable, with some recentgrowth particularly in the central and eastern EuropeanMember States that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007.Among the countries listed in the chart, Slovenia has thehighest number of men per 100 children who weretaking paternity leave: around 80 men per 100 childrenborn take the fully paid 15-day period and another10–14 men per 100 children born prolonged their leaveon an unpaid basis from 2006 to 2016. In 2016, a newoption of an additional five paid days was introducedand proved popular (9,526 fathers), thereby reducingthe number of fathers on unpaid days. High rates ofpaternity leave (60–80 fathers per 100 children) werealso observed in Denmark, Portugal (for both themandatory and compulsory leave days) and Spain. Therates were lower (40–60 fathers per 100 children) inEstonia, France, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, with thelatter country and the three Baltic States reflecting thehighest growth in uptake since 2013.
3 Main findings
Figure 1: Men on paternity leave in relation to the number of live births, 2009-2016
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Url
op
ojc
ow
ski
Co
ng
é p
ate
rnit
é et
d’a
ccu
eil d
e l’e
nfa
nt
Isa
pu
hku
s
Pat
ern
itāt
es p
aba
lsts
Tėv
ystė
s at
ost
ogo
s
Pre
sta
cio
n d
e p
ater
nit
ad
Lice
nça
pa
ren
tal
excl
usi
va d
o p
ai
(op
tio
nal
day
s)
Lice
nça
pa
ren
tal
excl
usi
va d
o p
ai
(co
mp
uls
ory
day
s)
Fæd
reo
rlo
v (a
s p
art
of B
ars
elso
rlo
v)
Oče
tovs
ki d
op
ust
-m
ore
th
an
15
da
ys
Oče
tovs
ki d
op
ust
-1
5 d
ays
full
y p
aid
Oče
tovs
ki d
op
ust
- t
ota
l
PL (23a) FR (11a) EE (8a) LV (19a) LT (17a) ES (9b) PT(24b) PT(24a) DK (7a) SI (27b) SI (27a) SI (27ab)
2016 2013 2009
Source: National statistics; see Tables A1 and A2 in Annex 1, author’s own calculations; number of total live births: Eurostat [demo_gind]
11
Less straightforward to interpret and compare acrosscountries are the figures regarding the uptake ofparental leave by fathers in relation to the number ofchildren, especially in those cases where the availablestatistics are based on parents drawing benefits.Besides the question of eligibility and which fathers canbe captured in the data, parental leave typicallystretches over a longer period of time within which itcan be taken, i.e. it can be taken in blocks, which canresult in double and triple counting. The incidence offathers taking the leave is again determined by the rulesof the leave or benefit system. In some countries,episodes of benefit drawing can be counted for eachand every single day taken, whereas in others there areminimum or maximum periods that one parent must orcan take when receiving the benefit. In addition, somecountries do not have statistics on paternity andparental leave periods separately available, leading toan overestimation of the incidence vis-à-vis countrieswith separate statistics for parental leave as, usually,the incidence of fathers taking paternity days off ascompared to parental leave is higher, and due tofragmentation, some double counting is likely.
Following all these reservations, Table 3 below depictsthe number of men receiving parental benefits within ayear after the birth in relation to the number of livebirths within the same year. The reader is advised toread the data in conjunction with Table 1 and Table A1in Annex 1.
The data show a predominance of very low andmedium–low uptake of parental leave by fathers fordifferent parts of leave and drawing periods, includingin particular, but not exclusively, the central andeastern European Member States. The Nordic countriesare at the other end of the scale, with wide-rangingeligibility criteria and well-paid schemes which partiallycombine parental and paternity leave periods and allowfor the fragmented use of the leave – for example, to citean extreme case, for every child born in Sweden in acertain year, more than three parental leave benefits arepaid out to Swedish fathers.
Countries which showed considerable growth in theproportion of fathers per child taking parental leavewere Germany (21% of children born in 2008 versus 34%of children born in 2014 were cared for by their fatherson parental leave while receiving Elterngeld), Portugal(from 10% in 2009 to 34% in 2016 of fathers sharing theinitial parental leave with mothers) and Estonia (also upfrom 8% in 2008 to 20% in 2017).
In Latvia, on the other hand, the number of fathersreceiving parental benefit (Vecāku pabalsts – 19b) hasdropped significantly, especially in the years of financialcrisis, and by 2017 had not returned to the levels of2008. Since 2008, frequent changes to the parentalbenefit legislation were made, essentially reducing itsamount in the context of austerity measures. Also, in2009, it was decided that the unemployed could onlyhave one benefit, reducing the number of unemployedfathers who had hitherto received parental benefits.
Main findings
Table 3: Number of men on parental leave/or number of benefits received by men on parental leave per 100live births, 2008 – 2017
Country Type of leave 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Very low
Croatia (13a) Rodiljni dopust (maternal leave– days shared with father)
0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4
Spain (9b) Prestaciones por maternidad 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.3
Slovakia (28a) Davka materské (maternitybenefit)
0 1 1 3 5
Romania (25c) Child-rearing indemnity – assecond beneficiary
0.5 2.8 1.3
Hungary (14d) GYET (childrearing support) 4 4 4 3 3
Czech Republic(5b)
Rodičovský příspěvek (parentalallowance)
5.3 5.1 4.6 5.3 4.9 4.9 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.5
Croatia (13b) Roditeljski dopust (parentalleave after the child reaches sixmonths)
2 2 2 5 5 5 5
Medium low
Italy (16c) Congedo parentale 6 7 7 9 11
Portugal (23e) Social parental leave benefit 4.0 7.0 6.8 7.6 8.0 7.7 7.7 7
Slovakia (28b) Rodičovský príspevok (parentalallowance)
6 7 8 9 10 10 10 10 11
Bulgaria (3b) Childcare leave up to two yearsof age
3 6 8 9 10 9 10 11 11
12
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Country Type of leave 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Medium low
Latvia (19b) Vecāku pabalsts 55 60 33 13 8 8 12 24 34 36
Belgium (2b) Ouderschapsverlof metuitkeringen 9 11 11 11 12 13 14 15 16
Romania (25b) Child-rearing indemnity –as main beneficiary
13 17 15 14 13
Austria (1a) Kinderbetreuungsgeld(all fathers obtaining it for atleast two months)
10 12 13 14 15 15 15
Estonia (8b) Parental benefit (total of alltypes of benefit)
8 14 15 14 14 15 17 18 19 20
Luxembourg (18b) Congé parentale 15 16 17 17 16 17 17 18 18
Medium
Lithuania (17b) Vaiko priežiūros atostogos 10 11 10 10 13 21 26 28 32
Portugal (24c) Men who shared initialparental leave of 120/150 dayswith mothers*
9 19 21 23 24 25 28 30
Germany (6a) Elterngeld 21 24 25 27 29 32 34
Poland (23ab) Urlop ojcowski and urloprodzicielski 43 41 42
Denmark (7b) Forældreorlov (as part ofBarselsorlov)
26 30 31 32 32 44 46 45 49
Norway (22b) Foreldrepenger 60 61 62 65 68 69 68 70
High
Portugal (24cde) Benefit for initial parentalleave, benefit for extendedparental leave and benefit forsocial parental leave
44 74 80 80 81 79 84 88 87
Denmark (7ab) Barselsorlov, total 87 93 94 98 96 98 102 99 106
Finland (10ab) All parental allowances 91 90 92 98 102 103 103 118 117
Sweden (26a) Föräldrapenning (parentalbenefit)
264 262 270 286 294 300 300 309 314 336
Note: Numbers above 100% are mainly due to double and triple counting of periods of benefits. The code for the type of leave is shown inparentheses after the country name. Source: Unless otherwise indicated, national sources, as per Table A1. *Portugal source: CITE (2017). Number of men on parental and/orpaternity leave in relation to the number of live births within each year obtained via Eurostat [demo_gind]
13
Proportion of men amongparents receiving parentalbenefitsAnother indicator of ‘uptake’– which could be obtainedfrom most countries – is the share of men among allrecipients of parental leave allowances. These sharesare now depicted below in two separate figures forbetter readability. Figure 2 summarises countries withshares exceeding 10%, while Figure 3 combinescountries in which fathers make up less than 10% of allrecipients of some kind of parental leave or childcareallowance.
Starting from relatively low levels (below or around10%) in 2005, growth was particularly high in Portugal,where the proportion of men sharing the ‘initialparental leave’ went from hardly any to about 30% in2016. Growth of the share was also high in Lithuaniaand Italy, reaching between 17% and 22% at the end ofthe period which can be observed with the availabledata. Estonia and Slovakia similarly recordedconsiderable growth of the share of fathers takingparental leave benefits – yet both still remain below10%. In Estonia, the high growth of the share wasinterrupted and slowed down between 2009 and 2012,
which was probably linked to the suspension of thepublicly financed scheme in the context of theeconomic crisis, although employers could still pay thebenefit on a voluntary basis. In Finland, there wasconsiderable growth in the share of fathers takingparental allowance, from around 30% at the beginningof the millennium up to 40% in 2016.
The importance of being clear about what the datacontain and how they were generated is evident in thecase of Austria. The official social security statistics, aspublished annually by Statistics Austria, provide a‘snapshot’ of the number of recipients of parental leaveallowance (Kinderbetreuungsgeld – 1c) in December ofeach year. According to these figures, the share offathers remained consistently low at around 4%.However, other data paint a different picture.Riesenfelder and Danzer (2017), using a cohortapproach, followed up on the actual uptake after thewhole period of entitlement had expired. Their figuressuggest a considerable upward trend of the share offathers on parental leave – increasing to 14.5% for allfathers (1a) and 18.2% for fathers of babies born in 2014who were ‘predominantly employed’ (1b) before theirleave entitlement. This example shows that data onuptake might be underestimated if they refer only to thestatus quo at a certain point in time, especially if the
Main findings
Figure 2: Share of fathers taking parental leave/benefits relative to all eligible parents taking parental leaveallowance (2001–2017) for countries or leave types where the share is greater than 10%
PL Maternity allowance - for fathers BE (2) Ouderschapsverlofmet uitkeringen
RO (25b) Concediul parental/pentru
creşterea copilului
LU (18b) Congé parentale
IT (16b) Congedodi paternità
AT (1b) Kinderbetreuunggeld -predominantly employed
parents - cohort
PT initial parental leave
LT (17b) Vaikopriežiūros atostogos
SE (26a) Föräldrapenning
AT (1a) Kinderbetreuunggeld - all parents - cohort
FI Parental allowances
AT (1c) Kinderbetreuunggeld - all parents - snapshot
EE (8b-max)Lapsehoolduspuhkus -
maximum rate
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Note: See description of the leave/benefits and sources in Table A1 in Annex 1. Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018)
14
timing of the fathers’ leave is not equally distributedover the whole year.
Smaller upward trends, yet departing from alreadyhigher initial levels of fathers’ shares, were observed inBelgium, Luxembourg and Sweden.
A more ‘modest’ growth of the share of fathers inparental leave was recorded in Hungary (for the GYETbenefit), Spain (prestacion por maternidad), Bulgaria(for the leave after the child is one year old), Poland(parental leave) and Slovakia (parental allowance).Fathers’ shares also remained relatively stable ‘overall’in Bulgaria (for the shared leave after the child is sixmonths old), and Croatia (for the maternal leave dayswhich can be shared with the father) and the CzechRepublic (rodičovský příspěvek). Declining shares, onthe other hand, were found in Hungary (for the GYESbenefit), Poland (the maternity leave benefit for fathers)and Romania (for men being the main beneficiary ofchild-rearing indemnity).
Propensity of fathers to takeleaveWhat is the current state of fathers’ participation inparental and paternity leave and how has it developed?Combining information from both indicators – the shareof fathers in relation to births and the share of fathersamong parents – it can be concluded that progress hasbeen made in some countries in terms of increasingfathers’ participation (Austria, Estonia for higher rates ofbenefits, Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Italy, Portugal),or in maintaining higher levels (Sweden, Belgium,Luxembourg). But it also shows that a good number ofcountries with available data have low levels of fathers’participation in family leave (Bulgaria, Czech Republic,Croatia, Hungary and Romania), despite some partialgrowth (Estonia for lower benefit rates, or Slovakia).
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Figure 3: Share of fathers taking parental leave/benefits relative to all eligible parents taking parental leaveallowance (2001–2017) for countries or leave types where the share is less than 10%
PL (23b) Maternity allowance -due to parental leave
(urlop rodzicielski)
BG Maternity benefit - after the child is 6 months of age
HU (14c) Childcare allowance (GYES: Gyermekgondozást segítő ellátás)
HU (14d) Childrearing
support (GYET: Gyermeknevelési
támogatás)
BG Childcare benefit - after the child is 1 year of age
HR (13a) Maternal leave(days shared with father)
(rodiljni dopust)
SK (28a) Davkamaterské
CZ (5b) Rodičovský příspěvek
SK (28b) Rodičovskýpríspevok
EE (8b) Lapsehoolduspuhkus - total
HR (13b) Roditeljski dopust
ES (9c) Prestaciones por maternitad
EE (8b-min) Lapsehoolduspuhkus -minimum wage rate -
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018); see description of the leave/benefits and sources in Table A1 in Annex 1
15
Differentiated figuresFor countries where more differentiated figures(different parts of the leave or different benefitentitlements) were available, it is clear that not allcountries can be ‘lumped together’. Fathers’participation is greater among predominantlyemployed 2 fathers in Austria (than for those that areunemployed 3) and the share of Austrian fathers is alsohighest (30%) in the shortest and income-related leaveoption but lowest (10%) in the longest flat-rate variantof the leave. A similar picture emerges in Estonia, wherethe share of men who took parental leave benefit at themaximum rate rose significantly 4 from 7% in 2004 to29% in 2017, while the share of men obtaining lowerbenefits (‘in the rate of the parental benefit or in the rateof monthly minimum wages’) remained extremely lowat less than 2%. Portuguese uptake of fathers’ exclusivepaternity leave days was higher for the compulsory thanfor the voluntary days, and uptake by Portuguesefathers receiving social parental benefit continues to below.5
Taking all types of parental allowances available toPortuguese fathers together (i.e. including the‘extended’ leave), the share of fathers in relation to allbirths remained relatively stable between 2009 and2017, despite considerable growth in the initial sharedparental leave.
In Slovakia, the share of men taking maternity benefit(davka materske) instead of the mother, or after shefinished drawing her benefit, has increased from 0.3% to4.4%, while the share of fathers taking parental benefit(rodičovský príspevok) has remained low at around 3%.In both cases, fathers can take the benefit provided themother is not taking care of the child at the same time.One explanation for the increase is that replacementrates for the income-related maternity benefits haverecently been increased, from 60% in 2011 to 75% in2017 (Eurofound, 2017c). At the same time, mediacampaigns promoting the uptake were run in 2015and 2016.
Countries without data over timeIn Cyprus, according to data from the Labour RelationsDepartment of the Ministry of Labour, Welfare andSocial Insurance, 934 people (89% women and 11%men) registered their parental leave with the socialsecurity services between 2003 and 2011.
In Greece, there is no database in which the uptake ofpaternity or parental leave by fathers is systematicallygathered. The most recent source available is theLabour Inspectorate’s Annual Report 2013, presented inKETHI (2016), on the use of parental leave in a sample ofprivate sector enterprises (see Table 4 overleaf). Whilethe share of men absent from work due to childcare or
Main findings
2 Fathers with more than 183 days of employment (excluding minimal employment, i.e. employment below the social security threshold) within 365 daysin a time slot ending six months before the child’s birth (for mothers) or six months before the start of the drawing period of the childcare benefit(for fathers).
3 More detailed figures are available (in German) in Riesenfelder (2017) and an overview is provided in Riesenfelder and Danzer (2017).
4 It should be stressed, however, that this group only concerns a minority of all parents on parental leave: in 2017 there were 1,255 parents in this groupand among them 360 men.
5 Workers not covered by the Portuguese social security system, including civil servants, are not eligible for the paid paternity leave days. For this reason,the proportion of fathers per 100 live births taking the obligatory paternity leave days is less than 100%. Read more about the development of family leavein Portugal in Cunha et al (2017).
The figures on the father’s uptake presented in the section above merely refer to the incidence. For example, afather taking just one day of leave would also be counted as ‘participating’ and sharing the family leaveentitlement. Data on the actual duration of the leave were scantily available and could not be obtained for themajority of Member States (see section on duration below and Table A5 in Annex 1).
In Sweden, the policy debate has progressed beyond the mere counting of the number of fathers on parentalleave and now focuses more on increasing the number of couples who share their family entitlements equally.‘Equal sharing’ in this context means that couples share the total amount of family leave days – between 40 and60. For babies born in 2013, Swedish statistics show that only 14% of families have ‘shared equally’. Sharingequally is most common in families where either parent works in a job that ‘requires special theoreticalcompetence’ (in that case, 28% of families share equally), or when the woman has a managerial position (23%).In contrast, families where the man works in a managerial position tend to ‘share equally’ in only 10% of thecases.
Source: Swedish National contribution, based on Försäkringskassan.
Sweden: Progress from mapping the incidence to measures for ‘sharing equally’
16
parental leave is extremely low, it is higher for otherfamily-related leave, such as sick leave for dependentfamily members, or reduced working days for caring fora disabled child.
In Ireland, where paid paternity leave was onlyintroduced at the end of 2016, no data for the full yearare yet available; however, 29,702 Irish fathers took thepaternity benefit (payment for employed and self-employed people who are on paternity leave from work)between January and November 2017.
In the United Kingdom, 218,500 fathers receivedstatutory paternity leave pay from 2016 to 2017, anincrease of about 2% from the previous year. Data onthe uptake of the new entitlement to statutory sharedparental pay are not yet available.
DurationBesides the incidence of men going on parental orpaternity leave, another and even more importantindicator for fathers’ uptake is its duration or length:how much time fathers spend on paternity or parentalleave with their children. In this regard, the authorshave obtained statistics only from a very limited set ofcountries (see Table A5 in Annex 1).
Looking at those average days, three points are worthhighlighting.
First, the average duration is determined by theprovisions of each national leave scheme in place, andtherefore varies considerably across countries. InGermany, men spent on average 92 days on parentalleave with their children. In Slovakia, the small numberof men who took maternity benefit spent 196 days on it.In Denmark, fathers spent around 30 days onbarselsorloven, and in Sweden, fathers of babies born in2013 spent on average 69 days on parental leave.
In Finland, in 2016, fathers took 21 days (out of themaximum of 54) of the paternity allowance period,spending on average 15 days at home with the motherafter the birth and 26 days after the maternity andparental leave had ended. In France, the majority of thefathers that took paternity leave (95%) took the fullamount of 11 days (or more). Around half of them tookthe leave immediately after the child’s birth, the restlater, but only 7% took the leave after the end of thematernity leave period.
Second, mothers continue to spend a much longer timeon parental leave than fathers: four times longer inGermany and Sweden and 10 times longer in Denmark.
Third, the average duration has been very stable overtime in countries with available data.
Other interesting data on duration show that inGermany the youngest and oldest fathers (few innumber) have the longest average durations of parentalleave (8 months, when they are younger than 20 yearsold, 4.7 months when they are between 20 and 25 and3.8 months when they are older than 45), while those ‘inprime age’ (between 30 and 40) spend on average just2.9 months. In Denmark, there is a clear connectionbetween the duration of the leave taken and the father’slevel of education. Fathers with the highest level ofeducation (five years or more of higher education) spenton average 48 days on leave in 2015 – up from 26 days in2003. Those with three to four years of higher educationspent 40 days on average in 2015 (up from 24),while those with ‘no education’ or ‘upper secondary’education spent only around half of the time:20–23 days on average in 2015, up from 17 days in 2003.In Sweden, data from Försäkringskassan for childrenborn in 2013 also showed considerable differencesregarding the duration among occupations:male workers with higher education took on average100 days of parental leave, while the duration waslowest for workers in agriculture (48 days).
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Men Women
Full-time Part-time Full-time Part-time
Childcare leave 118 61 3,337 1,621
Parental leave 12 0 1,136 291
Children’s school attendance licence 2,215 267 8,061 1,660
Sick leave for dependent family members 107 4 653 222
Reduced working day for child’s disability 63 10 103 3
Single parent’s leave 44 1 154 132
Total 2,599 343 13,444 3,829
Table 4: Use of parental leave in a sample of Greek private sector enterprises
Source: KETHI (2016) Greek Labour Inspectorate, Annual Report 2013.
17
The national experts from the Network of EurofoundCorrespondents were asked to provide relevant andrecent research (2014–2017) on the uptake ofpaternity/parental leave by fathers.
Statistical research on the development of fathers’participation in leave and evaluation studies on policymeasures was the most prevalent theme in thesupplementary research, available in around half of thecountries. A few countries conduct more regularresearch on family leave, such as the Italian Observatoryon Family Support Measures (Osservatorio SullePrestazioni a sostegno della famiglia) and thePortuguese Observatory of Families and Family Policies(Observatório das Famílias e das Políticas de Família).
In other countries, government ministries or socialsecurity funds have – sometimes repeatedly –commissioned evaluation studies to examine the statusquo of family leave, its uptake and the effects of pastreforms, often with a view to informing future reforms offamily leave. Examples include: the AustrianWiedereinstiegsmonitoring (Monitoring of re-entries)(Riesenfelder, 2017; Riesenfelder and Danzer, 2017); theGerman Elterngeld Monitor (Parental Leave BenefitMonitor) which was conducted in 2012 by the GermanInstitute for Economic Research (DIW, 2011, 2012); theEstonian study by Praxis on parental leave ahead ofenvisaged reforms (Biin et al, 2013); the recent Finnishresearch on family polices in the past two decades,based on detailed administrative data regarding ‘about573,566 families’ with children (Saarikallio-Torp andHaataja, 2016); and a study (unpublished)commissioned by the Cypriot Ministry of Labour,Welfare and Social Insurance, estimating the expectedimpacts ahead of the introduction of paid paternityleave.
Various gender equality bodies/institutes ordepartments or women’s organisations, which alsoaddress family leave-related research in their reports,represent other useful sources. Examples are studies bythe Belgian Vrouwenraad (2016), the Belgian Institutefor Gender Equality (2011), the Danish Minister forLigestilling (2018), Gender Equality Monitoring for theEstonian Ministry of Social Affairs (2016) and theCroatian Gender Equality Ombudsperson’s regularreports (various years). In such reports, equality-relatedthemes, such as the division of care responsibilities bygender and career interruptions, were prevalentresearch questions.
Opinions about what defines care role models wereexamined in several countries, with Spain and Croatiaconceptualising ‘fatherhood’ and ‘masculinity’(Barbeta-Viñas and Cano, 2017; Jugovic, 2016;Maskalan, 2016). Some countries specifically examinedthe questions fathers ask when contemplating leavechoices. In Belgium and France, reports were based ononline surveys among fathers. In Finland (Lammi-Taskula et al, 2017) and Norway (Kitterød et al, 2017),the reasons why fathers do not take leave were studied.Childcare was further explored in the Czech Republic(Paloncyová et al, 2014), Lithuania (Šarlauskas andTelešienė, 2014) and Spain (Borràs et al, 2018).
In Table 5, these themes are arranged in similarcategories as those above, by the relative level ofparticipation. The table shows that countries with analready higher rate of fathers’ participation tend tofocus their research more on statistics and policyevaluation studies and on themes around the ‘equalsharing’ of childcare. Countries with hitherto very lowfather participation rates tended to research traditionalbeliefs on gender roles, with the most recent researchincluding questions on attitudes towards fathers’participation.
4 Recent research on fathers’uptake of paternity and parentalleave
18
Reasons why fathers take orforego their entitlements The question as to why fathers take or forego theirentitlements is a multifaceted one and singling outspecific factors would not do justice to the complexityof the issue.
Contextual factors, in particular societal attitudestowards the role of fathers in relation to childcare, mayalready exert an impact on what kind of family leavearrangements are in place, how they have beendesigned and made available to fathers, how rigorouslytheir uptake is supported within the business sphereand how strongly they are already adopted by fathers –thereby generating sufficient critical mass for newfathers to participate in childcare. Whether men take uptheir leave entitlements and how equally they sharechildcare and the distribution of paid and unpaid work
with their partners are decisions for both the householdand the individual. The joint income of both partnersand the opportunity costs in terms of foregone wageincreases and career advancements are probably one ofthe most important ‘objective’ or tangible determinantsof such a decision. Yet, in the context of persistentgender pay gaps and the influence of stereotypicalgender roles, the household choice still tends toreinforce the status quo of the traditional model of malechief earner–female care provider.
Beyond the household level, other individual and job-specific factors may play a role in influencing thedecision for men to partake of leave entitlements – suchas age, education, the sector or occupation andcompany size; additional factors could include the placewhere people live and work, job prospects in the areaand the type and accessibility of childcare facilities(Eurofound, 2019, forthcoming). Ultimately, job
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Research strand
Participation rates of father
High Medium Low
Statistics andevaluation studies onparticipation byfathers
Belgium: RVA/ONEM (2012);
Vrouwenraad (2016)
Denmark: Andersen (2016)
Finland: Saarikallio-Torp andHaataja (2016)
Norway: Hamre (2017)
Austria: Riesenfelder and Danzer(2017) Riesenfelder (2017)
Germany: Institut für DemoskopieAllensbach (2018); BMBFSJ (2017);DIW (2012)
Italy – INPS (2017)
Portugal: Wall and Leitão (2017);Cunha et al (2017)
Slovakia: Eurofound (2017c)
Estonia: Biin et al (2013)
Spain: Meil et al (2017)
Equal sharing Denmark: Minister of GenderEquality (2018)
France: Périvier (2017)
Portugal: Perista et al (2016); Cunhaet al (2017)
Sweden: Ministry of Employment(2014)
Austria: BMASK (2018)
Luxembourg: Zhelyazkova (2013)
Traditional beliefsabout genderroles/opinions andattitudes towardsfathers’ participation
Norway: Schou (2017)
Portugal: Cunha et al (2017)
Croatia: Jugovic (2016); Maskalan(2016)
Czech Republic: Kuchařová andPeychlová (2016)
Spain: Barbeta-Viñas, and Cano(2017)
Hungary: Bencsik and Juhász (2012)
Slovenia: Hrženjak (2016)
Involvement inchildcare
Lithuania: Šarlauskas and Telešienė(2014)
Czech Republic: Paloncyová et al(2014)
Spain: Borràs et al (2018)
Why fathers choosenot to take parentalleave
Belgium: VIVA-SVV (2016)
Portugal: Cunha et al (2017)
Norway: Kitterød et al (2017)
Finland: Saarikallio-Torp andHaataja (2016)
Luxembourg: Zhelyazkova (2013)
Table 5: Overview of recent research on fathers’ uptake of parental and paternity leave in the EU28 andNorway, 2018
Note: No additional research available for Bulgaria, Malta, Greece, Latvia, Poland or Romania. Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018)
19
security, as reflected in the type of employmentcontract held by the father, but also the actual orperceived level of support from the employer, canstrongly influence the decision to take leave. In thesections below, the authors present recent statisticsand research evidence from studies across Europe toillustrate this.
Obstacles and supporting factorsLooking into the most recent national research findingsand statistics from the past five years, as reported byEurofound’s Network of Correspondents, the followingmain obstacles and supporting factors to taking leavewere identified in various countries:
£ The design and features of the leave: notably thelevel of compensation rates, but also the extent towhich leave can be taken on a flexible basis.
£ The perceived low support of the company andonerous administrative requirements to obtainbenefits.
£ Fathers’ lack of eligibility to go on family-relatedleave and receive compensation.
Income and job securitySeveral studies have pointed to income-relatedconsiderations as key factors in the decision for fathersto partake or not in parental leave.
A recent survey in the Czech Republic (Kuchařov andPeychlová, 2016), asking parents what types of parentalleave fathers would take, found concerns about fathers’salary and employment security to be key. This is alsomirrored by a qualitative study of Norwegian fatherswhich found job/income and career-related risks asmajor hindrances to fathers taking their wholeentitlement (Kitterød et al, 2017). A Finnish (Salmi andNärvi, 2017) survey of fathers in relation to part-timefamily leave showed that 59% of respondents abstainedfrom taking the leave mainly due to financialconsiderations, while only 3% of respondents said thatuncertainty in the work situation was a hindrance. Andin Belgium, where the share of fathers going on parentalleave has risen recently, a survey of 2,399 men entitledto parental leave showed that over half (54%) did nottake it due to financial reasons. This was particularlyrelevant for fathers and families with low incomes(VIVA-SVV, 2016).
In Germany, where parental leave benefit is linked toincome, workers with higher incomes take Elterngeldmore often than those with a low income. Prior toenactment of the new law, there was lively debateregarding the social aspects of the parental leavescheme, where there were already indications thatuptake by fathers seemed to be greatest in families withhigher incomes. Parental leave as a research issue haslost momentum since the introduction of the newElterngeldPlus scheme, which has been broadly backed
by the Social Democrats, the Greens and the Left. As of2018, debates on ElterngeldPlus in Parliament show thatthere is also support from both the Christian Democratand Christian Social unions. Households with a high netincome are still overrepresented among parentsobtaining the benefit: 51% of parents withElterngeldPlus have more than €3,000 per month at theirdisposal, as compared to 47% of all families withchildren younger than six years old. According to asurvey of parents by the Institut für DemoskopieAllensbach (2018), loss of income and the fear ofexperiencing disadvantages at work remain obstaclesfor sharing more equally (and thereby taking advantageof the Partnerschaftsbonus).
In the United Kingdom, where the shared parental leavebenefit is a flat rate and relatively low (equivalent to lessthan a quarter of men’s median full-time weeklyearnings), the low level of the benefits has been cited asa major hindrance for fathers to take their sharedparental leave entitlements (see UK Parliament, 2017).According to a company survey by XPertHR, employerswho top up the shared parental leave pay are twice aslikely to receive shared parental leave requests as thosewho offer just the statutory rate (Carty, 2016). The studyfinds that one employer in four either enhances sharedparental pay above the statutory minimum or plans toover the coming year, but over double this numbercurrently offer enhanced maternity pay.
Zhelyazkova (2013) studied the decisions of fathers inLuxembourg to go on parental leave, based on anopportunity-cost approach, in which such costs arecalculated in terms of income foregone minus thebenefit obtained. She found that fathers with the lowestopportunity costs in terms of direct earnings foregonewere more likely to go on leave than those whose costswere between €1,500 and €2,000. For those with highercosts, there was no significant difference – only thosewith very high opportunity costs had a significantlylower likelihood of taking up the leave. She also lookedinto ‘indirect’ opportunity costs in terms of foregonepay increases or missed promotion opportunities andfound that fathers who had recently received higher paywere more likely to take leave than fathers with verymodest pay increases, indicating that security ofemployment influences the decision to take leave.
The situation is different in Hungary, where fathersappeared to take on the childcare role onlyexceptionally and out of financial necessity. Bencsik andJuhász (2012) conducted qualitative and quantitativeresearch into the social perceptions and attitudestowards fathers who are on GYES or GYED. In thequalitative phase of the research, in-depth interviewswere carried out with seven couples where the fathertook paternity leave. They found that paternity leave byfathers was usually chosen for financial reasons. Most ofthe couples reported that in their environment theirdecision was seen as strange. Takács (2017) also foundthat there were financial reasons behind the fathers’
Recent research on fathers’ uptake of paternity and parental leave
20
decision to take paternity leave, and that couplesusually chose this option when the mother’s salary washigher than the father’s. Most of these fathers tookpaternity leave for less than a year, only two of themwere ‘full-time fathers’ and none of them had a paid jobduring the paternity leave.
Design of the leave: flexibility aspectsHow the leave is designed is another factor that couldinfluence uptake. In a recent Czech survey, whichinvestigated parents’ preferences prior to theintroduction of the new ‘motivational parental leave’,while two-thirds of respondents said that they woulddefinitely take it, more than half of the interestedrespondents said that they would prefer a flexibleuptake in terms of individual days – to help the mother‘in case of need’ (Kuchařová and Peychlová, 2016).According to Irish research, there is a company-specificdimension to it. A company survey by employerorganisation IBEC (2017) showed that large companieswere more likely to allow their employees to takeparental leave entitlements in a fragmented way: 70%out of a total of 373 employers responding allowedemployees to fragment their leave, with 46% of thisnumber allowing the leave to be taken on a daily basisand 43% on a weekly basis. Companies with over 500employees were more likely to agree to fragmentation(100%) than smaller companies with less than 50employees (54%), and foreign-owned firms were morelikely to agree to it (83%) than Irish-owned firms (61%).
Company supportIn Estonia, results from the Gender Equality Monitor in2013 and 2016 showed basically similar results. Roughlya third of respondents stated that in their workplace itwas difficult for fathers to stay on parental leave for atleast one month or longer. However, men, compared towomen, felt more confident about this issue (EstonianMinistry of Social Affairs, 2014, 2016). The secondEquality Report from Germany points out that fathersoften have to justify longer periods of leave for infantcare and have difficulties convincing employers whythese are necessary (BMBFSJ, 2017). In a Portuguesequalitative study of men on parental leave, intervieweesreported not only that their superiors and even socialsecurity misinformed them about their rights, but alsothat employers lacked understanding of their decisionto share leave and of their motivation for staying athome with the baby. The men interviewed felt they wereseen as transgressors for not putting their work andcareer interests ahead of family interests, questioningthe image of the good worker. There were even someworkers who suffered reprisals such as a cut in salary ordismissal (Cunha et al, 2017).
In the United Kingdom, where shared parental leavehas only recently been introduced, there is evidencefrom surveys to show that people think their employerswould not approve of the leave: a survey of 1,010
working parents by the NGO Working Families (2015)found that nearly half (45%) of fathers in their annualModern Families Index in 2015 felt their employer wouldnot approve of them availing of shared parental leave.At the same time, more respondents agreed thandisagreed that being allowed to take shared parentalleave would boost their commitment to their employer.Similarly, the Fawcett Society found that 35% of fathersin employment with children under the age of 18 believethat fathers who take time off to care for children arenot supported by their employers (Fawcett Society,2016). Slovenian research (Hrženjak, 2016) suggeststhat employers’ expectations of their male employeescould be one reason for the fathers’ low uptake ofparental leave, but in a wider context this reflectsattitudes in society and the absence of a positive imageof the father carrying out more family responsibilities.
However, there are also recent counter-exampleshighlighted by the research. A case-study-basedresearch of Austrian companies showed growingacceptance and ‘snowball effects’, with increasingnumbers of male employees taking their parental leaveor part-time entitlements, once a few others had startedto take theirs, with senior managers in particular actingas role models.
As soon as the first fellow takes parental leave, thesecond one says, ‘Well, if he can do it, I can do it too’.[…] Six years ago, there was this guy who set the ballrolling. The others then started grappling with theissue, which led to men taking parental leave as wellas women.
(Interview with the management of a small company – BMASK 2018, p. 28)
And the research also showed that within the surveyedcompanies, short-term parental leave (more thanlong-term) was becoming the new norm and wasperceived as being ‘more and more cool’.
Salmi and Närvi’s (2017) online survey of part-time leaveamong 1,239 Finnish men showed that ‘difficulty inaddressing the employer’ or ‘the employer objected’were among the least frequently quoted obstacles.
Legal entitlement to the leaveWhile many fathers can take paid paternity or parentalleave, still not all do, due to a lack of legal entitlementto it. This is a hindrance, particularly in countries whereit is not an individual entitlement but connected to themothers’ entitlement, or where the entitlement is linkedto certain eligibility criteria, such as a minimum numberof contributions to social security schemes, or to theemployment status of the father.
In Portugal, for instance, there is a legal obstacle to thefather taking ‘initial parental leave’, related to themother’s position in the job market. If she is not eligiblefor the initial parental leave, whether on account ofbeing inactive or for any other reason, the father loses
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
21
the right to it even if he is working, and is only entitledto the father’s exclusive initial parental leave. Thisexplains why just 71% of Portuguese fathers of newbornbabies take the mandatory paternity leave days.Similarly, in the United Kingdom, analysis by the TradesUnion Congress (TUC, 2015) showed that the stricteligibility rules constitute a barrier, with 40% of workingfathers with a child aged under one not qualifying forshared parental leave because their partner is not inpaid work (fathers are only entitled to shared parentalleave if the mother of their child is entitled to maternityleave). In Norway, around 13% of fathers were found tobe ineligible for the father’s quota (Kitterød et al, 2017).More information on eligibility can be found in Table A1in Annex 1.
Administrative requirementsAnother obstacle seems to be the administrativerequirements linked to obtaining benefits, which insome countries were perceived as too demanding forparents or for companies.
According to a survey of 972 parents in Germany whowere recipients of ElterngeldPlus – the more flexiblevariant which can be combined with work – the vastmajority of the respondents find the applicationprocedure difficult, with slightly more men than womenfinding it difficult. Only 25% of mothers and 20% offathers said that they found it easy to complete theapplication form (Deutscher Bundestag, 2018). InNorway, Kitterød et al (2017) reported that otherproblems associated with the non-uptake of leave wererelated to the administration within NAV (the NorwegianLabour and Welfare Administration), includingcomplicated application forms and the lack ofinformation and competence among NAV employees.Norman and Fagan (2017) found that applying forshared parental leave in the United Kingdom is also acomplex process, as illustrated by the government’s66-page technical guide, representing a hindrance forcompanies who are actively trying to promote sharedparental leave.
Individual and job-related factors The obstacles and supporting factors discussed aboveare those which can potentially – to a greater or lesserextent – be influenced by policymakers. The availabledata and research, however, also point to someindividual and job-related factors that influence uptakeand these are described in this section.
AgeMale recipients of parental or paternity leave benefitsare most often found in the 30–40 age bracket in thosecountries for which data were obtained: in the CzechRepublic, fathers on parental leave were ‘getting older’,as reflected by a shift in prevalence from the 30–34 agegroup to the 35–39 age group between 2004 and 2015.
In Finland, most fathers on parental or paternity leaveare in the 30–34 age group. In Italy, more than half offathers on leave are between 34 and 44 years old. InGermany, 35% of fathers on parental leave are agedbetween 30 and 35, and another 30% are aged between35 and 40. These data are closely linked to the overallage distribution of fathers and do not reveal more aboutthe influence of a father’s age on his decision to takeparental leave (unlike the French multivariate research– see next section).
Occupation or employment statusThe employment status or occupation of the father isanother factor to be investigated. Descriptive univariatestatistics obtained show that, in Austria, fathers onparental leave are overrepresented among farmers, theself-employed and civil servants. In Italy, blue-collarworkers make up a growing share (61% in 2016, up from57% in 2012) of all private sector male recipients ofparental leave beneficiaries, while the white-collarworkers’ share amounted to 33% in 2016 – indicatingthat overall the propensity of white-collar workers totake parental leave remains higher. In Sweden, theshare of male parents who took fewer than five days ofparental leave was found to be highest amongagricultural workers (34%), managers (29%) and thoseperforming work not requiring special vocationaltraining (29%), while it was lowest among workersrequiring a theoretical special competence (11%) andthose whose work requires a short university educationor equivalent (16%).
ResidenceResidence might be another determinant of thelikelihood that fathers take leave. Based onadministrative statistics, the share of men among allparents who take leave varies considerably acrossregions, defined on a NUTS 2 basis. From countries withavailable data, it was relatively often (but not always)found to be higher in locations around capital cities, aswas the case in Austria, the Czech Republic andBulgaria. The share of Swedish fathers ‘sharing equally’the number of days (i.e. 40–60) is among the highest inStockholm. The picture is not so clear in Germany,where the share of fathers on parental leave in Berlinranks only fifth among all regions, yet it is still in theupper tercile. In Portugal, the regional distribution offathers taking out any kind of parental leave benefit iseven, with the lowest share in Faro (42%) deviating notmuch from the highest in Aveiro, Braga and Leiria (47%),and Lisbon having a slightly lower share (43%). In Spain,the share of fathers taking out prestaciones pormaternidad (parental leave) in Madrid was slightly lowerthan the national average.
Recent research on fathers’ uptake of paternity and parental leave
22
Findings from multivariatestudiesBeyond the findings reported above, some recentstudies applied multivariate models to examine thefactors determining the non-uptake of parental orpaternity leave by fathers, and considered severaldeterminants simultaneously.
According to a study based on Finnish register data(Saarikallio-Torp and Haataja, 2016), one-fifth of fathersdo not take any parental leave. The probability of nottaking any parental leave is especially high among low-income workers and those with a low level of education,entrepreneurs and the unemployed. In contrast, highlyeducated, high-paid men working in the public sector inbig organisations and/or in predominantly femalesectors are more likely to take paternity leave. ForFrance, recent multivariate research by the statisticalservice of the French Ministry of Social Affairs (DREES)found that ‘older’ fathers (35–40 years old), especiallythose older than 40, were less likely to take paternityleave upon the birth of their first child (Legendre andand Lhommeau, 2016). Also less likely to take leavewere fathers with three or more children in thehousehold, those regularly working more than 40 hoursper week and those with a very low household income.Fathers on fixed-term term contracts in any sector
(48%) and self-employed workers 6 (32%) also had lowerodds of availing of their entitlement. On the other hand,fathers working in the public sector were most likely toavail of their paternity leave entitlements (88%),followed by private sector employees with permanentcontracts (80%).
In Norway, where fathers were entitled to a ‘father’squota’ of 10 weeks until mid-2018 7, Kitterød et al (2017)studied those who were entitled to it but did not take itfor the entire duration. They tended not to have auniversity degree, to have either a low or very highincome, and to be fathers born abroad. Moreover,limited uptake of the father’s quota is common amongemployees in sectors such as accommodation and foodservice activities, human health and social workactivities, transport and storage and real estate,scientific, technical, administrative and supportservices. One key finding of this study was also that afather’s non-uptake of the entire quota does notnecessarily indicate his non-involvement in care for hischildren: some of the fathers using the full quota werenot necessarily absent from work, but combined thebenefit with flexible working while they were not themain childcarer. On the other hand, some fathers whodid not avail of the full entitlement period might havebeen caring for the child during periods ofunemployment or while on sick leave.
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
6 In France, the ceiling for the payment is lower for the self-employed than that for private sector workers (€52.10 per day and €82.32 per day respectively in2014), which may explain the low participation of the former.
7 This increased to 15 weeks as of 1 July 2018.
23
This report presents country-specific data on fathers’uptake of parental and paternity leave across Europesince the beginning of the millennium, insofar as theywere available.
The data are heterogeneous and patchy, mainly due tothe fact that the national leave systems are so different,but also in terms of how the data are captured andreported. Care has been taken to compare like with likeas far as possible. It is also important to stress that thedata obtained are better suited for within-countrycomparisons over time, whereas cross-countrycomparisons should only be made with the utmostcaution and by consulting the background informationprovided in Table 1 and Table A1 in Annex 1, togetherwith other country-specific information.
Against this background, it can be concluded thatprogress has been made in many Member States inincreasing the number and share of fathers who aretaking parental or paternity leave.
While paternity leave around the time of the child’sbirth is typically well paid – in the majority of caseswithout major loss of earnings – the periods are usuallyvery short. Looking at these shorter and typicallybetter-compensated periods of leave exclusivelyavailable for fathers, it can be concluded that theuptake is relatively high among eligible fathers in mostMember States for which data were available. Progressin the number of men per 100 children who take suchleave or benefits has been made since 2013 in the BalticStates and Poland in particular, and before that inPortugal and Slovenia.
However, with the exception of the initial family timetypically taken around the time of the birth of the child,the data on parental leave suggest that this benefit isnot yet fully exploited. Parental leave is typically lesswell compensated and in a number of Member Statesthe right to parental leave remains a family right ratherthan an individual right. Moreover, some legalframeworks maintain the principle that the mother isthe main beneficiary of leave policies rather than themother and father together, effectively excluding anumber of fathers from such leave.
Nevertheless, progress has been made in severalcountries on increasing the share of fathers takingparental leave (Austria, Estonia for higher rates ofbenefits, Finland, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal),or in maintaining already high levels (Belgium,Luxembourg, Sweden). But the research also shows that
a good number of countries with available data remainat low levels of father participation (Bulgaria, Croatia,Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania), despite somepartial growth (Estonia for those receiving loweramounts of compensation or Slovakia).
However, not all newborn children have eligible fatherswho can take advantage of such entitlements, as suchprerogatives may be linked to the mother’s entitlementor the father’s employment status. It should be notedthat the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) iscurrently working on assessing the eligibility ofpotential mothers and fathers for paid parental leave inthe EU.
This report has brought together information on theincidence of fathers’ participation in paternity andparental leave from national statistics in Europe, in theform of the number of men among parents or per 100children. However, these measures fall short ofindicating the actual extent of father participation, asthey only record the ‘incidence’, meaning that in manycountries fathers would already be counted asparticipating in the statistics if they had taken a fewdays off work.
On the other hand, data on the actual duration of theleave by gender were scarce, but where they wereavailable they showed that fathers take much shorterperiods of family leave than mothers, with littleprogress noted among those few countries able toprovide such data. In the spirit of ‘what cannot bemeasured cannot be managed’, any efforts to improvethe data collection on family leave across Europe areimportant prerequisites when the objective is toincrease men’s participation in family-related leave.
In this regard, the Swedish method of collecting dataand monitoring the extent and development of ‘equalsharing’ of family leave days could be considered a goodexample for others.
Research conducted over the past five years or so hasnot shown any original or surprising findings.Maintaining an adequate level of household incomeremains a key concern of families and stronglyinfluences the decision as to whether and to whatextent men take leave or cut back on working time. Incases where mothers have well-paid jobs, fathers startoff from relatively secure job positions, thecompensation ratios for foregone pay are high, theparents are well educated, the administrative hurdles toobtain benefits are low and the companies and social
5 Summary and conclusions
24
environment are regarded as supportive, thelikelihood that fathers participate to a greater extent infamily-related leave and care has been found to behigher.
The role that companies and the social environment canplay is also highlighted by recent research, with findingsin several countries pointing to the perceived lack ofemployers’ support as a hindrance in fathers’ decisionsto take more leave, while research in other countriesshows how such support – notably with managers
acting as role models – can also greatly promoteuptake. Whether men sharing family leave more equallywith their partners becomes ‘cool’ and ‘the new norm’in response to the lead taken by others, or whether menfeel embarrassed if they have to engage in childcarework through necessity, are societal issues that cannotbe solved solely by putting entitlements in place. Whatis needed is to arrive at a shared understanding of thoseinvolved at various levels – governments and socialpartners, employers and employed parents, fathers andmothers – in order to promote a more equal sharingamong women and men.
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
25
General sourcesBlum S., Koslowski A., and Moss P. (eds.) (2017),13th International review of leave policies and relatedresearch 2017, International Network on Leave Policiesand Research.
Blum, S., Koslowski, A., Macht, A. and Moss, P. (eds.)(2018), 14th International review of leave policies andresearch 2018, Internional Network on Leave Policiesand Research.
Eurofound (2015), Promoting uptake of parental andpaternity leave among fathers in the European Union,Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Eurofound (2017a), Developments in working life inEurope 2016: EurWORK annual review 2016, PublicationsOffice of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Eurofound (2019), Provision of out-of-school care inEurope, forthcoming.
European Commission (2017a), An initiative to supportwork-life balance for working parents and carers,COM(2017)252 final, Brussels.
European Commission (2017b), Proposal for a Directiveof the European Parliament and of the Council on work-life balance for parents and carers and repealing CouncilDirective 2010/18/EU, COM(2017)253 final, Brussels.
European Commission (2018), Work-life balance, FlashEurobarometer 470, Brussels.
MISSOC (Mutual Information System on Socialprotection) (2018), Comparative tables IVmaternity/paternity, web page, accessed 9 October2018.
OECD (2016a), Parental leave: Where are the fathers?Policy Brief, March 2016, OECD Publishing, Paris.
OECD (2016b), Background brief on fathers’ leave and itsuse, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Van Belle, J. (2016), Paternity and parental leave policiesacross the European Union, Rand Europe.
National sources
AustriaBMASK (Bundesministerium für Arbeit, Soziales,Gesundheit und Konsumentenschutz) (2018),EU-Project: Men and reconciliation of work and family:Supporting the path to gender equal distribution ofparental leave and working time, Vienna.
Bundeskanzleramt Österreich/Bundesministerin fürFrauen, Familien und Jugend (2018),Kinderbetreuungsgeld Geburten bis 28.2.2017:Monatsstatistik, Vienna.
Bundeskanzleramt Österreich/Bundesministerin fürFrauen, Familien und Jugend (2018),Kinderbetreuungsgeld Geburten ab 1.3.2017:Monatsstatistik, Vienna.
Bundeskanzleramt, Sektion Familien und Jugend(2018), Auswertung Väterbeteiligung beimKinderbetreuungsgeld (Stand 14.2.2018, Geburten bis28.02.2017), Vienna.
Bundesministerium für Familien und Jugend (2017),Auswertung Väterbeteiligung beimKinderbetreuungsgeld (Stand 21.4.2017, Geburten bis28.02.2017), Vienna.
Eurofound (2017b), Living and working in Austria,Dublin.
Riesenfelder, A. (2017), WiedereinstiegsmonitoringÖsterreich Kohorten 2006 bis 2014, L&R Sozialforschung,Vienna.
Riesenfelder, A. and Danzer, L. (2017),Wiedereinstiegsmonitoring: Ein Überblick über dieErgebnisse der dritten Fassung desWiedereinstiegsmonitorings zu den Kohorten 2006 bis2014 in Österreich und in den Bundesländern,L&R Sozialforschung, Vienna.
BelgiumInstituut voor de Gelijkheid van Vrouwen en Mannen(2011), De ervaringen van werknemers metvaderschapsverlof in Belgie Een kwalitatieve studie,Brussels.
RVA/ONEM (2014), Ouderschapsverlof: Evolutie van deverhouding mannen/vrouwen van 2002 tot 2012,Brussels.
RVA/ONEM (2012), Ouderschapsverlof: Evolutie van deverhouding mannen/vrouwen van 2002 tot 2012,Brussels.
BibliographyAll Eurofound publications are available at www.eurofound.europa.eu
26
VIVA-SVV (2018), Ouderschapsverlof moet beter wordenvergoed [Paternity leave has to be remunerated better],21 March 2018.
Vrouwenraad (2016), Stand von zaken ouderschpsverlof[State of affairs of parental leave], Brussels.
BulgariaNSSI (National Social Security Institute) (2017a),Analysis of cash benefits and benefits for the period 2010–2016, Sofia.
NSSI (2017b), Social indicators by gender, web page,accessed 9 October 2018.
NSSI (2018), Statistics, in Bulgarian.
CroatiaBlum S., Koslowski A. and Moss P. (eds.) (2017),13th International review of leave policies and relatedresearch 2017, International Network on Leave Policiesand Related Research, London.
Gender Equality Ombudsperson (2016),Pravobraniteljice za ravnopravnost spolova, Annualreport, Zagreb.
Grgurev Ivana (2014), ‘Diskriminacija trudnih radnica:kako uspješno pomiriti trudnoću sa zahtjevima tržišta’[‘Discrimination against pregnant workers: How tosuccessfully reconcile pregnancy with marketdemands’], in Potocnjak, Z., Grgurev, I. and Grcic, A.(eds.). Perspektive antidiskriminacijskog prava[The Perspective of Antidiscrimination Law], Universityof Zagreb, pp. 133–152.
Jugovic, I. (2016), ‘Beliefs about the gender division ofparental leave and characteristics associated withthem’, Croatian Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 23, No. 3,pp. 359–382.
Maskalan, A. (2016), ‘In the name of the father: Adiscussion on (new) fatherhood, its assumptions andobstacles’, Croatian Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 23,No. 3, pp. 383–398.
CyprusNo recent research or other relevant sources identified.
Czech RepublicKuchařová, V. and Peychlová, K. (2016), Výzkum zájmurodičůo motivační otcovskou dovolenou [Survey onattitudes towards the new motivational Paternityleave], VÚPSV, Prague.
Paloncyová, J., Barvíková, J., Kuchařová, V. andPeychlová, K. (2014), Nové formy denní péče o děti vČeské republice, VÚPSV, Prague.
Paloncyová, J., Barvíková, J., Kuchařová, V. Svobodová,K. and Šťastná, A. (2013), Rodinné chování a rodinnápolitika jako kontext systému denní péče o děti ve Franciia v České republice, VÚPSV, Prague.
DenmarkAndersen, S.H. (2016), Paternity leave and themotherhood penalty: New causal evidence, Study paper114, The Rockwell Foundation.
Minister for Ligestilling (Minister for Gender Equality)(2018), Redegørelse / Perspektiv- og handlingsplan 2018,Copenhagen.
EstoniaBiin, H., Karu, M., Masso, M. and Veldre, V. (2013), Eestivanemapuhkuste süsteemi analüüs: Aruanne, Praxis,Tallinn.
Derman, N., Hansson, L., Heinla, E., Helemäe, J., Järve,M., Laidmäe, V., et al (2006), Soolise võrdõiguslikkusemonitoring 2005, Estonian Ministry of Social Affairs,Tallinn.
Estonian Ministry of Social Affairs (2014), Soolisevõrdõiguslikkuse monitooring 2013: Artiklite kogumik[Gender equality monitoring 2013: A collection ofarticles], Tallinn.
Estonian Ministry of Social Affairs (2016), Soolisevõrdõiguslikkuse monitooring 2016: Elanikkonnaküsitlusuuringu raport [Gender equality monitoring2016: Population survey report], Tallinn.
Estonian National Social Insurance Board (2018),Parental leave benefit statistics 2005–2018.
Statistics Estonia (2018), Persons receiving parentalbenefit by type of benefit and sex.
Vainu, V., Järviste, L. and Biin, H.(2010), Soolisevõrdõiguslikkuse monitooring 2009, Estonian Ministry ofSocial Affairs, Tallinn.
FinlandKela (2017), Kelan lapsiperhe-etuustilasto 2016 [Kela’sstatistics on benefits for families with children],Helsinki.
Lammi-Taskula, J., Salmi, M. and Närvi, J. (2017), ‘Isienperhevapaat’, [‘Fathers’ family leave’], in Salmi, M. andNärvi, J. (eds.), Perhevapaat, talouskriisi ja sukupuoltentasa-arvo [Family leave, the economic crisis and genderequality]. THL raportti 4/2017, Helsinki, pp. 105–134.
Miettinen, A. (2017), Tre myter om föräldraledigheter: Enjämförelse av föräldraledigheterna i de nordiskaländerna [Three myths about parental leave: Acomparison on parental leaves in the Nordic countries].Befolkningsförbundet, Institutet förbefolkningsforskning, Tankesmedjan Agenda, Helsinki.
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
27
Saarikallio-Torp, M. and Haataja A. (2016), ‘Isienvanhempainvapaiden käyttö on yleistynyt. Ketkä isätvapaita käyttävät ja ketkä eivät?’ [‘Fathers’ use ofparental leave has increased: Which fathers use leave,and which do not?’] in Haataja, A., Airio, I., Saarikallio-Torp, M. and Valaste, M. (eds.), Laulu 573 566 perheestä:Lapsiperheet ja perhepolitiikka 2000-luvulla [A songabout 573,566 families: Families with children andfamily policies in the 2000s], Kela, Helsinki, pp. 80–115.
Salmi, M. and Närvi, J. (2017), ‘Johdanto’[‘Introduction’] in Salmi, M. and Närvi, J. (eds.),Perhevapaat, talouskriisi ja sukupuolten tasa-arvo[Family leave, the economic crisis and gender equality].THL raportti 4/2017, Helsinki, pp. 8–35.
FranceLegendre, É. and Lhommeau, B., with Vincent, J. (2016),‘Le conge de paternité : Un droit exercé par sept peressur dix’, Études et Résultats, n°957, DREES.
GermanyBMBFSJ (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren,Frauen und Jugend) (2017), ZweiterGleichstellungsbericht [Second Equality Report], Berlin.
Deutscher Bundestag (2018), Unterrichtung desBundestages: Bericht über die Auswirkungen desElterngeldPlus und zum Partnerschaftsbnus sowie zumElterngeld [Information of the Bundestag: Report on theeffects of the Elterngeld Plus, the Elternbonus and theElterngeld], Berlin.
DIW (Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung) (2012), ElterngeldMonitor, Berlin.
DIW (2017), Elterngeld und soziale Normen [Elterngeldand social norms], Berlin.
Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach (2018) DasElterngeldPlus nach zwei Jahren: Befragung vonBezieherinnen und Beziehern im Auftrag des BMFSFJ [TheElterngeldPlus benefit after two years: Survey amongthe recipients, commissioned by the BMFSFJ], Berlin.
GreeceKETHI (Research Centre for Gender Equality) (2016),Bibliographic review and policy analysis on reconciliationof professional and family/private life.
HungaryBencsik A. and Juhász T. (2012), Férfiak gyesen, gyeden?[Fathers on childcare leave?], A Virtuális IntézetKözép-Európa Kutatására közleményei, Vol. 4, No. 5,pp. 133–143.
Takács J. (2017), ‘Aktívan törődő apák Magyarországon’[Actively caring fathers in Hungary], Szociológiai Szemle,Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 104–126.
IrelandIBEC (Irish Business and Employers Confederation)(2017), Fragmentation of parental leave by company size,Dublin.
ItalyINPS (Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale)(2017), Prestazioni a sostegno della famiglia:Aggiornamento all’anno 2016 [Family supports: Updatefor the year 2016], December, Rome.
LatviaNo recent research or other relevant sources identified.
LithuaniaLithuanian Statistics Department (2017), Women andMen in Lithuania 2016, Vilnius.
Lithuanian Statistics Department (2016), Women andMen in Lithuania 2015, Vilnius.
Lithuanian Statistics Department (2015), Women andMen in Lithuania 2014, Vilnius.
Šarlauskas, T. and Telešienė, A. (2014), ‘The regulationof state social insurance: Structure and choices ofbeneficiaries’, Public Policy and Administration, Vol. 13,No. 1, pp. 95–108.
LuxembourgMoss, P. (2016), Les pères dans les politiques de congésparentaux: Retour sur les données européennes del’International Network on Leave Policies andResearch,Revue des politiques sociales et familiales,Vol. 122, pp. 103–110.
Valentová, M. and Bia, M. (2013), Le congé parental chezles parents d’enfant unique: Analyse du recours au congéparental par les mères et les pères d’enfant unique, et deson impact sur l’engagement des mères sur le marché dutravail, report, 30 December, Luxembourg.
Zhelyazkova, N. (2013), ‘Male use of parental leave inLuxembourg: Empirical analysis of administrativerecords’, Working Paper Series No. 045, United NationsUniversity – Maastricht Economic and Social ResearchInstitute on Innovation and Technology, Maastricht.
MaltaNo recent research or other relevant sources identified.
NetherlandsCBS (Central Bureau voor de Statistiek) (2014)Ouderschapsverlof; gebruik en duur, 2000–2013, webpage, accessed 10 October 2018.
CBS (Central Bureau voor de Statistiek) (2016)Werknemers – gebruik van en behoefte aanouderschapsverlof, web page, accessed 10 October2018.
Bibliography
28
NorwayHamre, K. (2017), Fedrekovoten – mer populær enn noengang [Paternity leave: More popular than ever],Statistics Norway, web page, accessed 9 October 2018.
Kitterød, R.-H., Halrynjo, S., Østbakken, K. M. (2017),Pappaperm? Fedre som ikke tar fedrekvote – hvor mange,hvem og hvorfor? [Fathers who do not take paternityallowance – how many, who and why?], Institutt forsamfunnsforskning, Oslo.
Rudlende, L. and Brghaug, R. (2017), Familiens bruk avforeldrepenger etter fødsel [Family use of parentalbenefits after childbirth], NAV, Oslo.
Schou, L. (2017), ‘Fedrekvoten – uttak og holdninger’, inArbeid og velferd, nr. 3, 2017.
PolandZUS (Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych) (2016), RocznikStatystyczny Ubezpieczeń Społecznych 2012–2014[Statistical Yearbook of Social Insurance 2012-2014],Warsaw.
ZUS (Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych) (various years),Kwartalne informacje o świadczeniach pieniężnych z FUSoraz o innych świadczeniach [Quarterly information oncash benefits from the Social Insurance Fund and otherbenefits], Warsaw.
PortugalCITE (Comissão para a igualdade no trabalho e noemprego) (2017) Relatório sobre o progresso daigualdade entre mulheres e homens no trabalho, noemprego e na formação profissional – 2016, Lisbon.
Cunha, V., Atalaia, S. and Wall, K. (2017), Policy Brief II –Men and parental leaves: legal framework, attitudes andpractices, ICS/CITE, Lisbon.
Perista, H., Cardoso, A., Brázia, A., Abrantes, M., Perista,P. and Quintal, E. (2016), Os usos do tempo de homens ede mulheres em Portugal. CESIS/CITE, Lisbon.
Wall, K. and Leitão, M. (2017) ‘Portugal country note’, in:Koslowski A., Blum S. and Moss P. (eds.), Internationalreview of leave policies and research 2016, InternationalNetwork on Leave Policies and Related Research,London.
RomaniaBadea, D. (2015), Din bancă, în concediu de paternitate,[From the bank, on paternity leave], Cariere Jurnal deleadership, 22 December 2015.
Basarab, B. (2017), Concediu paternal? Eşti militar? Nici oproblemă, restitui banii! [Paternal leave? Are you amilitary? No problem, refund the money!], Stareapresei,23 July 2017.
Gheorghe, A. (2015), Tatii romani nu vor sa intre inconcediu de ingrijire a copilului, desi primesc bani pentruasta [Romanian fathers do not want to go on parentalleave, although they get money for it], Wall StreetRomania, 2 August 2015.
SlovakiaEurofound (2017c), Slovakia: Incentives for men to taketime off work for family life, Dublin.
SloveniaHrženjak, M. (ed.) (2016), Spremembe očetovstva: moškimed delom in staršestvom [Changing fatherhood: menbetween employment and parenthood], Ljubljana:Mirovni Inštitut.
MDDSZ (Ministry of Work, Family and Social Affairs)(2018), Družinksi prejemki, zavaronvanje za starševskovarstvo [Family benefits, insurance for parental care],web page, accessed 10 October 2018.
SpainBarbeta-Viñas, M. and Cano, T. (2017), ‘Toward a newmodel of fatherhood? Discourses on the process ofpaternal involvement in urban Spain’, Revista deinvestigaciones sociológicas, Vol. 159, pp. 13–30.
Borràs, V., Ajenjo, M. and Moreno-Colom, S. (2018),‘More time parenting in Spain: A possible changetowards gender equality?’, Journal of Family Studies,doi:10.1080/13229400.2018.1440618.
Meil, G., Rogero-García, J. and Romero-Balsas, P. (2017),Los permisos parentales como instrumentos para laigualdad de género, Observatorio Social de ‘la Caixa’,Barcelona.
SwedenDelegation for Equality in the Working Life (2014),Lönsamt arbete – familjeansvarets fördelning ochkonsekvenser [Profitable work - the distribution andconsequences of family responsibilities], Stockholm.
Försäkringskassan (2016), Föräldrapenning och yrke[Parental benefit and occupation], Stockholm.
Försäkringskassan (2017), Socialförsäkringen i siffror2017 [Social insurance 2017 in numbers], Stockholm.
Ministry of Employment (2014), Lönsamt arbete.familjeansvarets fördelning och konsekvenser,Stockholm.
SOU (Statens Offentliga Utredningar) (2017), Jämställtföräldraskap och goda uppväxtvillkor för barn – en nymodell för föräldraförsäkringen [Equal parenting andgood childhood upbringing - a new model for parentalinsurance], Stockholm.
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
29
United KingdomCarty, M. (2016), ‘Enhanced pay key to shared parentalleave take-up’, XpertHR, 2 June.
Fawcett Society (2016), Parents, work and care: Strikingthe balance, London.
Norman, H. and Fagan, C. (2017), Shared Parental Leavein the UK: is it working? Lessons from other countries,web page, accessed 9 October 2018.
TUC (Trades Union Congress) (2015), Statistical briefingon father’s leave and pay, February, London.
UK Parliament (2017), Women and EqualitiesCommittee, Sharing parental leave, web page, accessed9 October 2018.
Working Families (2015), The Modern Families Index2015, London.
UK Parliament, Women and Equalities Committee(2017), Gender pay gap: government response webforum, Sharing parental leave; An overview of the repliesreceived from different organisations, web page,accessed 9 October 2018.
Bibliography
30
Annex 1Descriptions of family leave and additional data
Annexes
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Au
stri
aKa
renz
urla
ub(l
eave
), K
inde
rbet
reuu
ngsg
eld
(ch
ild
care
ben
efit
) (1
a–c
)
Acco
rdin
g to
labo
ur la
w, t
he m
axim
um d
urat
ion
ofp
aren
tal l
eave
(ent
itle
men
t by
fam
ily) i
s up
to th
e ch
ild’s
seco
nd b
irth
day
. The
re a
re n
o m
and
ator
y p
erio
ds
for
fath
ers,
onl
y op
tion
al o
nes.
New
mo
del
fo
r b
irth
s fr
om
1 M
arc
h 2
01
7:
par
ents
can
cho
ose
betw
een
a fla
t-ra
te c
hild
care
ben
efit
acco
unt o
r an
inco
me-
rela
ted
mod
el.
The
avai
lab
le d
ata
rela
te to
a p
revi
ous
mod
el (f
or b
irth
sup
to 2
8 Fe
bru
ary
2017
). W
ithi
n th
is m
odel
, par
ents
cou
ldch
oose
bet
wee
n fo
ur fl
at ra
tes
or a
n in
com
e-re
late
dm
odel
: €43
6 p
er m
onth
for 3
0 m
onth
s or
for 3
6 m
onth
sif
both
par
ents
ap
ply
for t
he p
aym
ent (
30+6
bon
usm
onth
s’ o
pti
on);
€624
per
mon
th fo
r 20
mon
ths
or24
mon
ths
(20+
4 bo
nus
mon
ths’
op
tion
); €8
00 a
mon
thfo
r 15
mon
ths
or 1
8 m
onth
s (1
5+3
bonu
s m
onth
s’ o
pti
on);
€1,0
00 p
er m
onth
for 1
2 m
onth
s or
14
mon
ths
for t
hose
earn
ing
less
than
€1,
000
per
mon
th (1
2+2
bonu
s m
onth
s’op
tion
) - 8
0% o
f the
last
net
inco
me
for 1
2 m
onth
s or
14 m
onth
s fo
r tho
se e
arni
ng b
etw
een
€1,0
00 a
nd €
2,00
0 a
mon
th (1
2+2
bon
us m
onth
s’ in
com
e-re
late
d o
pti
on).
All p
aren
ts, u
nive
rsal
ben
efit
,in
clud
ing
emp
loye
d, s
elf-
emp
loye
d,
civi
l ser
vant
s, u
nem
plo
yed
, stu
den
ts,
etc.
The
child
care
ben
efit
is a
dm
inis
tere
d b
yth
e so
cial
sec
urit
y in
stit
utio
ns w
hich
are
oblig
ed b
y th
e C
hild
care
Ben
efit
Act
(Kin
derb
etre
uung
sgel
dges
etzK
BG
G,
§36
(2))
to p
rovi
de
stat
isti
cal d
ata
(e.g
. on
the
num
ber o
f ben
efic
iari
es, h
ow lo
ng th
eyin
tend
to d
raw
the
bene
fits,
etc
.) to
the
Min
iste
r for
Fam
ilies
and
You
th. T
heFe
der
al M
inis
try
pro
vid
es m
onth
lyst
atis
tics
on
the
bene
ficia
ries
of t
hech
ildca
re b
enef
it (n
umbe
rs, b
y ge
nder
,p
rofe
ssio
nal g
roup
, soc
ial s
ecur
ity
inst
itut
ion,
regi
onal
pro
vinc
e, fa
mily
stat
us),
but n
o fu
rthe
r dat
a (e
.g. l
engt
h of
dra
win
g by
eac
h p
aren
t).
Dat
a re
late
to th
e p
revi
ous
mod
el, b
efor
e20
17 a
nd re
pre
sent
an
aver
age
acro
ss a
llop
tion
s.
The
dat
a p
rese
nted
her
e, b
y:
(1a)
and
(1b)
Rie
senf
eld
er a
nd D
anze
r(2
017)
are
bas
ed o
n a
coho
rt a
pp
roac
h an
din
clud
e ‘a
ll fa
ther
s’ a
nd ‘p
red
omin
antl
yem
plo
yed
’ fat
hers
sep
arat
ely.
Fat
hers
wit
hm
ore
than
183
day
s of
em
plo
ymen
t(e
xclu
din
g m
inim
al e
mp
loym
ent,
i.e.
emp
loym
ent b
elow
the
soci
al s
ecur
ity
thre
shol
d) w
ithi
n 36
5 d
ays
in a
tim
e sl
oten
din
g si
x m
onth
s be
fore
the
child
’s b
irth
(mot
hers
) or s
ix m
onth
s be
fore
the
star
t of
the
dra
win
g p
erio
d o
f the
chi
ldca
re b
enef
it(f
athe
rs).
(1c)
Sta
tist
ik A
ustr
ia (2
017)
–Ki
nder
betr
euun
gsge
ldbe
zieh
er, D
ecem
ber
each
yea
r.
As th
e m
inim
um d
raw
ing
per
iod
of t
hebe
nefit
is tw
o m
onth
s, a
ll fig
ures
(1a-
c)re
fer t
o p
aren
ts o
btai
ning
it fo
r at l
east
two
mon
ths.
Bel
giu
mVa
ders
chap
sver
lof/C
ongé
de
pate
rnité
(2a
) a
nd
Oud
ersc
haps
verlo
f met
uitk
erin
gen
(Pa
ren
tal l
eave
wit
h b
enef
its)
(2
b)
(2a)
10
day
s d
urin
g th
e fir
st 4
mon
ths
afte
r the
bir
th. F
orth
e fir
st th
ree
(man
dat
ory)
day
s, th
ere
is n
o ch
ange
insa
lary
; for
the
rem
aini
ng s
even
day
s, th
e m
utua
l fun
dp
ays
82%
of t
he u
sual
gro
ss s
alar
y.
Oud
ersc
haps
verlo
of(2
b) R
educ
tion
of w
orki
ng ti
me
by a
half:
€40
1.25
for w
orke
rs u
nder
50
and
€68
0.62
for 5
0+.
Red
ucti
on o
f wor
king
tim
e by
a fi
fth:
€13
6.12
for u
nder
50
and
€27
2.25
for 5
0+. T
emp
orar
y b
reak
of w
ork
(fou
rm
onth
s): €
802.
52
All m
ale
emp
loye
es. U
nem
plo
yed
and
self-
emp
loye
d fa
ther
s ar
e no
t elig
ible
.Ri
jksd
iens
t Voo
r Arb
eids
voor
zien
ing/
Offi
ceNa
tiona
l de
l’Em
ploi
.(2
a) N
o d
ata.
(2b)
Yea
rly
aver
age
of fa
ther
s on
pai
dp
aren
tal l
eave
.
Bu
lga
ria
Otp
usk
po b
asht
inst
vo(3
a),
Ma
tern
ity
ben
efit
(a
fter
th
e ch
ild
is s
ix m
on
ths
old
) (3
b)
an
d C
hil
dca
re le
ave
up
to
tw
o y
ears
old
(3
c)
(3a)
Otp
usk
po b
asht
inst
vo(p
ater
nity
leav
e): i
n ad
dit
ion,
the
fath
er o
f a n
ewbo
rn c
hild
acq
uire
s th
e ri
ght t
o us
e 15
cale
ndar
day
s of
leav
e im
med
iate
ly a
fter
the
del
iver
y of
the
baby
from
the
hosp
ital
.
(3b)
Mat
erni
ty le
ave
is 4
10 c
alen
dar
day
s, o
f whi
ch 4
5ob
ligat
ory
day
s sh
ould
be
take
n be
fore
the
child
’s b
irth
.Th
e fa
ther
cou
ld u
se th
e re
mai
nder
of 4
10 d
ays
par
enta
lle
ave
inst
ead
of t
he m
othe
r (w
ith
the
cons
ent o
f the
mot
her)
aft
er th
e ch
ild is
old
er th
an s
ix m
onth
s.C
omp
ensa
tion
at 9
0% o
f the
ave
rage
gro
ss s
alar
y.
(3c)
Otp
usk
za o
tgle
gdan
e na
det
e do
2 g
odis
hna
vazr
ast –
afte
r the
chi
ld is
one
yea
r old
– u
ntil
the
child
is tw
o ye
ars
old
. Lea
ve fo
r chi
ldre
n up
to tw
o ye
ars
old
(tw
o ye
ars
and
six
mon
ths
for e
very
ad
dit
iona
l chi
ld).
It c
an b
etr
ansf
erre
d to
the
fath
er, g
rand
mot
her o
r gra
ndfa
ther
.Fl
at ra
te: 2
015–
2017
fixe
d a
t BG
N 3
40 (€
174)
.
For a
ll le
ave:
pai
d s
ocia
l ins
uran
ce fo
rat
leas
t 12
mon
ths.
The
only
bod
y ca
ptu
ring
dat
a on
pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal l
eave
by
fath
ers
inB
ulga
ria
is th
e N
atio
nal S
ocia
l Sec
urit
yIn
stit
ute
(NSS
I). N
SSI i
s re
spon
sibl
e fo
rp
aym
ent o
f ben
efit
s fo
r chi
ldbi
rth
and
mat
erni
ty/p
ater
nity
leav
e. N
SSI c
aptu
res
only
pai
d e
pis
odes
of a
ll el
igib
le fa
ther
s fo
ral
l typ
es o
f pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal l
eave
.
NSS
I cap
ture
s on
ly p
aid
ep
isod
es o
f all
elig
ible
fath
ers
for a
ll ty
pes
of
pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal l
eave
. NSS
I pub
lishe
sq
uart
erly
and
ann
ual d
ata
on s
hort
-ter
mca
sh b
enef
its.
Dat
a re
late
to th
e nu
mbe
r of
bene
fits
for e
ach
mon
th, i
nclu
din
gp
regn
ancy
and
bir
th a
ndp
ater
nity
/par
enta
l lea
ve. T
he d
ata
here
incl
ude
all t
ypes
of l
eave
(3a–
c).
Table A1: Background information on fathers’ uptake data
31
Annexes
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Cze
ch R
epu
bli
cO
tcov
ská
dovo
lená
an
d D
ávka
otc
ovsk
é po
poro
dní p
éče
(all
ow
an
ce)
(5a
)
Rodi
čovs
ká d
ovol
ená
(lea
ve)
an
d R
odič
ovsk
ý př
íspě
vek
(all
ow
an
ce)
(5b
)
(5a)
New
ly in
trod
uced
pat
erni
ty le
ave
and
allo
wan
ce: n
o d
ata.
(5b)
Rod
ičov
ská
dov
olen
á (l
eave
) and
Rod
ičov
ský
pří
spěv
ek(a
llow
ance
).
Par
enta
l allo
wan
ce u
p to
chi
ld’s
four
th b
irth
day
. Par
enta
lal
low
ance
is p
aid
to a
par
ent u
ntil
the
youn
gest
chi
ld in
the
fam
ily is
four
yea
rs o
ld, u
p to
a m
axim
um a
mou
nt o
f CZK
220
,000
(€8,
524)
. 70%
of t
he c
laim
ant’
s re
duc
ed d
aily
refe
renc
e am
ount
.
Par
enta
l lea
ve a
pp
lies
to th
e m
othe
r of t
hech
ild (a
fter
the
end
of h
er m
ater
nity
leav
e)an
d to
the
fath
er (f
rom
the
child
’s b
irth
). Th
eyca
n ap
ply
for p
aren
tal l
eave
from
thei
rem
plo
yer u
ntil
the
child
is th
ree
year
s ol
d.
The
par
enta
l allo
wan
ce c
an b
e ta
ken
unti
l the
child
is fo
ur y
ears
old
. The
figu
re g
oes
beyo
ndth
ose
on p
aren
tal l
eave
.
The
Min
istr
y of
Lab
our a
nd S
ocia
l Aff
airs
(MoL
SA)
mai
ntai
ns s
tati
stic
s on
reci
pie
nts
of th
e p
aren
tal
allo
wan
ce; t
he s
ourc
e of
the
dat
a co
nsis
ts o
fre
por
ts c
omp
iled
by
labo
ur o
ffic
es a
s th
ein
stit
utio
ns re
spon
sibl
e fo
r the
pay
men
t of s
tate
soci
al s
upp
ort b
enef
its.
The
dat
a is
ava
ilabl
e on
the
MoL
SA w
eb p
ages
(htt
ps:
//w
ww
.mp
sv.c
z/cs
/105
43).
(5a)
No
dat
a.
(5b)
Ave
rage
mon
thly
num
ber o
f par
enta
lal
low
ance
reci
pie
nts.
The
num
ber o
f par
enta
lbe
nefit
allo
wan
ce re
cip
ient
s d
oes
not c
orre
spon
dto
the
num
ber o
f par
ents
on
par
enta
l lea
ve, a
sp
aren
ts w
ho a
re s
elf-
emp
loye
d, n
ot in
the
labo
urfo
rce,
or u
nem
plo
yed
, etc
. nex
t to
wor
king
par
ents
can
also
be
incl
uded
.
Ger
ma
ny
Elte
rnge
ld(6
a)
an
d E
ltern
geld
Plus
(6b
)
(6a)
Par
enta
l lea
ve is
ava
ilab
le fo
r a m
axim
um o
f thr
ee y
ears
.Fr
om J
uly
2015
, par
enta
l lea
ve c
an b
e ta
ken
in th
ree
bloc
ksw
itho
ut th
e em
plo
yer’
s co
nsen
t: tw
o bl
ocks
may
lie
betw
een
the
thir
d a
nd e
ight
h ye
ar o
f a c
hild
’s li
fe a
nd la
st u
p to
two
year
sre
spec
tive
ly (p
revi
ousl
y on
ly 1
2 m
onth
s). T
he e
mp
loye
r may
refu
se th
e cl
aim
of a
thir
d b
lock
of p
aren
tal l
eave
bet
wee
n th
eth
ird
and
eig
hth
year
of l
ife o
nly
for u
rgen
t op
erat
iona
l rea
sons
.P
aren
tal l
eave
allo
wan
ce is
pai
d fo
r 14
mon
ths
(if fa
ther
s ch
oose
to ta
ke tw
o m
onth
s of
par
enta
l lea
ve).
A se
par
ate
pat
erni
ty le
ave
regu
lati
on is
not
in p
lace
.
(6b)
A n
ew o
pti
on a
s of
201
5 in
whi
ch p
aren
ts c
an c
laim
ben
efit
sw
hen
red
ucin
g th
eir w
orki
ng h
ours
. No
dat
a in
this
rep
ort.
All p
aren
ts, e
mp
loye
d, u
nem
plo
yed
and
sel
f-em
plo
yed
, stu
den
ts.
Fed
eral
Sta
tist
ical
Off
ice
(des
tatis
) mon
itor
s th
eup
take
of t
he s
chem
es E
lter
ngel
d a
ndEl
tern
geld
Plu
s la
id d
own
in th
e fe
der
al A
ct o
np
aren
tal l
eave
allo
wan
ces
and
par
enta
l lea
ve(B
unde
selte
rnge
ld-u
nd E
ltern
zeitg
eset
z, B
EEG
),20
07; l
ates
t rev
isio
n re
gard
ing
the
new
Elte
rnge
ldPl
usan
d p
artn
ersh
ip b
onus
sch
eme
in20
15).
The
dat
abas
e is
the
par
enta
l lea
veal
low
ance
s p
er c
hild
(Bez
ugss
tatis
tik) r
egis
tere
dby
the
auth
orit
ies
at th
e en
d o
f the
dur
atio
n of
the
allo
wan
ce s
chem
e.
All p
aren
ts w
ho re
ceiv
ed th
e El
tern
geld
bene
fit.
No
dat
a on
Elte
rnge
ldPl
us.
Den
ma
rkFæ
dreo
rlov
(7a
) a
nd
For
æld
reor
lov
(7b
) –
bo
th a
s p
art
of
Bars
elso
rlov
(7a)
Fir
st tw
o w
eeks
aft
er b
irth
are
ear
mar
ked
for m
en.
(7b)
In D
enm
ark
the
emp
loye
d a
nd s
ecur
ed u
nem
plo
yed
par
ents
of a
chi
ld h
ave
a ri
ght t
o re
ceiv
e p
aren
tal l
eave
ben
efit
s fr
om4
wee
ks b
efor
e th
e (e
xpec
ted
) bir
th o
f a c
hild
unt
il 46
wee
ks a
fter
the
child
is b
orn.
The
4 w
eeks
bef
ore
birt
h an
d 1
4 w
eeks
aft
er th
eb
irth
are
exc
lusi
vely
for t
he m
othe
r.
Afte
r the
14
wee
ks, t
he p
aren
ts h
ave
32 w
eeks
to s
hare
bet
wee
nth
em. W
heth
er it
is p
aid
by
the
emp
loye
r or b
y p
aren
tal b
enef
its
is d
ecid
ed th
roug
h th
e p
aren
ts’ c
ontr
actu
al te
rms
wit
h th
eem
plo
yer.
Mos
t bus
ines
ses
pay
full
wag
es in
par
ts o
f par
enta
l lea
ve, i
nw
hich
cas
e th
e su
bsid
iari
es g
o to
the
bus
ines
s. A
fter
the
14w
eeks
, the
em
plo
yer p
ays
a fu
rthe
r 11
wee
ks’ l
eave
, wit
h b
oth
par
ents
hav
ing
the
righ
t to
4 w
eeks
eac
h. T
he re
mai
ning
thre
ew
eeks
’ lea
ve c
an b
e ta
ken
by
eith
er th
e m
othe
r or t
he fa
ther
. The
par
t of t
he 1
1 w
eeks
’ lea
ve g
rant
ed to
eac
h of
the
par
ents
can
not
be
trad
ed b
etw
een
them
and
, if n
ot ta
ken,
the
pay
men
t is
canc
elle
d.
Emp
loye
d, s
elf-
emp
loye
d a
nd s
ecur
edun
emp
loye
d.
The
mai
n d
ata
sour
ce fo
r the
up
take
of p
ater
nity
and
par
enta
l lea
ve is
Sta
tist
ic D
enm
ark’
s re
gist
er.
The
regi
ster
con
tain
s in
form
atio
n on
all
emp
loye
dan
d s
ecur
ed u
nem
plo
yed
par
ents
. The
leav
e ca
nbe
frag
men
ted
or t
aken
all
at o
nce.
The
regi
ster
is b
ased
on
the
subs
idia
ry s
yste
m. I
tth
eref
ore
cove
rs a
ll em
plo
yed
par
ents
in a
ll ki
nds
of jo
bs a
nd s
ecto
rs w
ho to
ok a
t lea
st o
ne d
ay o
fp
aid
par
enta
l lea
ve.
In th
eory
, a c
omp
any
can
fail
to re
gist
er fo
rp
aren
tal l
eave
ben
efit
s, b
ut th
at w
ould
be
high
lyun
likel
y si
nce
the
busi
ness
then
will
fail
the
subs
idia
ries
. The
re a
re a
lso
stat
isti
cs o
n p
aren
tsou
tsid
e th
e la
bour
mar
ket,
but
tech
nica
lly th
eyar
e no
t tak
ing
par
enta
l lea
ve; t
hey
sim
ply
sta
yin
the
soci
al b
enef
it s
yste
m th
ey a
re a
lrea
dy
ap
art o
f.
Bot
h se
ries
for (
7a) a
nd (7
b) o
nly
cont
ain
men
that
are
emp
loye
d o
r sel
f-em
plo
yed
.
32
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Est
on
iaP
ate
rnit
y b
enef
it (
8a
) a
nd
Pa
ren
tal b
enef
it (
8b
)
Cur
rent
ly, t
here
are
two
diff
eren
t typ
es o
f lea
ve a
vaila
ble
for
fath
ers:
(8a)
‘Pat
erni
ty le
ave’
is a
vaila
ble
for w
orki
ng fa
ther
s. It
com
pri
ses
10 w
orki
ng d
ays,
pai
d in
the
amou
nt o
f the
fath
er’s
ave
rage
wag
ean
d it
can
be
take
n d
urin
g a
per
iod
of t
wo
mon
ths
pri
or to
the
birt
h d
ate
or tw
o m
onth
s af
ter t
he b
irth
.
(8b
) ‘P
aren
tal l
eave
’ can
be
used
by
eith
er th
e m
othe
r or f
athe
r. It
can
be
take
n up
to 3
yea
rs, a
nd is
pai
d u
p to
18
mon
ths.
Par
ents
can
shar
e th
e le
ave,
but
can
not s
tay
on th
e le
ave
toge
ther
(for
exam
ple
, mot
her t
akes
a y
ear a
nd th
en fa
ther
take
s re
mai
ning
six
mon
ths,
etc
). H
owev
er, t
he p
aren
tal l
eave
is m
ostl
y us
ed b
ym
othe
rs o
nly.
(8a)
Wor
king
fath
ers.
(8b)
All
par
ents
are
elig
ible
, irr
esp
ecti
ve o
fth
eir e
mp
loym
ent s
tatu
s.
Sour
ce: E
ston
ian
Nat
iona
l Soc
ial I
nsur
ance
Boa
rd,
nati
onal
soc
ial i
nsur
ance
sta
tist
ics
(8a)
Wor
king
fath
ers
who
rece
ived
the
pat
erni
tybe
nefit
.
(8b)
Wor
king
fath
ers
and
mot
hers
who
rece
ived
the
par
enta
l ben
efit
– to
tal,
all t
ypes
of
com
pen
sati
on ra
tes.
(8b-
100)
Rec
ipie
nts
of th
e p
aren
tal b
enef
it a
t10
0% o
f inc
ome.
(8b-
max
) Rec
ipie
nts
of th
e p
aren
tal b
enef
it w
ith
the
high
est r
ate
of c
omp
ensa
tion
.
(8b-
min
) Rec
ipie
nts
of th
e p
aren
tal b
enef
it w
ith
the
low
rate
of c
omp
ensa
tion
, eq
ual t
o th
est
atut
ory
min
imum
wag
e.
Sp
ain
Pres
taci
on d
e pa
tern
idad
(9a
) a
nd
Pre
stac
ione
s por
mat
erni
dad
(9b
)
(9a)
As
of 1
Jan
uary
201
7, fo
ur u
nint
erru
pte
d w
eeks
, as
ind
ivid
ual
righ
t for
the
fath
er, t
o b
e ta
ken
any
tim
e d
urin
g th
e m
ater
nity
leav
e.
(9b)
In S
pai
n, m
ater
nity
leav
e gi
ves
mot
hers
the
righ
t to
take
six
wee
ks o
f pai
d le
ave
afte
r the
bir
th p
lus
10 w
eeks
that
can
be
shar
ed b
etw
een
the
mot
her a
nd fa
ther
. The
se 1
0 w
eeks
can
be
take
n fu
ll ti
me
or p
art t
ime.
(9a)
Pat
erni
ty le
ave
is fo
r all
emp
loye
dfa
ther
s, a
nd s
elf-
emp
loye
d (L
eave
Rev
iew
2017
).
(9b
) Em
plo
yed
(inc
lud
ing
self-
emp
loye
d).
Soci
al S
ecur
ity
(Seg
urid
ad S
ocia
l).(9
a) F
athe
rs re
ceiv
ing
pat
erni
ty le
ave
allo
wan
ce.
(9b)
Fat
hers
rece
ivin
g m
ater
nity
leav
e al
low
ance
.
Fin
lan
dP
ate
rnit
y le
ave
– Is
yysv
apaa
/fade
rska
psle
digh
et(1
0a
) a
nd
Pa
ren
tal l
eave
– V
anhe
mpa
inva
paa/
förä
ldra
ledi
ghet
(10
b)
Fam
ily le
ave
in F
inla
nd is
bas
ed o
n th
e Em
plo
ymen
t Con
trac
tsAc
t. T
he fa
mily
leav
e sy
stem
con
sist
s of
the
mat
erni
ty le
ave,
the
pat
erni
ty le
ave
and
the
par
enta
l lea
ve. F
athe
rs a
re e
ntit
led
to a
9-
wee
k-lo
ng p
ater
nity
leav
e (5
4 w
orki
ng d
ays)
, to
be
take
n b
efor
eth
e ch
ild tu
rns
2. T
hree
wee
ks o
f the
se c
an b
e us
ed a
t the
sam
eti
me
as th
e m
ater
nity
leav
e, w
hich
last
s 10
5 w
orki
ng d
ays
(div
ided
into
a p
rena
tal l
eave
of 3
0–50
wor
king
day
s an
d a
pos
t-na
tal l
eave
of 5
5–75
wor
king
day
s). I
n ad
dit
ion,
the
par
enta
lal
low
ance
, tha
t las
ts u
p to
158
wor
king
day
s af
ter t
he m
ater
nity
leav
e ha
s en
ded
, can
be
take
n b
y ei
ther
the
mot
her o
r the
fath
eror
be
div
ided
bet
wee
n th
em a
ccor
din
g to
wha
t the
par
ents
dec
ide.
Uni
vers
al, n
ot re
late
d to
em
plo
ymen
t.
In F
inla
nd, T
he S
ocia
l Ins
uran
ce In
stit
utio
n of
Finl
and
(Kel
a), i
s th
e p
ublic
aut
hori
ty re
spon
sibl
efo
r fam
ily e
ntit
lem
ents
.
The
dat
a in
clud
es a
ll su
b-p
erio
ds
of p
aren
tal l
eave
for w
hich
par
enta
l allo
wan
ce c
an b
e d
raw
n, th
atis
: mat
erni
ty le
ave
(äiti
ysva
paa)
, pat
erni
ty le
ave
(isyy
svap
aa) a
nd p
aren
tal l
eave
(van
hem
pain
vapa
a) (1
0a, b
).
Fra
nce
Cong
é d’
accu
eil à
l’en
fant
(11
a)
an
d P
rest
atio
n pa
rtag
ée d
’édu
catio
n de
l’en
fant
/Pre
Pa
rE (
11
b)
(11a
) For
a s
ingl
e ch
ild, f
athe
rs m
ay ta
ke 1
1 co
nsec
utiv
e d
ays
afte
r the
bir
th o
f a c
hild
, inc
lud
ing
Satu
rday
s, S
und
ays
and
pub
licho
liday
s. F
or m
ore
than
1 c
hild
, the
leav
e co
nsis
ts o
f a m
axim
umof
18
day
s. In
ad
dit
ion,
the
Fren
ch L
abou
r Cod
e gr
ants
thre
e d
ays
of le
ave.
(11b
) In
add
itio
n to
pat
erni
ty le
ave,
on
the
arri
val o
f a c
hild
, afa
ther
who
has
at l
east
one
yea
r of s
enio
rity
in th
e co
mp
any
can
bene
fit, l
ike
the
mot
her,
from
a p
aren
tal l
eave
of e
duc
atio
n. T
his
leav
e al
low
s hi
m to
inte
rrup
t his
pro
fess
iona
l act
ivit
y fo
r thr
eeye
ars
whi
le re
tain
ing
his
emp
loym
ent c
ontr
act.
Thi
s le
ave
isun
pai
d. H
owev
er, t
he p
aren
t may
ob
tain
an
allo
wan
ce.
(11a
) Em
plo
yed
, sel
f-em
plo
yed
, une
mp
loye
d.
(11b
) A lu
mp
sum
allo
wan
ce is
pai
d to
par
ents
of c
hild
ren
und
er th
ree
who
are
not
wor
king
or w
ho w
ork
par
t tim
e. T
he a
mou
ntis
€39
6.01
for s
omeo
ne e
mp
loye
d fu
ll ti
me;
€256
.01
for s
omeo
ne e
mp
loye
d p
art t
ime
and
€147
.48
for s
omeo
ne e
mp
loye
d p
art t
ime
(bet
wee
n 50
% a
nd 8
0% o
f a fu
ll-ti
me
job)
.To
rece
ive
it, t
he p
aren
t mus
t hav
e at
leas
tei
ght-
qua
rter
s of
old
-age
pen
sion
cont
ribu
tion
s va
lidat
ed fo
r a p
rofe
ssio
nal
acti
vity
, dur
ing
a p
erio
d th
at v
arie
s ac
cord
ing
to th
e nu
mbe
r of c
hild
ren.
(11a
) Pai
d p
ater
nity
leav
e al
low
ance
is p
aid
by
com
pul
sory
soc
ial s
ecur
ity.
The
mai
n so
urce
that
pro
vid
es a
n an
alys
is o
f the
dat
a is
sued
from
the
diff
eren
t soc
ial s
ecur
ity
regi
mes
is th
e M
GD
stu
dy
of th
e st
atis
tic
serv
ices
of t
he M
inis
try
of S
ocia
lAf
fair
s (D
REE
S) la
unch
ed e
very
five
yea
rs s
ince
2002
(Enq
uete
Mod
es d
e ga
rde
et d
’acc
ueil
des
jeun
es).
How
ever
, onl
y th
e la
st o
ne, l
aunc
hed
in20
13, c
olle
cts
for t
he fi
rst t
ime
elig
ibili
ty a
ndfa
ther
s' u
se o
f pat
erni
ty le
ave
follo
win
g th
e bi
rth
of th
eir y
oung
est c
hild
.
(11a
) Num
ber o
f fam
ilies
who
rece
ived
the
bene
fit.
Onl
y p
aid
ep
isod
es. A
ll el
igib
le fa
ther
s (i.
e.em
plo
yed
, sel
f-em
plo
yed
). Th
e 11
-day
s p
ater
nity
leav
e in
trod
uced
in 2
002
+ th
e 3
day
s of
f pro
vid
edby
the
Labo
ur C
ode
that
can
be
take
n ad
dit
iona
llyto
the
11 d
ays
of th
e p
ater
nity
leav
e. A
ll ep
isod
esof
pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal l
eave
– fr
agm
ente
d o
r not
.D
ata
on th
e p
ater
nity
leav
e an
d o
n th
e p
ater
nity
day
-off
pro
vid
ed b
y th
e La
bour
Cod
e.
(11b
) No
dat
a.
33
Annexes
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Cro
ati
aM
ate
rna
l lea
ve d
ays
sh
are
d w
ith
fa
ther
– R
odilj
ni d
opus
t(1
3a
) a
nd
Pa
ren
tal l
eave
aft
er t
he
chil
d r
each
ed s
ix m
on
ths
– Ro
dite
ljski
dop
ust–
(1
3b
)
Cro
atia
n le
gisl
atio
n d
isti
ngui
shes
bet
wee
n ‘m
ater
nity
’ lea
ve(r
odilj
ni d
opus
t) a
nd ‘p
aren
tal’
leav
e (r
odite
ljski
dop
ust)
. The
re is
no s
tatu
tory
pat
erni
ty le
ave.
The
max
imum
per
iod
of l
eave
inC
roat
ia is
12
or 1
4 m
onth
s fo
r the
firs
t and
the
seco
nd c
hild
,d
epen
din
g on
whe
ther
and
how
a m
othe
r and
fath
er s
hare
the
leav
e. M
ater
nity
leav
e la
sts
unti
l the
bab
y is
six
mon
ths
old
. The
first
70
day
s fo
llow
ing
the
birt
h ca
n, o
ne a
t a ti
me,
be
used
onl
yb
y th
e m
othe
r, w
here
as th
e re
mai
ning
per
iod
of m
ater
nity
leav
eis
usu
ally
use
d b
y th
e m
othe
r, b
ut th
e fa
ther
can
use
it in
stea
d, i
fth
e m
othe
r agr
ees.
Whi
le p
aren
tal l
eave
is a
per
sona
l rig
ht o
f bot
h pa
rent
s, o
ne p
aren
tca
n tr
ansf
er tw
o m
onth
s of
thei
r ent
itle
men
t to
the
othe
r if t
hey
are
both
em
ploy
ed a
nd if
bot
h pa
rent
s gi
ve w
ritt
en c
onse
nt.
Par
ents
can
use
thei
r ent
itle
men
t at t
he s
ame
tim
e or
cons
ecut
ivel
y. L
eave
can
be
take
n in
the
follo
win
g w
ays:
a) f
ully
(in
one
peri
od);
b) p
arti
ally
(no
mor
e th
an tw
o ti
mes
per
yea
r, e
ach
tim
e fo
r no
less
than
30
days
); c)
par
t tim
e (d
urat
ion
is d
oubl
edan
d co
mpe
nsat
ion
is 5
0% o
f the
com
pens
atio
n fo
r ful
l-tim
e le
ave)
.Le
ave
can
be ta
ken
unti
l the
chi
ld tu
rns
eigh
t yea
rs o
ld.
Bot
h (1
3a) a
nd (1
3b) E
mp
loye
d a
nd s
elf-
emp
loye
d p
aren
ts.
Bot
h (1
3a) a
nd (1
3b) T
he C
roat
ian
Hea
lth
Insu
ranc
e Fu
nd is
resp
onsi
ble
for t
he d
ata
colle
ctio
n of
the
mot
hers
and
fath
ers
that
use
dp
aid
mat
erni
ty le
ave
(rod
iljni
dop
ust)
and
pai
dp
aren
tal l
eave
(rod
iteljs
ki d
opus
t) d
urin
g th
e ye
ar.
Thes
e d
ata
are
not p
ublis
hed
by
the
Cro
atia
nH
ealt
h In
sura
nce
Fund
but
are
ava
ilabl
e at
Yea
rly
Rep
ort b
y th
e G
end
er E
qua
lity
Om
bud
sper
son.
Not
ava
ilabl
e.
Hu
ng
ary
GYE
T (
chil
d-r
eari
ng
su
pp
ort
) (1
4b
) a
nd
GYE
S (
chil
dca
re a
llo
wa
nce
) (1
4c)
GYE
T (1
4b)
Par
enta
l lea
ve in
Hun
gary
is a
fam
ily e
ntit
lem
ent,
so
par
ents
can
choo
se w
heth
er th
e fa
ther
or t
he m
othe
r will
sta
y w
ith
the
child
,al
thou
gh u
sual
ly it
is th
e la
tter
. Par
enta
l lea
ve fo
r ins
ured
par
ents
: a) A
fter
the
mat
erni
ty le
ave,
unt
il th
e ch
ild’s
sec
ond
bir
thd
ay; b
) Aft
er th
e se
cond
bir
thd
ay o
f the
chi
ld u
ntil
his/
her
thir
d b
irth
day
(non
-man
dat
ory)
.
(14c
) GYE
S is
‘a fl
at-r
ate
bene
fit e
qua
l to
the
amou
nt o
f the
min
imum
old
-age
pen
sion
’ (€9
1 in
201
8). F
or m
ulti
ple
bir
ths,
200%
of t
his
amou
nt is
pai
d in
the
case
of t
wo
child
ren,
300
% fo
rth
ree
child
ren,
wit
h si
mila
r inc
reas
es fo
r ‘ad
dit
iona
l chi
ldre
n’.
GYE
T (1
4b) A
ll p
aren
ts (i
nsur
ed a
ndun
insu
red
), it
is fo
r fam
ilies
wit
h th
ree
orm
ore
child
ren
(the
you
nges
t chi
ld s
houl
d b
eb
etw
een
thre
e an
d e
ight
yea
rs o
ld).
GYE
S (1
4c) A
ll p
aren
ts (i
nsur
ed a
ndun
insu
red
), un
til t
he c
hild
’s th
ird
bir
thd
ay.
The
Hun
gari
an S
tate
Tre
asur
y ha
s d
ata.
(14b
) Num
ber o
f GYE
T be
nefic
iari
es, p
erso
ns,
2013
–201
7.
(14c
) Mon
thly
ave
rage
num
ber o
f GYE
Sbe
nefic
iari
es a
ccor
din
g to
gen
der
, per
1,0
00.
Ita
lyCo
nged
o di
pat
erni
tà–
Ma
nd
ato
ry p
ate
rnit
y le
ave
da
ys –
(1
6a
) a
nd
Vo
lun
tary
pa
tern
ity
lea
ve d
ays
(1
6b
) a
nd
Con
gedo
par
enta
le(1
6c)
The
pat
erni
ty le
ave
can
be
man
dat
ory
and
vol
unta
ry. D
ata
isp
rovi
ded
on
the
num
ber
of b
enef
icia
ries
of t
he tw
o ty
pes
of
leav
e. F
or 2
016
and
201
7, th
e m
and
ator
y p
ater
nity
leav
e w
asin
crea
sed
to tw
o d
ays,
whe
reas
for 2
018
it h
as b
een
furt
her
augm
ente
d to
four
day
s. T
he p
ater
nity
leav
e w
as in
trod
uced
inIt
aly
for p
riva
te s
ecto
r em
plo
yees
on
an e
xper
imen
tal b
asis
by
law
92/
2012
(Art
. 4.2
424.
4) fo
r the
yea
rs 2
013–
2015
and
it h
asbe
en e
xten
ded
ther
eaft
er tw
ice,
in 2
015
for 2
016,
and
in 2
016
for
2017
and
201
8. T
he o
rigi
nal m
easu
re p
rovi
ded
for o
ne d
ay o
fm
and
ator
y le
ave
and
two
day
s of
vol
unta
ry le
ave.
Bot
h th
e m
and
ator
y an
d th
e vo
lunt
ary
pat
erni
ty le
ave
mus
t be
take
n w
ithi
n th
e fif
th m
onth
from
the
child
’s b
irth
. The
vol
unta
ryle
ave
rem
aine
d s
et a
t tw
o d
ays
in 2
016,
it w
as s
usp
end
ed in
201
7an
d it
has
bee
n re
intr
oduc
ed a
s on
e d
ay in
201
8. T
he v
olun
tary
pat
erni
ty le
ave
can
be
take
n as
an
alte
rnat
ive
and
in re
pla
cem
ent
of th
e m
and
ator
y m
ater
nity
leav
e.
(16c
) Par
enta
l lea
ve is
onl
y vo
lunt
ary.
6 m
onth
s p
er p
aren
t –in
div
idua
l and
non
-tra
nsfe
rabl
e, m
ax. 1
0 m
onth
s, w
here
by it
can
be e
xten
ded
to 1
1 m
onth
s w
hen
shar
ed a
nd w
hen
the
fath
erta
kes
at le
ast 3
mon
ths.
30%
of b
asic
rem
uner
atio
n up
to th
ech
ildre
n’s
age
of s
ix y
ears
, unp
aid
aft
erw
ard
s.
(16a
, b) A
ll em
plo
yees
and
sel
f-em
plo
yed
wor
kers
(Fro
m 2
017
Leav
e R
evie
w).
(16c
) All
emp
loye
d p
aren
ts, e
xcep
t dom
esti
cw
orke
rs a
nd h
ome
help
s. S
elf-
emp
loye
dw
orke
rs a
re g
ener
ally
ent
itle
d to
thre
em
onth
s, w
hich
can
be
take
n on
ly d
urin
g th
efir
st y
ear a
fter
the
child
’s b
irth
(fro
m 2
017
Leav
e R
evie
w).
The
sour
ce fo
r dat
a on
par
enta
l lea
ve is
the
Nat
iona
l Ins
titu
te o
f Soc
ial S
ecur
ity
(Inp
s). I
n th
ed
atab
ase
and
sta
tist
ics
sect
ion
ther
e is
ad
edic
ated
obs
erva
tory
on
fam
ily s
upp
ort
mea
sure
s (O
sser
vato
rio su
lle p
rest
azio
ni a
sost
egno
del
la fa
mig
lia).
Onl
y p
riva
te s
ecto
r em
plo
yees
.
(16c
) Dat
a on
par
enta
l lea
ve is
ava
ilabl
e in
thre
ese
par
ate
dat
aset
s co
veri
ng p
riva
te s
ecto
rem
plo
yees
(inc
lud
ing
agri
cult
ure)
, sel
f-em
plo
yed
wor
kers
and
sem
i-au
tono
mou
s w
orke
rsre
spec
tive
ly, w
hich
cor
resp
ond
s to
thre
e d
iffer
ent
sche
mes
. Dat
a ar
e p
rovi
ded
per
typ
e of
emp
loym
ent c
ontr
act (
open
-end
ed, f
ixed
-ter
m,
seas
onal
). P
aren
tal l
eave
(201
2–20
16).
Num
ber o
f mal
e be
nefic
iari
es b
y em
plo
ymen
tco
ntra
ct (p
riva
te s
ecto
r em
plo
yees
), ag
e an
d jo
bcl
assi
ficat
ion.
34
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Lith
ua
nia
Tėvy
stės
ato
stog
os (1
7a
) –
Pa
tern
ity
lea
ve a
nd
Vai
ko p
rieži
ūros
ato
stog
os(1
7b
) –
Pa
ren
tal l
eave
(17a
) Ave
rage
dur
atio
n of
pat
erni
ty le
ave
in L
ithu
ania
is 3
0 d
ays
sinc
e p
ater
nity
leav
e is
gra
nted
to in
sure
d m
en fr
om th
e d
ay o
fbi
rth
of th
e ch
ild u
ntil
the
child
reac
hes
1 m
onth
old
.
(17b
) Par
enta
l lea
ve is
gra
nted
unt
il th
e ch
ild re
ache
s th
ree
year
sol
d. A
mat
erni
ty (p
ater
nity
) allo
wan
ce is
pai
d fo
r the
per
iod
of a
child
care
leav
e af
ter t
he e
nd o
f a m
ater
nity
leav
e un
til t
he c
hild
ison
e or
two
year
s ol
d. P
aren
ts c
an c
hoos
e be
twee
n tw
o op
tion
s of
leng
th a
nd b
enef
it.
Fath
ers
who
hav
e at
leas
t 12
mon
ths
of s
ocia
lin
sura
nce
dur
ing
the
last
24
mon
ths.
Sam
e-se
x co
uple
s ar
e no
t elig
ible
(fro
m L
eave
Rev
iew
.)
In L
ithu
ania
, dat
a re
late
d to
pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal
leav
e ar
e co
llect
ed a
nd p
ublis
hed
by
two
mai
nbo
die
s: th
e St
ate
Soci
al In
sura
nce
Fund
Boa
rdun
der
the
Min
istr
y of
Soc
ial S
ecur
ity
and
Lab
our
(Sod
ra) a
nd th
e Li
thua
nian
Sta
tist
ics
Dep
artm
ent
(LSD
). H
owev
er, b
oth
of th
em (S
odra
and
LSD
)p
ublis
h ba
sica
lly th
e sa
me
dat
a. L
SD re
ceiv
esag
greg
ate
dat
a fr
om S
odra
and
then
pub
lishe
sth
em in
the
LSD
’s d
atab
ase.
Dat
a co
vers
onl
y th
ose
par
ents
who
take
pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal l
eave
in L
ithu
ania
. The
dat
aca
ptu
re a
ll p
aren
ts in
diff
eren
t for
ms
ofem
plo
ymen
t (em
plo
yed
, sel
f-em
plo
yed
, etc
.), i.
e.al
l tho
se e
ligib
le fo
r the
ben
efit
s. O
nly
the
pai
dp
art o
f lea
ve e
pis
odes
is c
over
ed. (
17a)
– L
SD d
ata:
annu
al a
vera
ge o
f pat
erni
ty b
enef
it re
cip
ient
s.(1
7b) S
odra
dat
a: n
umbe
r of p
aren
tal l
eave
ben
efit
reci
pie
nts
by g
end
er –
Men
.
Luxe
mb
ou
rgP
are
nta
l lea
ve –
Co
ng
é p
are
nta
le (
18
b)
The
par
ent c
an re
que
st e
ithe
r the
‘fir
st p
aren
tal l
eave
’, w
hich
mus
t be
take
n im
med
iate
ly a
fter
the
mat
erni
ty o
r ad
opti
onle
ave,
or t
he ‘s
econ
d p
aren
tal l
eave
’, w
hich
mus
t be
take
n b
efor
eth
e ch
ild's
6th
bir
thd
ay (o
r 12t
h b
irth
day
for a
dop
ted
chi
ldre
n).
Par
enta
l lea
ve is
onl
y gr
ante
d o
nce
per
chi
ld. I
f one
of t
hep
aren
ts w
aive
s th
eir r
ight
to p
aren
tal l
eave
, the
leav
e ca
nnot
be
tran
sfer
red
to th
eir s
pou
se to
allo
w th
e la
tter
to ta
ke tw
o p
erio
ds
of p
aren
tal l
eave
.
Affil
iate
d to
the
Luxe
mbo
urg
soci
al s
ecur
ity
syst
em a
nd in
uni
nter
rup
ted
em
plo
ymen
t for
at le
ast 1
2 m
onth
s; w
orki
ng fo
r a m
inim
um o
f10
hou
rs a
wee
k (b
ased
on
Leav
e R
evie
wne
twor
k).
Sour
ced
from
the
Luxe
mbo
urg
Min
istr
y of
Fam
ily,
Inte
grat
ion
and
Gre
ater
Reg
ion.
Ad
min
istr
ativ
ed
ata
from
soc
ial s
ecur
ity
regi
ster
s p
rovi
ded
by
the
Gen
eral
Insp
ecto
rate
of S
ocia
l Sec
urit
y (I
GSS
).D
urin
g p
aren
tal l
eave
, the
par
ent i
s en
titl
ed to
an
allo
wan
ce p
aid
by
the
Cais
se p
our l
’ave
nir d
esen
fant
s(C
AE) (
Chi
ldre
n’s
Futu
re F
und
) as
are
pla
cem
ent i
ncom
e.
The
sour
ces
cap
ture
ep
isod
es o
f pai
d a
nd u
npai
dle
ave,
the
elig
ible
fath
ers,
the
diff
eren
t typ
es o
fle
ave
and
the
leav
e of
fath
ers
in d
iffer
ent s
ecto
rs.
Dat
a re
fer t
o nu
mbe
r of f
athe
rs o
n p
aren
tal l
eave
per
yea
r, a
dd
ing
up th
e fir
st a
nd th
e se
cond
par
t of
the
leav
e.
Latv
iaP
ate
rnit
y le
ave
– P
ater
nitā
tes p
abal
sts(
19
a)
an
d P
are
nta
l lea
ve –
Vec
āku
paba
lsts
(19
b)
(19a
) Pat
erni
ty le
ave
is g
rant
ed n
ot la
ter t
han
two
mon
ths
afte
rth
e ch
ild is
bor
n. T
he b
enef
it m
ust b
e re
que
sted
wit
hin
six
mon
ths
from
the
first
day
of t
he le
ave.
The
bene
fit s
hall
be g
rant
ed in
the
amou
nt o
f 80%
of t
he a
vera
gein
sura
nce
cont
ribu
tion
s sa
lary
of t
he a
pp
lican
t. T
he a
vera
gein
sura
nce
cont
ribu
tion
s o
f an
emp
loye
e fo
r the
rece
ipt o
f the
pat
erni
ty b
enef
it is
cal
cula
ted
for a
per
iod
of 1
2 ca
lend
ar m
onth
sen
din
g 2
mon
ths
pri
or to
the
mon
th in
whi
ch th
e le
ave
beg
an.
For a
sel
f-em
plo
yed
per
son,
the
aver
age
insu
ranc
e co
ntri
buti
ons
sala
ry s
hall
be
calc
ulat
ed fo
r the
12-
mon
th p
erio
d e
ndin
gon
e-q
uart
er b
efor
e th
e q
uart
er in
whi
ch th
e le
ave
beg
ins.
In L
atvi
a th
ere
is a
com
plic
ated
sys
tem
of t
rans
fera
bilit
y of
leav
ean
d b
enef
it, t
he n
umb
er o
f the
day
s im
med
iate
ly fo
llow
ing
child
birt
h an
d th
e m
axim
um le
ngth
of l
eave
. The
se te
rms
are
esta
blis
hed
by
law
as
chan
geab
le it
ems,
and
are
not
sp
ecifi
cally
cap
ture
d b
y th
e st
atis
tics
.
A m
an is
elig
ible
for p
ater
nity
ben
efit
if h
e is
wor
king
at a
pai
d jo
b, h
as s
ocia
l ins
uran
cean
d is
the
fath
er o
f a n
ewbo
rn c
hild
. He
isel
igib
le to
take
leav
e in
rela
tion
to h
is c
hild
’sb
irth
for t
he d
urat
ion
of 1
0 ca
lend
ar d
ays.
A se
lf-em
plo
yed
per
son
has
the
righ
t to
rece
ive
pat
erni
ty b
enef
it if
he
has
mad
eso
cial
insu
ranc
e co
ntri
buti
ons.
By
com
ple
ting
an
app
licat
ion
for t
he a
lloca
tion
of th
e be
nefit
, the
sel
f-em
plo
yed
ind
ivid
ual
mus
t him
self
spec
ify th
e p
erio
d d
urin
g w
hich
the
leav
e w
ill b
e ta
ken.
Two
mai
n so
urce
s re
gula
rly
capt
ure
the
upta
ke o
fpa
tern
ity/
pare
ntal
leav
e by
fath
ers:
the
Stat
eR
even
ue S
ervi
ce (e
mpl
oyer
s ar
e re
ques
ted
topr
ovid
e da
ta a
bout
leav
e pe
riod
s aw
arde
d to
fath
ers)
and
the
Stat
e So
cial
Insu
ranc
e Ag
ency
(VSA
A) th
at re
ceiv
es th
is d
ata
from
VID
and
calc
ulat
es b
enef
its
rele
vant
to in
com
e, a
nyco
ndit
ions
and
leng
th o
f lea
ve. S
tati
stic
al d
ata
isno
t reg
ular
ly c
aste
d or
pub
lishe
d, b
ut is
ava
ilabl
efr
ee o
f cha
rge
on re
ques
t. P
ublic
ly a
vaila
ble
stat
isti
cal d
ata
can
be fo
und
on th
e VS
AAho
mep
age
(but
not
in E
nglis
h). B
asic
dat
a on
soc
ial
bene
fits
is p
ublis
hed
by th
e C
entr
al S
tati
stic
alB
urea
u’s
in th
eir s
tati
stic
al y
earb
ook
and
the
Cen
tral
Sta
tist
ical
Bur
eau’
s on
line
data
base
. Mor
ede
taile
d da
ta is
ava
ilabl
e fr
om p
rim
ary
data
in th
eSt
ate
Soci
al In
sura
nce
Agen
cy (i
nclu
ding
dat
aco
llect
ed b
y th
e St
ate
Rev
enue
Ser
vice
) for
polic
ymak
ing
and
anal
ytic
al n
eeds
on
dem
and.
Thes
e so
urce
s ca
ptu
re th
e fo
llow
ing
case
s: p
aid
leav
e ep
isod
es, a
nd it
is p
ossi
ble
to id
enti
fyep
isod
es w
hen
the
req
uest
for l
eave
and
/or
bene
fit w
as re
ject
ed; a
ll el
igib
le fa
ther
s (i.
e.em
plo
yed
, sel
f-em
plo
yed
) (w
orki
ng fa
ther
s w
hoha
ve p
aid
soc
ial c
ontr
ibut
ions
and
con
seq
uent
lyar
e so
cial
insu
red
); ev
ery
typ
e of
ep
isod
e;em
plo
yed
in a
ll se
ctor
s; a
ll ep
isod
es o
fp
ater
nity
/par
enta
l lea
ve –
if th
ey a
re fr
agm
ente
d.
Bre
akd
owns
of t
he re
cip
ient
s by
age
gro
ups
coul
dbe
obt
aine
d, b
ut th
e Ag
ency
doe
s no
t hav
ein
form
atio
n on
pro
fess
ion
and
ed
ucat
ion
leve
l of a
reci
pie
nts,
and
sec
tors
.
(19b
) Par
enta
l lea
ve, u
pon
the
req
uest
of a
n em
plo
yee,
sha
ll b
egr
ante
d a
s a
sing
le p
erio
d o
r in
par
ts. T
he e
mp
loye
e ha
s a
dut
y to
noti
fy th
e em
plo
yer i
n w
riti
ng o
ne m
onth
in a
dva
nce
of th
ebe
ginn
ing
and
the
leng
th o
f the
par
enta
l lea
ve o
r par
ts th
ereo
f.Th
e em
plo
yee
is e
ntit
led
to re
turn
to w
ork,
sub
ject
to a
noti
ficat
ion
to th
e em
plo
yer a
t lea
st tw
o w
eeks
in a
dva
nce,
whe
re d
ue to
obj
ecti
ve re
ason
s th
ere
is n
o re
ason
for f
urth
erne
ed o
f chi
ldca
re. T
here
is a
com
plic
ate
rela
tion
bet
wee
n ch
osen
dur
atio
n of
par
enta
l lea
ve a
nd p
aren
tal a
llow
ance
unt
il th
e ch
ildre
ache
s th
e ag
e of
18
mon
ths.
Lea
ve s
hall
be g
rant
ed fo
r a p
erio
dno
t exc
eed
ing
one
and
a h
alf y
ears
and
it c
an b
e re
que
sted
at a
nyti
me
up to
the
day
the
child
reac
hes
the
age
of e
ight
yea
rs.
The
follo
win
g p
eop
le a
re e
ntit
led
to re
ceiv
eth
e p
aren
tal b
enef
it: a
ny s
ocia
lly s
ecur
edp
erso
n ta
king
car
e of
a c
hild
or s
ever
alch
ildre
n bo
rn in
the
sam
e la
bour
, if t
hat
per
son
is e
mp
loye
d o
n th
e d
ay o
f gra
ntin
g of
the
ben
efit
(i.e
. is
cons
ider
ed to
be
anem
plo
yee
or a
sel
f-em
plo
yed
per
son
acco
rdin
g to
the
Law
on
Stat
e So
cial
Insu
ranc
e).
Thes
e m
ay b
e on
e of
the
child
’s p
aren
ts if
they
are
on
par
enta
l lea
ve o
r do
not e
arn
inco
me
as a
sel
f-em
plo
yed
per
son,
or,
are
not o
n p
aren
tal l
eave
or e
arn
inco
me
as a
self-
emp
loye
d p
erso
n d
urin
g th
e ch
ildca
re.
See
(19a
).Se
e (1
9a).
35
Annexes
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Net
her
lan
ds
Pa
ren
tal l
eave
– O
ud
ersc
ha
psv
erlo
f (2
1b
)
Dut
ch n
atio
nal p
olic
y st
ates
em
plo
yees
are
ent
itle
d to
thre
e d
ays
of le
ave
afte
r the
bir
th o
f a c
hild
. Thi
s is
not
to b
e co
nfus
ed w
ith
mat
erni
ty/p
ater
nity
/par
tner
leav
e (k
raam
verlo
for
vade
rsch
apsv
erlo
f) w
hich
is p
rovi
ded
for t
he a
ctua
l bir
th o
f ach
ild. P
aren
tal l
eave
is fo
r par
ents
and
par
tner
s af
ter t
he b
irth
of
a ch
ild.
Par
ents
in th
e N
ethe
rlan
ds
can
take
par
enta
l lea
ve u
ntil
thei
rch
ild(r
en) t
urn
eigh
t yea
rs o
ld. P
aren
ts in
the
Net
herl
and
s ar
een
titl
ed to
par
enta
l lea
ve o
f up
to 2
6 ti
mes
thei
r tot
al w
eekl
yw
orki
ng h
ours
. So,
for i
nsta
nce,
a 4
0-ho
ur w
ork
wee
k m
eans
an
emp
loye
e is
elig
ible
for 2
6 x
40 h
ours
= 1
,040
hou
rs o
f par
enta
lle
ave
unti
l a c
hild
turn
s ei
ght.
In p
rinc
iple
, par
enta
l lea
ve is
unp
aid
, but
this
can
var
y p
er c
olle
ctiv
e la
bou
r agr
eem
ent.
Emp
loye
es w
ho w
ork
mor
e th
an 1
2 ho
urs
per
wee
k an
d h
ave
child
ren
up to
8 y
ears
old
,w
ho c
are
for o
ne o
r mor
e of
thos
e ch
ildre
n.
Entr
epre
neur
s, in
clud
ing
solo
sel
f-em
plo
yed
peo
ple
hav
e d
iffer
ent,
mor
e lim
ited
acc
ess
toso
cial
sec
urit
y su
pp
ort t
han
emp
loye
es.
Entr
epre
neur
s, a
s th
eir o
wn
emp
loye
rs, p
ayth
eir o
wn
soci
al s
ecur
ity
cont
ribu
tion
s an
dth
e sh
are
of c
ontr
ibut
ions
usu
ally
pai
d b
y an
emp
loye
r. A
s su
ch, t
here
ap
pea
rs to
be
less
dat
a av
aila
ble
on m
ater
nity
, let
alo
nefa
ther
-sp
ecifi
c le
ave.
For
sol
o se
lf-em
plo
yed
ind
ivid
uals
and
thei
r par
tner
s, th
e D
utch
gove
rnm
ent e
stab
lishe
d a
diff
eren
t pol
icy,
the
ZEZ
(Zel
fsta
ndig
en
Zwan
ger)
, Sol
ose
lf-em
plo
yed
and
pre
gnan
t.
The
nati
onal
pub
lic e
mp
loym
ent a
genc
y, th
e U
WV,
orch
estr
ates
and
exe
cute
s th
e so
cial
sec
urit
yp
aym
ents
in th
e N
ethe
rlan
ds
and
as
such
has
acce
ss to
dat
a on
em
plo
yees
and
thei
r use
of
diff
eren
t soc
ial s
ecur
ity
bene
fits.
The
mai
n d
ata
sour
ce o
n p
aren
tal l
eave
is th
ena
tion
al s
tati
stic
s bu
reau
, Cen
tral
Bur
eau
voor
de
Stat
isti
ek (C
BS)
.
Dat
a m
aint
aine
d b
y th
e C
BS,
whi
ch is
pub
licly
avai
labl
e, fo
cuse
s on
em
plo
yee
info
rmat
ion
only
.Th
e d
ata
pre
sent
ed th
eref
ore
only
incl
ude
info
rmat
ion
on to
tal e
ligib
le e
mp
loye
es.
Entr
epre
neur
s an
d s
olo
self-
emp
loye
d a
re n
otin
clud
ed in
the
dat
a se
ts w
ho a
re o
nou
tder
scha
psve
rloof
(par
enta
l lea
ve).
The
dat
aset
s fo
r 200
5–20
15 a
nd fo
r 200
5–20
13,
mai
ntai
ned
by
Stat
isti
c N
ethe
rlan
ds,
trac
k th
eex
tent
to w
hich
em
plo
yees
mak
e us
e of
par
enta
lle
ave,
and
als
o to
wha
t deg
ree
the
emp
loye
rco
mp
ensa
ted
the
emp
loye
e. T
hree
cat
egor
ies
ofco
mp
ensa
tion
are
def
ined
, whe
ther
the
emp
loye
rp
aid
for t
he le
ave
(1) i
n it
s en
tire
ty, (
2) a
por
tion
of
the
leav
e or
(3) n
one
of th
e le
ave.
No
rwa
yFo
reld
repe
nger
(22
b)
Cur
rent
ly, t
he p
aren
tal l
eave
per
iod
aft
er b
irth
is d
ivid
ed in
toth
ree
par
ts: a
leav
e p
erio
d o
f 10
wee
ks e
xclu
sive
ly fo
r the
mot
her,
a le
ave
per
iod
of 1
0 w
eeks
exc
lusi
vely
for t
he fa
ther
and
the
com
mon
leav
e p
erio
d (f
athe
r or m
othe
r, b
y ch
oice
) of 2
6 w
eeks
.It
is p
ossi
ble
to e
xten
d th
e le
ave
per
iod
from
46
to 5
6 w
eeks
wit
ha
20%
red
ucti
on in
allo
wan
ce. I
n th
is c
ase,
the
com
mon
leav
ep
erio
d is
36
wee
ks.
Anyo
ne w
ith
pen
sion
able
ear
ning
s fo
r am
inim
um o
f 6 o
f the
last
10
mon
ths
befo
reth
e ti
me
of th
e co
ntri
buti
on is
elig
ible
for
par
enta
l ben
efit
(for
eld
rep
enge
r).
The
mai
n d
ata
sour
ce o
f the
use
of p
ater
nal l
eave
by fa
ther
s is
the
NAV
(Nor
weg
ian
Labo
ur a
ndW
elfa
re A
dm
inis
trat
ion)
regi
ster
on
pat
erna
lbe
nefit
s. N
AV p
ublis
h ye
arly
sta
tist
ical
ove
rvie
ws
on p
ater
nal l
eave
, as
wel
l as
per
iod
ical
rep
orts
.
The
self-
emp
loye
d a
re in
clud
ed. F
athe
rs’ r
ight
tobe
nefit
s (f
rom
the
com
mon
quo
ta) i
s lim
ited
if th
em
othe
r is
not e
ligib
le to
ben
efit
(not
vic
e ve
rsa)
.Th
e st
atis
tics
can
not s
ingl
e ou
t fat
hers
wit
hlim
ited
righ
ts; t
hey
app
ear i
n th
e st
atis
tics
as
non-
user
s.
Po
lan
dP
ate
rnit
y a
llo
wa
nce
– o
f a
t le
ast
on
e d
ay
– (u
rlop
ojco
wsk
i) (2
3a
) a
nd
Ma
tern
ity
all
ow
an
ce –
ma
tern
ity
lea
ve f
or
fath
ers,
pa
tern
ity
lea
ve (
urlo
p oj
cow
ski)
an
d p
are
nta
l lea
ve(u
rlop
rodz
icie
lski
) (2
3a
, b).
(23a
) Not
ob
ligat
ory,
two
wee
ks, o
nly
for f
athe
rs.
(23a
, b) M
ater
nity
leav
e is
20
wee
ks (1
4 of
them
are
rese
rved
for
mot
hers
, aft
er w
hich
tim
e fa
ther
s ca
n us
e th
e 6
wee
ks th
at a
rele
ft, i
nste
ad o
f the
mot
her)
. Max
imum
six
wee
ks c
an b
e us
edb
efor
e th
e b
irth
of t
he c
hild
. Par
enta
l lea
ve is
then
a m
axim
um o
f32
wee
ks a
fter
the
mat
erni
ty le
ave.
It c
an b
e d
ivid
ed in
to fo
urp
arts
, whi
ch c
an b
e us
ed b
oth
by
the
mot
her a
nd fa
ther
; the
y ca
nta
ke th
e le
ave
at th
e sa
me
tim
e or
one
of t
hem
can
take
all
the
leav
e. O
ne p
art o
f the
leav
e ha
s to
last
for a
t lea
st e
ight
wee
ks.
Onl
y fo
r em
plo
yees
wit
h a
cont
ract
of
emp
loym
ent,
the
self-
emp
loye
d a
nden
trep
rene
urs
(exc
lud
ing
peo
ple
wor
king
on
civi
l-la
w c
ontr
acts
).
ZUS
(Soc
ial I
nsur
ance
Inst
itut
ion)
use
s th
e te
rm‘m
ater
nity
allo
wan
ce’ i
n re
fere
nce
to a
ll ty
pes
of
leav
e fo
r mot
hers
and
fath
ers.
Acc
ord
ing
to la
w,
ther
e ar
e th
ree
typ
es o
f lea
ve fo
r fat
hers
:m
ater
nity
leav
e fo
r fat
hers
, pat
erni
ty le
ave
(url
opoj
cow
ski)
and
par
enta
l lea
ve (u
rlop
rod
zici
elsk
i).
(23a
) Num
ber o
f rec
ipie
nts
cove
rs e
very
one
who
take
s p
ater
nity
leav
e fo
r at l
east
one
day
.
ZUS
colle
cts
the
dat
a on
mat
erni
ty a
llow
ance
sw
hich
are
pai
d fo
r per
iod
s of
mat
erni
ty le
ave
orot
her p
erio
ds
of le
ave
take
n un
der
the
term
s of
the
mat
erni
ty le
ave,
ad
dit
iona
l mat
erni
ty le
ave,
pat
erni
ty le
ave
and
par
enta
l lea
ve.
36
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Po
rtu
ga
lC
om
pu
lso
ry d
ays
– F
ath
er’s
exc
lusi
ve p
are
nta
l lea
ve (
24
a)
an
d O
pti
on
al d
ays
– F
ath
er’s
exc
lusi
ve p
are
nta
l lea
ve (
24
b)
Init
ial p
are
nta
l lea
ve –
Lic
ença
par
enta
l ini
cial
(‘In
itia
l pa
ren
tal l
eave
’ of
12
0/1
50
da
ys)
(24
c); E
xten
ded
pa
ren
tal l
eave
(2
4d
) a
nd
So
cia
l pa
ren
tal l
eave
ben
efit
(2
4e)
(23a
) and
(23b
) ‘Fa
ther
’s e
xclu
sive
leav
e’ (i
.e. n
on-t
rans
fera
ble
) of
15 c
omp
ulso
ry w
orki
ng d
ays
(of w
hich
five
day
s m
ust b
e ta
ken
cons
ecut
ivel
y im
med
iate
ly a
fter
bir
th, c
aptu
red
her
e an
d 1
0 d
ays
dur
ing
the
sub
seq
uent
30
day
s) (p
aid
at 1
00%
).
Spec
ific
leav
e fo
r fat
hers
was
intr
oduc
ed in
199
9: th
e ‘p
ater
nity
leav
e’ o
f 5 w
orki
ng d
ays,
init
ially
op
tion
al; a
nd th
e op
tion
al‘p
aren
tal l
eave
’ of 1
5 d
ays
for t
he fa
ther
; ini
tial
par
enta
l lea
vew
ith
bon
us o
f 1 m
onth
whe
n p
aren
ts s
hare
the
leav
e (if
fath
eran
d m
othe
r tak
e 30
day
s or
two
per
iod
s of
con
secu
tive
15
day
sal
one)
. Tw
o p
ossi
ble
scen
ario
s in
cas
e of
sha
ring
: 150
day
s p
aid
at 1
00%
or 1
80 d
ays
pai
d a
t 83%
.
(24c
) Aft
er th
e 42
day
s (6
wee
ks) f
ollo
win
g th
e b
irth
, com
pul
sory
for m
othe
rs, t
he re
mai
ning
per
iod
may
be
shar
ed b
etw
een
the
fath
er a
nd th
e m
othe
r by
mut
ual a
gree
men
t. B
oth
par
ents
can
take
init
ial p
aren
tal l
eave
at t
he s
ame
tim
e, fo
r up
to 1
5 d
ays,
tobe
take
n be
twee
n th
e 4t
h an
d 5
th m
onth
.
24d
) Ext
end
ed p
aren
tal l
eave
. For
the
exte
nded
par
enta
l lea
ve o
fth
ree
mon
ths
the
bene
fit c
orre
spon
ds
to a
dai
ly a
llow
ance
of
25%
of t
he a
vera
ge d
aily
wag
e (o
r €5.
2 p
er d
ay m
inim
um).
(24e
) Par
ents
, mot
hers
or f
athe
rs, w
ho a
re n
ot w
orki
ng a
nd d
ono
t hav
e co
ntri
buti
ons
for s
ocia
l sec
urit
y ar
e en
titl
ed to
par
enta
lso
cial
ben
efit
.
(24a
–d) T
he d
ata
refe
r to
ind
ivid
uals
cov
ered
by
the
gene
ral s
ocia
l sec
urit
y sy
stem
.
(24e
) Par
ents
, mot
hers
or f
athe
rs, w
ho a
reno
t wor
king
and
do
not h
ave
cont
ribu
tion
sfo
r soc
ial s
ecur
ity
are
enti
tled
to p
aren
tal
soci
al b
enef
it.
The
Inst
itut
e of
Soc
ial S
ecur
ity
(Inst
ituto
de
Segu
ranç
a So
cial
– IS
S) is
the
enti
ty re
spon
sibl
efo
r col
lect
ing
and
pub
lishi
ng d
ata
on th
ebe
nefic
iari
es o
f par
enta
l lea
ve b
enef
its
inP
ortu
gal.
Fath
ers
wor
king
in th
e p
riva
te s
ecto
r and
wor
kers
in p
ublic
func
tion
s si
nce
1 Ja
nuar
y 20
06, t
hus
excl
udin
g ci
vil s
erva
nts
and
wor
kers
who
sew
elfa
re s
yste
m is
not
par
t of t
he g
ener
al s
ocia
lse
curi
ty s
yste
m, l
ike
som
e w
orke
rs in
the
bank
ing
sect
or. P
aren
ts, m
othe
rs o
r fat
hers
, who
are
not
wor
king
and
do
not h
ave
cont
ribu
tion
s fo
r soc
ial
secu
rity
are
ent
itle
d to
par
enta
l soc
ial b
enef
it,
pai
d a
t a p
erce
ntag
e of
the
Soci
al S
upp
ort I
ndex
(Inde
xant
e de
Apo
ios S
ocia
is–
IAS)
-> s
ee (2
4e).
(24c
) Par
ents
rece
ivin
g th
e be
nefit
for i
niti
alp
aren
tal l
eave
.
(24c
, d, e
) Tot
al n
umbe
r of p
aren
ts o
n p
aren
tal
leav
e, in
clud
ing
thos
e on
init
ial p
aren
tal l
eave
(c),
exte
nded
par
enta
l lea
ve (d
) and
thos
e on
soc
ial
par
enta
l lea
ve (e
).
(24e
) Par
ents
rece
ivin
g th
e so
cial
par
enta
l ben
efit
,in
clud
ing
thos
e w
ho re
ceiv
ed a
bon
us.
Ro
ma
nia
Ch
ild
-rea
rin
g in
dem
nit
y –
as
ma
in b
enef
icia
ry (
25
b)
an
d C
hil
d-r
eari
ng
ind
emn
ity
– a
s se
con
d b
enef
icia
ry (
25
c)
(25b
) Acc
ord
ing
to G
over
nmen
t Em
erge
ncy
Ord
inan
ce n
o.11
1/20
10 o
n ch
ild-r
eari
ng le
ave
and
mon
thly
ind
emni
ty,
child
-rea
ring
leav
e (L
eave
no.
2) c
an b
e ta
ken
upon
req
uest
by
the
mot
her o
r the
fath
er. I
t can
be
take
n un
til t
he c
hild
reac
hes
the
age
of tw
o, a
nd in
the
case
of a
chi
ld w
ith
dis
abili
ties
, up
toth
e ag
e of
thre
e.
(25c
) If b
oth
par
ents
(nat
ural
or a
dop
tive
) wor
k, th
e m
ain
ben
efic
iary
can
onl
y ta
ke th
e le
ave
for (
a m
axim
um o
f) 1
yea
r and
11 m
onth
s; th
e ot
her p
aren
t mus
t tak
e at
leas
t 1 m
onth
of
child
-rea
ring
leav
e as
sec
ond
ary
ben
efic
iary
. If t
he la
tter
doe
s no
tcl
aim
this
righ
t, th
e p
rim
ary
ben
efic
iary
can
not b
enef
it fr
om th
eri
ght t
o le
ave
inst
ead
. How
ever
, uno
ffic
ial s
tati
stic
s sh
ow th
at th
enu
mb
er o
f ap
plic
ants
is lo
w.
Not
ava
ilabl
e.N
o of
ficia
l dat
a w
ere
pro
vid
ed, s
o d
ata
are
from
unof
ficia
l sou
rces
: art
icle
, Bad
ea (2
015)
for (
25b)
and
Ghe
orgh
e (2
015)
for (
25c)
.
Num
ber o
f mal
e ch
ild b
enef
it re
cip
ient
s, a
s m
ain
bene
ficia
ry (2
5b) o
r as
seco
nd b
enef
icia
ry (2
5c).
Sw
eden
Förä
ldra
penn
ing
– P
are
nta
l ben
efit
(2
6a
)
In S
wed
en p
aren
ts h
ave
a ri
ght t
o co
mp
ensa
tion
(par
enta
lbe
nefit
) and
the
righ
t to
par
enta
l lea
ve. T
he ri
ght t
o ha
vep
aren
tal l
eave
is m
ore
gene
rous
. Acc
ord
ing
to th
e la
w o
f Sw
edis
hp
aren
tal l
eave
, a p
aren
t can
be
abse
nt fr
om w
ork
to ta
ke c
are
ofhi
s/he
r chi
ld u
p u
ntil
the
child
is 1
8 m
onth
s ol
d. T
he p
aren
tal
bene
fit c
onsi
sts
of 4
80 d
ays
per
chi
ld, a
nd o
n th
ree
diff
eren
tco
mp
ensa
tion
leve
ls (t
he s
ickn
ess
ben
efit
leve
l, ba
sic
leve
l and
the
min
imum
leve
l). P
aren
tal b
enef
it a
llow
s th
e p
aren
t to
stay
hom
e fr
om w
ork
and
obt
ain
com
pen
sati
on fo
r ext
end
ed p
erio
ds
of ti
me,
ind
ivid
ual d
ays
or a
cer
tain
num
ber o
f hou
rs. I
f the
re a
retw
o p
aren
ts w
ith
join
t gua
rdia
nshi
p w
ho s
hare
the
day
s th
ep
aren
ts s
hare
195
eac
h at
sic
knes
s be
nefit
leve
l and
45
day
s ea
chat
the
min
imum
leve
l. Si
xty
day
s of
the
sick
ness
ben
efit
are
rese
rved
and
can
not b
e tr
ansf
erre
d to
ano
ther
par
ent.
All p
aren
ts in
Sw
eden
are
ent
itle
d to
pai
dp
aren
tal l
eave
(201
7 Le
ave
Rev
iew
).P
aren
tal b
enef
it (f
öräl
drap
enni
ng) i
s p
aid
by
Förs
äkrin
gska
ssan
.Th
ose
rece
ivin
g th
e be
nefit
.
37
Annexes
Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018), EurWORK’s Working Life country profiles (2018) and International Networkon Leave Policies and Research (2017).
Co
un
try
Typ
e o
f lea
ve, d
ura
tio
n a
nd
rat
es o
f co
mp
ensa
tio
nW
ho
is e
lig
ible
Da
ta a
dm
inis
tra
tio
n a
nd
/or
sou
rce
Wh
at
the
da
ta c
on
tain
s
Slo
ven
iaP
ate
rnit
y le
ave
– O
četo
vski
dop
ust (
27
a)
full
y p
aid
an
d u
np
aid
da
ys (
27
b)
The
upta
ke o
f pat
erni
ty/p
aren
tal l
eave
by
fath
ers
is re
gula
ted
by
the
Par
enta
l Pro
tect
ion
and
Fam
ily B
enef
its
Act,
201
4.
15 d
ays
fully
pai
d, f
urth
er 7
5 d
ays
unp
aid
.
Onl
y fo
r em
plo
yees
wit
h a
cont
ract
of
emp
loym
ent,
the
self-
emp
loye
d a
nden
trep
rene
urs
(exc
lud
ing
peo
ple
wor
king
on
civi
l-la
w c
ontr
acts
).
The
Act s
tip
ulat
es in
Art
icle
104
that
an
info
rmat
ion
dat
abas
e be
set
up
and
run
for t
hep
urp
oses
of m
anag
ing
the
pro
ced
ures
and
dec
idin
g on
righ
ts u
nder
this
Act
, mon
itor
ing,
pla
nnin
g an
d m
anag
ing
fam
ily p
olic
y, fo
rsc
ient
ific
and
rese
arch
pur
pos
es a
nd fo
rst
atis
tica
l pur
pos
es. T
he s
o-ca
lled
cen
tral
dat
abas
e is
man
aged
by
the
Min
istr
y of
Lab
our,
Fam
ily, S
ocia
l Aff
airs
and
Eq
ual O
pp
ortu
niti
es a
ndC
entr
es fo
r Soc
ial W
ork.
The
min
istr
y an
d th
ece
ntre
s m
aint
ain
dat
abas
es o
n p
ater
nity
and
pat
erni
ty a
llow
ance
as
wel
l as
of p
aren
tal l
eave
and
allo
wan
ce a
nd tr
ansf
erre
d p
aren
tal l
eave
and
allo
wan
ce.
The
dat
a he
re re
fer t
o p
ater
nity
leav
e, p
aid
and
unp
aid
ep
isod
es.
(27a
) ref
ers
to th
e nu
mbe
r of f
athe
rs ta
king
am
axim
um o
f 15
day
s.
(27b
) ref
ers
to fa
ther
s ta
king
mor
e th
an 1
5 d
ays.
Slo
vak
iaM
ate
rnit
y b
enef
it –
dav
ka m
ater
ské
(28
a)
an
d P
are
nta
l all
ow
an
ce –
rodi
čovs
ký p
ríspe
vok
(28
b)
(28a
) In
Slov
akia
, wit
h re
gard
to c
hild
care
, a fa
ther
may
ask
for
par
enta
l lea
ve d
urin
g w
hich
he
may
rece
ive
a m
ater
nity
or
par
enta
l allo
wan
ce. T
he p
ossi
bili
ty o
f rec
eivi
ng th
ese
allo
wan
ces
is, h
owev
er, l
inke
d to
the
fact
that
the
mot
her i
s no
tta
king
car
e of
the
child
at t
he s
ame
tim
e. T
he c
ond
itio
n is
that
,d
urin
g th
e p
erio
d o
f mat
erni
ty b
enef
it re
ceiv
ed b
y fa
ther
s, th
em
othe
r doe
s no
t rec
eive
this
ben
efit
. Als
o, p
aral
lel p
aren
tal a
ndm
ater
nity
ben
efit
s ar
e ex
clud
ed.
Taki
ng th
e m
ater
nity
ben
efit
is c
ond
itio
nal
upon
the
pay
men
t of i
nsur
ance
cont
ribu
tion
s fo
r sic
knes
s in
sura
nce
– Ac
tN
o. 4
61/2
003
Col
l. on
soc
ial i
nsur
ance
.
Ther
e is
no
dat
abas
e of
fath
ers
taki
ng th
em
ater
nity
ben
efit
. The
re a
re o
nly
stat
isti
cs o
n al
lre
cip
ient
s of
the
mat
erni
ty b
enef
it, b
ut w
itho
utm
ore
det
aile
d in
form
atio
n. F
emal
e m
othe
rs a
reon
mat
erni
ty b
enef
it fo
r 34
wee
ks. A
mal
e p
aren
tm
ay a
lso
req
uest
a m
ater
nity
ben
efit
if h
e ag
rees
that
he
will
take
car
e of
a c
hild
und
er th
e ag
e of
thre
e. T
he m
axim
um d
urat
ion
of th
e m
ater
nity
bene
fit fo
r a fa
ther
is 2
8 w
eeks
.
Fath
ers
obta
inin
g th
e m
ater
nity
ben
efit
.
(28b
) In
Slov
akia
, wit
h re
gard
to c
hild
care
, a fa
ther
may
ask
for
par
enta
l lea
ve d
urin
g w
hich
he
may
rece
ive
a m
ater
nity
or
par
enta
l allo
wan
ce. T
he p
ossi
bilit
y of
rece
ivin
g th
ese
allo
wan
ces
is, h
owev
er, l
inke
d to
the
fact
that
the
mot
her i
s no
tta
king
car
e of
the
child
at t
he s
ame
tim
e. T
he c
urre
nt s
tate
non
-co
ntri
but
ory
lum
p s
um b
enef
it ‘P
aren
tal A
llow
ance
’ was
bro
ught
in b
y Ac
t No.
571
/200
9 C
oll.
on p
aren
tal a
llow
ance
. It i
san
allo
wan
ce o
f the
uni
vers
al s
yste
m fi
nanc
ed b
y th
e st
ate
bud
get (
taxe
s).
Par
enta
l lea
ve, p
rovi
ded
for u
nder
the
Lab
our C
ode,
is g
iven
to a
par
ent o
n a
full-
tim
e ba
sis
and
can
als
o be
use
d in
blo
cks
of a
tle
ast o
ne m
onth
(unt
il th
e ch
ild re
ache
s ei
ght y
ears
old
– a
sm
axim
um).
Con
trib
utio
ns to
soc
ial i
nsur
ance
and
old
-age
pen
sion
of a
per
son
on p
aren
tal l
eave
are
pai
d b
y th
e st
ate.
The
per
iod
of p
aren
tal l
eave
and
the
pay
for i
t can
be
shar
ed b
y th
e
A w
orki
ng p
erso
n (m
ale
or fe
mal
e) c
an ta
kep
aren
tal l
eave
and
get
the
allo
wan
ce in
stea
dof
pay
. At t
he s
ame
tim
e, th
e em
plo
yer i
sob
liged
to k
eep
the
job
pos
itio
n op
en fo
rth
at w
orke
r.
Ther
e is
no
dat
abas
e of
fath
ers
on p
aren
tal l
eave
in S
lova
kia.
Pat
erni
ty le
ave
is n
ot a
pp
lied
. The
re is
a d
atab
ase
of re
cip
ient
s of
the
‘Par
enta
lAl
low
ance
’ – d
ata
are
avai
labl
e fo
r wom
en a
ndm
en. I
t is
kep
t at t
he C
entr
al O
ffic
e of
Lab
our,
Soci
al A
ffai
rs a
nd F
amily
(UP
SVR
). Ea
ch m
onth
,th
e nu
mbe
r of r
ecip
ient
s of
the
par
enta
lal
low
ance
is p
ublis
hed
in to
tal f
or m
en a
ndw
omen
and
sep
arat
ely
for w
omen
.
Par
ents
rece
ivin
g th
e be
nefit
.
38
Number of male recipients of parental/paternity leave allowance
Paternity allowances and leave
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Table A2: Development of the number of male recipients of paternity allowances (2009–2017)
Country Leave (Code) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Source
Number of male recipients of paternity benefits or allowances
Estonia Isapuhkus (8a) 5,253 5,701 6,460 6,924 7,220 Estonian National SocialInsurance Board, nationalsocial insurance statistics.
Spain Prestacion depaternidad (9b)
273,024 275,637 269,715 245,867 237,988 235,678 238,806 244,468 264,632 Spanish Ministry forEmployment and socialsecurity.
France Congé de paternité(11a)
400,000 405,000 411,000 403,000 382,000 376,000 366,000 358,000 DREES series which endsin 2014, based on the dataprovided by the socialsecurity.
Congé de paternité(11a)
377,000 383,000 389,000 381,000 376,000 370,000 CNAMTS, Central fund ofthe MSA, RSI, calculationDREES.
Italy Congedo di paternità(Mandatory leavedays) (16a)
50,474 67,672 72,754 92,858 INPS (2017)
Congedo di paternità(Voluntary leavedays) (16b)
5,432 8,130 9,587 9,186 INPS (2017)
Lithuania Tėvystės atostogos(17a)
12,966 12,349 12,029 12,124 12,642 13,476 14,933 16,277 15,100 LSD (various years)
Latvia Paternitātes pabalsts(19a)
8,549 7,097 7,017 7,913 8,785 9,761 10,625 11,081 10,966 Statistical Department ofSSIA.
Poland Paternity allowance(urlop ojcowsi) (23a)
28,600 28,600 148,500 146,400 ZUS, 2016, ZUS, variousyears, quarterly informationon cash benefits from theSocial Insurance Fund andother benefits.
Number of men on paternity leave
Denmark Fædreorlov (7a) 44,312 44,621 41,451 39,303 38,506 41,042 40,077 44,996 Statistic Denmark’sregister.
Italy Congedo di paternità(Mandatory leavedays) (16a)
50,474 67,672 72,754 92,858 INPS (2017)
Congedo di paternità(Voluntary leavedays) (16b)
5,432 8,130 9,587 9,186 INPS (2017)
Slovenia Paternity leave(Očetovski dopust) –up to 15 days (23a)
17,534 18,042 17,776 17,468 16,625 16,695 16,374 16,291 MDDSZ (2018)
Paternity leave(Očetovski dopust) –Total, 15 days ormore (23a, b)
20,863 21,776 21,445 21,054 20,039 19,691 19,264 18,210 MDDSZ (2018)
Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018)
39
Parental leave allowances
Annexes
Country Leave (Code) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Source
Number of male beneficiaries of parental allowances
Austria Kinderbetreuungsgeld– all fathers (1a)
9,485 10,426 11,228 11,735 12,171 12,627 Riesenfelder (2017), Table1, p. 15; For definitions,see Riesenfelder andDanzer (2017), p. 85.
Czech Republic Parental allowance(5b)
6,000 5,400 5,800 5,300 5,200 5,100 5,200 5,200 5,100 Ministry of Labour andSocial Affairs (MoLSA)database.
Denmark Forældreorlov (7b) 18,681 19,797 18,609 18,266 24,782 26,317 26,431 30,376 Statistic Denmark’sregister.
Estonia Parental benefit (8b) 2,140 2,347 2,075 2,030 2,036 2,280 2,459 2,611 2,746 Statistics Estonia, SW22.
Spain Prestaciones pormaternidad (9b)
5,726 5,805 5,798 5,028 4,919 4,912 5,208 5,688 4,930 Instituto Nacional deSeguridad Social.Ministerio de Empleo ySeguridad Social.
Croatia Rodiljni dopust (13a) 131 131 133 165 163 170 158 Pravobraniteljica zaravnopravnost spolova(various years)
Roditeljski dopust(13b)
877 927 1,042 2,023 2,036 2,030 1,930 Pravobraniteljica zaravnopravnost spolova(various years)
Hungary GYES (childcareallowance) (14c)
9,200 9,600 9,900 9,800 9,500 7,300 6,400 6,100 Hungarian State Treasury
GYET (child-rearingsupport) (14b)
3,210 3,362 3,263 3,234 3,090 Hungarian State Treasury
Italy Congedo parentale(16c)
31,549 34,118 36,540 45,003 52,567 INPS (2017)
Lithuania Vaiko priežiūrosatostogos (17b)
3,300 3,600 3,100 2,900 4,100 6,300 7,800 8,900 9,700 Sodra
Luxembourg Congé parental (18b) 894 976 968 942 1,049 1,050 1,106 1,079 Activity report 2016,Ministry of Family,Integration and GreaterRegion, pp. 178, 179
Latvia Vecāku pabalsts(19b)
13,130 6,514 2,406 1,493 1,739 2,507 5,216 7,502 7,512 Statistical Department ofSSIA
Portugal Parental leavebeneficiaries(24c, d, e)
43,309 75,124 77,403 72,111 67,137 65,439 71,502 76,282 74,919 Source: Institute for SocialSecurity (Instituto deSegurança Social – ISS)
Romania Child-rearingindemnity – as mainbeneficiary (25b)
25,123 34,586 27,559 28,424 24,815 Badea (2015)
Sweden Föräldrapenning(Parental benefit)
292,846 311,740 319,429 333,246 340,246 344,658 355,383 368,779 387,286 http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/socialforsakring-m-m/stod-till-barnfamiljer/foraldraforsakring
Slovakia Maternity benefit(davka materské)
222 314 717 1,731 3,079 1. On-request data fromSocial Insurance Agency.
Parental allowance(rodičovskýpríspevok)
3,971 4,525 4,803 5,019 5,210 5,550 5,710 5,894 6,088 1. On-request data fromCentral Office of Labour,Social Affairs and Family;2. Statistical Office ofSlovak Republic; 3. Slovaklegislation.
Number of parental/childcare allowances paid out to men
Bulgaria Childcare benefit –after the child is oneyear old (3b)
4,678 5,727 6,139 6,590 6,068 6,907 7,294 7,189 National Social SecurityInstitute (NSSI)
Number of men taking parental leave
Netherlands Ouderschapsverlof(21b)
46,000 63,000 61,000 70,000 CBS (2016)
Table A3: Development of the number of male beneficiaries of parental allowances (2009–2017)
Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018)
40
Duration of the leave or benefit-drawing periods
Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers
Mixed figures on paternity and parental allowances or leave
Table A4: Development of the number of male recipients of parental or paternity leave allowances* (2009–2017)
Country Code 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Source
Belgium 2a, b 11,145 13,891 14,454 14,063 14,849 15,976 16,718 17,824 19,555 Rijksdienst Voor Arbeidsvoorziening/Office National de l’Emploi
Bulgaria 3a, b 18,834 20,896 21,307 21,639 23,697 26,804 29,099 31,671 n/a National Social Security Institute (NSSI)
Note: data relate to the number ofbenefits for 15 days’ paternity leaveafter the birth of a child and the second6 months of maternity paid out to men.Total number of monthly benefits paidout – sum for the whole year.
Denmark 7a, b 58,478 59,615 57,599 55,312 54,933 57,940 57,658 65,035 Statistic Denmark’s register
Finland 10a, b 54,570 56,393 58,808 60,470 59,683 58,789 65,485 61,817 n/a Kela (2017), p. 45
Poland 23a, b n/a n/a n/a 165,600 150,700 159,300 ZUS (2016)
*Note: In these cases it is not possible to distinguish between the different leave – paternity or parental. Data refer to benefits paid out to men.Poland: maternity allowance – maternity leave for fathers, paternity leave (urlop ojcowski) and parental leave (urlop rodzicielski); Denmark:Barselsorlov (3a, b); Bulgaria: maternity benefit – after the child is six months old, including otpusk po bashtinstvo (paternity leave) and otpuskporadi bremennost, razhdane i osinovyavane (leave due to pregnancy, childbirth and adoption); Belgium: Vaderschapsverlof/Congé depaternité and Ouderschapsverlof met uitkeringens; Finland: all parental allowances, including maternity leave (äitiysvapaa), paternity leave(isyysvapaa) and parental leave (vanhempainvapaa). (n/a = not available.)Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018)
Table A5: Average duration of the leave by gender (2009–2017)
Type ofleave/benefit
Name of leave/benefit in country
Country Sex 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Source
Parentalandpaternityleave
Barselsorlov –including both partswhich can be sharedwith the mother anddays earmarked forfather
Denmark
Women 298.3 297.7 297.3 296.4 296.9 296.4 297.6Statistic Denmark’sregister
Men 28.0 29.1 29.2 29.5 30.1 29.7 30.8
Parentalleave Elterngeld Germany
Women 348.5DESTATIS
Men 92.3
Maternity benefit(davka materské) Slovakia
Women 238.0 238.0 238.0 238.0 238.0 On-request data fromSocial Insurance AgencyMen 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0 196.0
Parental allowance(rodičovskýpríspevok)
Slovakia Men 550.8 552.9 546.6On-request data fromCentral Office of Labour,Social Affairs and Family
Paternityleave Paternity benefit Estonia Men 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.7
Estonian National SocialInsurance Board, nationalsocial insurance statistics
Source: Network of Eurofound Correspondents (2018)
41
Annex 2: List of contributors
Network of Eurofound Correspondents
Annexes
Austria Bernadette Allinger, Working Life Research Centre (FORBA)
Belgium Driess van der Herreweghe, KU Leuven
Bulgaria Zlatka Gospodinova and Ivan Neykov, Balkan Institute for Labour and Social Policy (BILSP)
Croatia Predrag Bejakovic, Institute of Public Finance
Cyprus Pavlos Kalosinatos, Cyprus Labour Institute (PEO)
Czech Republic Ales Aleš Kroupa and Věra Kuchařová, Research Institute for Labour and Social Affairs
Denmark Tobias Bühring, Oxford Research
Estonia Ingel Kadarik, Helen Biin and Liina Osila, Praxis
Finland Rasmus Firon, Oxford Research
France Frédéric Turlan, IR Share
Germany Birgit Kraemer, WSI
Greece Sofia Lampousaki, INE/GSEE
Hungary Zsanna Nyírő and Kopint-Tárki
Ireland Colman Higgins, IRN Share
Italy Roberto Pedersini, Università degli Studi di Milano
Latvia Raita Karnite, EPC
Lithuania Rasa Miežienė, Lithuanian Social Research Centre
Luxembourg Carole Blond-Hanten, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER)
Malta Anna Borg, Centre for Labour Studies – University of Malta
Netherlands Amber van der Graff, Panteia
Norway Åsmund Arup Seip, Fafo Institute
Poland Marta Trawinska, Institute of Public Affairs
Portugal Heloísa Perista and Paula Carrilho, CESIS – Centro de Estudos para a Intervenção Social
Romania Raluca Dimitriu, Law Department – University of Economic Studies, Bucharest
Slovakia Rastislav Bednarik, Institute for Labour and Family Research
Slovenia Aleksandra Kanjuo Mrčela, University of Ljubljana
Spain Alejandro Godino, QUIT – Centre for Sociological Studies on Daily Life and Work
Sweden Sirin Celik, Oxford Research
United Kingdom Claire Evans, University of Warwick
EF/18/087
In the context of ongoing negotiations at EU level
on adopting a work–life balance package for
families and caregivers, Eurofound was requested
by the European Commission to provide an update
of the available data regarding paternity and
parental leave for fathers. This report presents the
currently available national statistics on the uptake
of family-related leave by fathers over time across
the EU28 and Norway, based on information
compiled by the Network of Eurofound
Correspondents. It gives a comparative overview of
the main features of the various leave
arrangements available for fathers, including
information on duration, compensation, eligibility
and the number of beneficiaries captured in the
data. Despite the unevenness and lack of coherent
statistics, the report concludes that in several
Member States progress has been made in
increasing the number and share of fathers who
are taking parental or paternity leave.
The European Foundation for the Improvement ofLiving and Working Conditions (Eurofound) is atripartite European Union Agency, whose role isto provide knowledge in the area of social,employment and work-related policies.Eurofound was established in 1975 by CouncilRegulation (EEC) No. 1365/75, to contribute to theplanning and design of better living and workingconditions in Europe.
TJ-0
6-1
8-1
97-E
N-N
ISBN: 978-92-897-1768-7
doi:10.2806/753240