Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers · Compensation for paternity leave 8 Compensation for parental leave 8 2. National data on fathers’ uptake of paternity and parental

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

http://eurofound.link/ef18087

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://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.

https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/events/a-modern-agenda-for-work-life-balance

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



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



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



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).



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).


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


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).


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).


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


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


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.


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.


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

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu

https://www.missoc.org/missoc-database/comparative-tables/

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.


http://www.nssi.bg/en/abouten/statistics/1430-indgender

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

https://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=72022ned&LA

https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/maatwerk/2016/32/werknemers-gebruik-van-en-behoefte-aan-ouderschapsverlof

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.


https://www.ssb.no/befolkning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/fedrekvoten-mer-populaer-enn-noen-gang--298200?tabell=298321

http://www.mddsz.gov.si/si/uveljavljanje_pravic/statistika/druz_prejemki_zavarovanje_sv/

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

https://www.workingfamilies.org.uk/workflex-blog/shared-parental-leave-in-the-uk-is-it-working-lessons-from-other-countries/

https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/women-and-equalities-committee/gender-pay-gap-evidence-check-forum/sharing-parental-leave/

https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/women-and-equalities-committee/gender-pay-gap-evidence-check-forum/sharing-parental-leave/

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

.

https://www.mpsv.cz/cs/10543

32


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


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


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


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)


http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/socialforsakring-m-m/stod-till-barnfamiljer/foraldraforsakring

40

Duration of the leave or benefit-drawing periods


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


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

Parental and paternity leave – Uptake by fathers · Compensation for paternity leave 8 Compensation for parental leave 8 2. National data on fathers’ uptake of paternity and parental

Documents