#family paid leave
Paid parental leave provides workers with financial compensation during temporary absences following the birth or adoption of a child. Private companies often provide paid leave and the federal government mandates 12 weeks of job-protected unpaid leave, but recently policymakers and advocates have become dissatisfied with the status quo.
Proponents of federal intervention argue that the private market does not or cannot provide sufficient paid leave. Moreover, proponents believe government supported leave would improve labor market outcomes and reduce gender and labor-market inequality.
However, the evidence that suggests otherwise…
First, ample data show that the private market provides paid leave at rates about 30 to 50 percentage points higher than proponents claim. Private paid leave provision has grown three- or fourfold over 50 years and continues to grow. This trend indicates industry is responsive to employee demands.
Second,workers may not be better off under federal paid leave and may be worse off. Government intervention provides new incentives, and individuals are likely to adapt accordingly. Evidence suggests government supported leave may result in wage or benefit reductions, female unemployment, or reduced professional opportunities for women.
Government intervention is also unlikely to correct gender or labor-market inequality in ways proponents desire. For example, families may respond to the policy by increasing women’s household work contributions relative to men’s. Redistributive effects of government intervention are likely to harm workers.
Policymakers should not adopt paid parental leave policies. Instead, they should consider improving workers’ lives through reforms that increase economic efficiency, remove barriers to flexible work, and increase choice.
