My research approach involves examining the details of PPL in PLEP 1987 and its amended PLEP (Paid Parental Leave) Amendment Act 2002, and comparing it with PPL policies in other OECD countries. From there, I have compiled advice on PPL from New Zealand and Australian entities, including the Ministry of Social Development, Department of Labour, Equal Opportunities Network and the Families Commission, researched academic publications concerning the effects of PPL on employees, employers (including workplaces) and examined figures on the correlation between parent-friendly workplace policies and business effectiveness and efficiency internationally. I analyze the social and economic effects of using started to analyze the various countries’ policies in light of these findings, with the goal of using this data to make an informed recommendation for the extension of PPL provided in New Zealand.
In assessing the relative merits of extending PPL, it is important to be clear about what policy goals or objectives it is seeking to address. These include:
- Protecting the health of the mother;
- Improving the health and development of the child;
- Maintaining family income following the birth of the child;
- Maintaining parents’ attachment to the workforce;
- Supporting family work and child raising;
- Helping to reconcile work and family life by protecting and promoting the well-being of children while their parent(s) is/are in the labor force;
- Ultimately, recognizing the social and economic importance of childbearing and child-raising.
In analyzing the social impacts of PPL, I found it has major correlations with:
- Increased parental bonding with new baby without worrying about money or future career prospects.
- Research shows many parents, especially mothers, return to work sooner than they would like, primarily because their right to leave was brief, or because of financial pressures.[1] While it is legally possible to more parents to stay at home after the arrival of a child, because the leave is largely unpaid, and too brief for many employees, there are many employees who feel economic and job-risk pressures to return to work sooner than they are ready to.
- Better pediatric health in employees’ children.
- Data for sixteen European countries over the 1969 through 1994 period shows that more generous paid leave is found to reduce deaths of infants and young children. The magnitudes of the estimated effects are substantial, especially where a causal effect of leave is most plausible. In particular, there is a much stronger negative relationship between leave durations and post-neonatal or child fatalities than for perinatal mortality, neonatal deaths, or low birth weight. The evidence further suggests that parental leave may be a cost-effective method of bettering child health.[2]
- Bringing New Zealand’s provisions closer to those provided in other OECD countries.
- All OECD countries (with the exceptions of Australia and United States) provide PPL, with the average duration of paid leave being 36 weeks. Additionally, in sixteen of the OECD countries, the cash benefit provided while on leave replaces between 70-100% of prior earnings.[3]
In analyzing the economic impacts of PPL, I found:
- Increased financial support for employees and their families.
- Employees are able to engage in what it generally unpaid care of their families, while ensuring their continued employment and receive remuneration for their employment.
- Helps employers to retain and recruit staff.
- Research shows that PPL increases the likelihood of employees wit children returning to the labor force. It is frequently viewed by international employers as a sound business decision – less as a generator of immediate and tangible financial savings, and more as a creator of a medium- to long-term investment for themselves.
[1] Kamerman, S. & Gatenio, S.
[2] Ruhm, C.J. (2000). Parental leave and child health. Journal of Health Economics, 19(6), 931-960.
[3] Kamerman, S. & Gatenio, S. http://www.childpolicyintl.org/issuebrief/issuebrief5.htm