FATHERS’ USE OF LEAVE IN AUSTRALIA

Abstract

This paper examines Australian fathers’ use of leave at the time of the birth of a child, drawing on data from The Parental Leave in Australia Survey, conducted in 2005, and a subsequent organizational case study. Our analysis shows that although most Australian fathers take some leave for parental purposes, use of formally designated paternity or parental leave is limited. This is unsurprising given the Australian policy framework, which lacks legislative provision for paid paternity or parental leave, and does not require any of the shared unpaid parental-leave entitlement to be reserved for fathers. Use of leave is shown to be influenced primarily by fathers’ employment characteristics, with those working in small organizations or non-permanent positions least likely to utilize paternity or other forms of leave. Overall, the analysis suggests that improvements in the policy framework would increase Australian fathers’ propensity to take parental leave, but highlights barriers to usage associated with labour market divisions and career pressures that will not be solved solely by the adoption of more progressive leave policies.

Keywords:

• parental leave
• paternity leave
• fathers
• employment
• Australia

Acknowledgements

This paper draws on research funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC) and five industry partners (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission; New South Wales Office of Industrial Relations; Queensland Department of Employment and Industrial Relations; New South Wales Office for Women; Women's Electoral Lobby) through ARC Linkage project LP0453613.

The survey component of the project (The Parental Leave in Australia Survey) was conducted as a nested study within the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). LSAC was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government through the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA), and is being conducted in conjunction with the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) and a consortium of research agencies and universities.

We gratefully acknowledge the support of these organizations and thank Amanda Hosking for her excellent research assistance. Full responsibility for the content of this paper remains solely with the authors. Gillian Whitehouse is grateful to the Thomas Coram Research Unit at the University of London for visiting status during the conceptualization and initial writing of this paper.

Notes

1. Information on mothers’ exits from the labour market and rates of return to work after taking leave was collected in The Parental Leave in Australia Survey (which is described later in the paper). Space constraints prevent elaboration of these issues here, but see note 8 below for a link to the survey findings.

2. ABS data confirm that it is predominantly men who work these long hours: in November 2006, 25% of employed men and 8.5% of employed women worked a total of 50 hours or more per week (ABS, 2007: 57).

3. The mother's male partner is the designated leave recipient – same sex couples are still not recognized in the federal legislation, although they are in some more recent provisions at state level.

4. In 2001, a federal test case extended the unpaid parental leave entitlement to casuals who had been with the same employer for 12 months. Some states subsequently introduced legislation to this effect, and since 2006 this right has also been encoded in the federal legislation.

5. In the most recent version of the federal legislation (amendments introduced in 2006), a six-week period is set aside for the mother immediately following the birth. In effect, this reduces the father's overall entitlement, as the total amount of leave per family remains at 52 weeks.

6. The total of 52 weeks is also reduced by any other ‘authorized’ forms of leave (such as annual leave) taken by the primary carer during the period up to the child's first birthday.

7. Only organizations of this size are required to report to EOWA.

8. Further information on this survey, including a report on preliminary findings, can be accessed at: http://www.uq.edu.au/polsis/parental-leave

9. The survey collected information on both mothers and fathers in these families. Among the couple families used for detailed analysis in this paper, the questionnaire was completed by the child's mother in 91% of cases, by fathers in 4% of cases, and by both parents in around 4% of cases. In a small proportion of cases no information was provided about who completed the survey. The parent completing the questionnaire may, of course, have consulted with their partner over the details entered.

10. Fathers reported their leave duration in days. The figures in tables 2 and 3 have been converted to weeks on the basis of a set of guidelines which, for example, equates 5–7 days to one week. Full details of the conversion rules are available from the authors.

11. We use the term ‘sector’ to refer to the ‘public/private’ divide. The importance of size and sector of employing organization for access to paid parental leave was indicated earlier in the discussion of the EOWA surveys.

12. On the issue of managerial status, for example, different studies have produced contrasting results (see Brandth & Kvande, 2002; Thompson et al., 2005).

13. While the survey collected information on whether the child was the mother's first child, a mother's first child may not necessarily be the father's first child. However, this will be the case for the vast majority of couple families in the sample.

14. In a UK study, Thompson et al. (2005) found that first-time fathers were more likely to take leave than those with more than one child.

15. Two additional variables included in the models, but omitted from table 4 for simplicity of presentation, are ‘don't know’ and ‘missing’ categories for fathers’ union membership and organizational size (6% and 4% of cases, respectively, for the samples used in these analyses, reflecting the fact that the questionnaire was usually completed by the mother). They are included in the analyses to ensure accuracy, but are not in themselves of substantive interest. Full details of all models and summary statistics are available from the authors.

16. Union membership in Australia differs markedly between public and private sectors. In 2005, around 50% of men working in the public sector were union members compared with less than 20% in the private sector (ABS, 2006b).

17. Mothers’ weekly hours were distributed quite differently from fathers’, with the main distinction for mothers being between part-time and full-time employment; hence, the measure included in the reported models was based simply on this distinction. However, as a proportion of employed mothers (a little over 20%) reported working more than 40 hours per week, a variable to represent ‘long hours’ was also tested in the models, but proved not to be significant.

18. While it was not possible to include a comprehensive list of occupations for mothers in the analysis due to colinearity between these and other variables in the models, it was possible to test whether fathers’ leave-taking was influenced by whether his partner worked in a managerial or professional occupation (these occupations accounted for 5% and 39%, respectively, of the sample of female employees used in the analysis). No significant relationships were observed.

19. The relative income of mothers and fathers was tested, based on weekly earnings. No consistent relationships were evident.

20. Full details are available from the authors.

21. Part-time staff can access the pro-rata equivalent. An eligible staff member who is not the primary carer is able to access a five-day short paid parental leave period.