The Dad and Partner Pay (DaPP) provision (in the current, pre 1 July 2023 scheme) provides 2 weeks of reserved, non-transferable leave for fathers/partners. Uptake has been low relative to use of the paid parental leave by mothers. According to data provided to the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce, in 2019/2020 there were 171,712 recipients of paid parental leave compared to 92,343 recipients of Dad and Partner Pay.[1] In overall terms, it is estimated that approximately 27%–30% of fathers/partners use the 2 weeks of Dad and Partner Pay.[2] This suggests that another incentive is needed to increase uptake by fathers/partners. But what this incentive should be is less clear as there are tensions between duration, payment, equality between mothers’ and fathers’ access, and whether it can be used at the same time as mothers (concurrently), or whether it must be used separately to support sole father care.
Parents were universal in their view that 4 weeks of paid parental leave reserved for fathers was ‘about right’ and sends a clear and positive message about the role of fathers, and an important ‘signal’ to employers about fathers’ role in the care of babies. They agreed a government initiative like this would help to normalise fathers staying home to care for their children while also challenging the idea that only mothers need to bond with a newborn. These views were based on the assumption that fathers were on parental leave concurrently with mothers, not caring for newborns alone.
The whole world’s changing, and dads want to be there with their kids. And I think even for those fathers who don’t think that they want to, I’ve seen it so many times, when the baby’s actually here, they completely change, and they want to. [this would support] enabling the dad and making it a bit more normal as well. I think if [David] wanted to take 4 weeks off, [his employer] would be saying, “Why do you want to take that long off?” Whereas I think if it’s a government initiative, it almost normalises it a little bit as well. This is an entitlement that dads are taking now. We see that fathers should be with their newborn kids and stuff. And I just see that as a really good thing. (Alexia, middle income)
I like the idea of [Andy] having more of a role than what my parents did, in terms of dad was the one that worked, mum stayed at home. I like the idea of both the male and female playing a role in the actual parenting. Even if it might be lopsided to [Andy] working more, I still think it’s really valuable for him to have input and a relationship with [our daughter]. Also for me, to maintain work. (Lily, low income)
However, concern was expressed about a time penalty for families where the father genuinely could not take 4 weeks of leave (in a block), thus cutting the total paid parental leave time available to the family, and effectively the mother. In these and other cases where personal, health or work commitments prevent fathers from taking the leave, parents felt the leave should be transferable to the mother.
It's a bit unfair… if you have complications during the birth and stuff, you could be in hospital or the baby could be sick or there’s some things that could happen and then you just don’t get around to it, and if you do and then they’re like, “No, sorry, you don’t get it now,” that would be a bit unfair. (Samantha, single mother, low income)
If you’re offering it to everybody and their work commitments [mean they] can’t take it, it should be still available. It should be looked at more [as] a family and not an individual, in my eyes. Really, if they were willing to pay [Max] to stay home for 2 weeks, why can’t they just give that money to us as a family? … You’re a family, you should just be giving them money and it should just be at your discretion how you use it. (Emily, high income)
Parents did not like the language of ‘use-it-or-lose-it’. They saw this as punitive and felt there could be backlash against fathers using the leave if framed this way. The preference was for the language of ‘reserved leave’. This could be supplemented with ‘non-transferable leave’ or a ‘father’s quota’, both terms widely used overseas.
I don’t like the terminology [use-it-or-lose-it]. It’s almost threatening. (Amy, same sex couple)
I think as a household, it would be great to be able to choose when and who takes it. I can see calling it ‘use-it-or-lose-it’ maybe is not the best idea. I think there would be backlash… I think people would see it as an entitlement that they’re due to receive and if they lose it then the government’s then taking something away from them that they’re entitled to receive. So, I think that wouldn’t land so well. Just something as simple as changing the name of it. … in a more positive light that this is leave for your male partner to take. (Sarah, middle income)
[1] Source: EDW Paid Parental Leave scheme Claims Universe, Data Load Version 2, as at 30 June each entitlement year.
[2] Exact numbers are difficult to obtain: using number of births in a year and assuming matching numbers for fathers/partners, the calculations is as follows: 294,369/92,343 = 31%. Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (2020). Births, Australia. ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/births-australia/2020.