Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young is right when she says we’ve come along way in a short time; within a matter of months, not one but both major political parties have finally put paid parental leave on their agenda. But why did it take Australia so long to get to this point compared to the rest of the developed world, and how much longer will it take to actually implement?

As a working woman who wants to remain a working woman and have babies, I find nothing more frustrating than the lack of a national paid maternity leave scheme. Australia is one of a very few countries around the world to have no general provision for this type of leave. Even Ethiopia, an underdeveloped nation, offers new parents 3 months’ leave at 100 per cent pay.

In most countries around the world, leave is funded either by employers directly, through social insurance, or partly funded by employers and employees. In AustraIia, women typically have to work for a large, publicly listed company to get any paid benefits.  Unfortunately, I work for a small, privately funded business with no such scheme in operation (it’s the only time I wished I worked for one of the four big banks) and face returning to a sole income upon the birth of my first child. It’s not something I blame on my employer. It’s simply something a small business cannot fund, for me or anyone else, without the help of the government.

But this really isn’t about money. I’m not worried about ‘doing it hard’ for 6 or more months while I bring up baby. I’m a girl from the ‘burbs who put herself through medical school. I know what it’s like to scrimp and save. The point is that it’s demoralising for an independent woman who has supported herself from the age of 15 to become wholly reliant at the age of 32 on her husband’s income – just because she decided to get preggers. It’s an insult.

More importantly, it’s outrageous for a country – a country that likes to call itself the knowledge nation – not to have paid maternity leave when the benefits to organisations have been proven over and over again:

• Increased retention of female employees and associated reduction in turnover costs;
• Improved staff morale and productivity;
• Cost-effective means of retaining skilled staff; and
• Improved organisational efficiency through the benefits of long service, e.g. institutional memory, industry knowledge, networks and contacts.

I hate to quote old data (although it does show how long we’ve known about the benefits of paid parental leave and done nothing) but a 1994 study from the US found that for every $1 a company spends on flexible work or family benefits, there is a return of $2–6 through reduced absenteeism, increased motivation and higher rates of retention. Indeed, Westpac reported that its retention rate increased from 54 per cent in 1995 to 93 per cent in 2000 as a result of introducing paid maternity leave. BT Australia reported a 100 per cent rate of return, stating that paid maternity leave was seen as intrinsic to returning mothers feeling valued and recognised. John Fairfax Publications reported that 88 per cent of women returned from maternity leave in 2000, compared to only 37 per cent in 1993, the difference being directly attributable to improved practices.

And last but not least, I’m getting old. My eggs are officially running out. I can’t afford to wait any longer for Rudd and Abbott to make it a good time in Australia to have children. I grew up in the days when Natasha Stott-Despoja wore Doc Martens to question time. I was a grown-up by the time she became a mother. I don’t want to be a grandmother before either of us is entitled to paid parental leave.

Candice O’Sullivan is Head of Strategy at WellmarkPerspexa, a business-to-business communications agency where complex messages and specialist audiences meet their match (we wish this included making sense of political mumbo jumbo for mum and dad voters!)

Where do you stand?

Add comment (0)  |  Trackback  |  Follow comments (RSS)  |  More by Candice O'Sullivan