Equality at work: paternity and shared parental leave

The UK’s rate of statutory parental pay is completely out of kilter with the cost of living. At considerably less than half of the National Living Wage and real Living Wage, it has not kept pace with inflation and is far below rates in most comparable countries. This causes financial hardship, particularly in lower income households, and is a barrier to parents taking the time they need to care for their babies. The low rate particularly inhibits take up of the very limited amount of statutory leave available to fathers and other parents, a disproportionately high number of whom are entirely reliant on the inadequate statutory minimum. (Conclusion, Paragraph 30)

A key aim of the Government’s review of the parental leave system must be to incentivise greater gender equality in parenting responsibilities. Increasing statutory paternity pay is a vital part of achieving this. As a priority, the Government must consider raising paternity pay to the level of maternity pay in the first six weeks i.e. 90% of average earnings. We recommend this change be made during this Parliament. (Recommendation, Paragraph 31)

In the longer term, the Government must also consider a feasible approach to phased introduction of increases to statutory pay across the system, to bring rates for all working parents up to a very substantial proportion (80% or more) of average earnings or the real Living Wage. Overall paid maternity entitlements in the UK compare unfavourably with most developed countries; reform of statutory pay must therefore not include any diminution of existing maternity entitlements. (Recommendation, Paragraph 32) Extending paternity leave

A key objective of reform of the paid parental leave system should be to promote equality. Maternity and paternity rights should be as equal as possible, to benefit mothers, fathers and families. We therefore welcome the Government’s intention to legislate for a day one right to paternity leave, in line with rights to maternity leave. A day one right to unpaid paternity leave 56 would be, however, only a limited move towards equality. The Government should either amend the Employment Rights Bill to legislate for a day one right to paid paternity leave or at least commit to consider bringing in this vital change, in consultation with employers, as part of its forthcoming review of the parental leave system. (Recommendation, Paragraph 61)

Since introducing up to two weeks of paid statutory paternity leave over 20 years ago, the UK has fallen far behind many comparable countries. We now have one of the worst leave offers in the developed world for fathers and other parents. A maximum of two weeks paternity leave is completely out of step with how most couples want to share their parenting responsibilities and balance these with working life. Our system entrenches outdated gender stereotypes about caring and harms fathers, mothers and families. The system requires substantial change. (Conclusion, Paragraph 64)

There is very strong evidence from around the world and from UK employers’ gender equal schemes that providing fathers and other parents with an extended period of sustainably paid statutory leave typically transforms take up. Extending paternity leave therefore has the potential to shift the dial on gendered allocation of parental responsibilities. Addressing the stark gendered disparity in our statutory leave periods should therefore be considered fundamental to fixing our broken system and a key priority of the Government’s forthcoming review. (Recommendation, Paragraph 65)

The Government’s review must consider a feasible plan to incrementally increase the period of paid paternity leave, drawing on lessons from recent reform programmes overseas, for example in Spain. As an initial medium- term objective, it should set out a pathway to increasing paid statutory paternity leave to six weeks over the course of this Parliament. It should aim to ensure maximum flexibility in the number of blocks the leave can be taken in during the first year after a baby’s birth or adoption. The Government must also assess the likely benefits of making a portion of the extended period of paternity leave compulsory, to drive culture change and normalise fathers taking a greater role in caring responsibilities. (Recommendation, Paragraph 66)

Lack of provision for self-employed parents, particularly fathers and other parents, is a key flaw in the system. Given the substantial economic contribution of self-employed fathers, it is grossly unfair to exclude them. Lack of provision causes financial hardship and associated family difficulties, notably where a self-employed father “does the right thing” in taking time away from earning to care for his partner after a caesarean section or medical complications after birth. The Government must aim to rectify this by: a) considering options for providing statutory paid leave for all self-employed and non-employee working fathers as part of its review of the parental leave system; including, b) introducing a Paternity Allowance 57 equivalent to Maternity Allowance, which provides self-employed mothers with up to 39 weekly payments at the statutory rate; and c) rectifying unfairness in the existing Maternity Allowance rules, including in relation to permitted paid self-employed work beyond 10 “keeping in touch” days while in receipt of the allowance, as identified in our recent follow up Report on misogyny in music, to ensure unfairness is not replicated in provision for self-employed fathers. (Recommendation, Paragraph 67)

While there is evidence of appetite for more leave among fathers across occupational and income groups, fathers in lower income and working-class occupational groups may face additional cultural barriers to taking leave. These households and communities are more likely to hold traditionalist views about gendered caring responsibilities, and these fathers are less likely to have supportive employers. (Conclusion, Paragraph 68)

The design and staffing of services for new parents caring for babies is highly gendered and can exclude or marginalise men, compounding cultural barriers to them taking a greater role in caring for their children. (Conclusion, Paragraph 69)

Alongside reforms of statutory paternity pay and leave entitlements, the Government’s review must consider steps it can take to reduce wider cultural and societal barriers to fathers taking more leave. It should in particularly consider steps to reduce cultural barriers in working class households and workplaces in which working class fathers are more likely to be employed. This could be through, for example, targeted awareness campaigns to ensure all fathers are aware of their paternity and shared parental leave entitlements and work with trade unions and employers of all sizes across all sectors to promote best practice. (Recommendation, Paragraph 70)

There have been recent local initiatives, for example in Blackpool, Bradford, Lambeth, Nottingham and Southend, in partnership with the National Children’s Bureau’s A Better Start campaign, designed to support fathers to play a more equal role in parenting. This has included training for local authority, third sector and NHS service providers, bespoke services for men taking care of their babies and facilitating spaces and communities in which fathers can share their experiences and support each other. A Better Start was a 10-year programme that is largely coming to an end this year, with an evaluation expected early in 2026. As part of its review, the Government should consider the evidence on the effectiveness of initiatives such as A Better Start partnerships in supporting men to take a greater caring role. It should consider the benefits of commissioning schemes of this nature across the country. (Recommendation, Paragraph 71) 58

In implementing reforms that work towards a more gender equal parental leave system, the Government must consider the potential impacts on employment discrimination against fathers and other parents. The Government’s review must consider the adequacy of legal protections against paternity discrimination, including protection from redundancy for those taking paternity leave, and steps needed to raise fathers’ and co-parents’, and their employers’, awareness of legal rights in his area. (Recommendation, Paragraph 72) Reforming shared parental leave

Shared Parental Leave (SPL) has clear benefits for couples who are able to access it. SPL enables a range of flexible options in how parents share their parental responsibilities and balance these with working life. It is the only aspect of our system that allows fathers and other parents an extended period to care for their babies, strengthening bonds with their children and enhancing family life. The scheme’s flexibility allows mothers to maintain attachment to the labour market and career progression. There is evidence that mothers are increasingly aware of this and taking advantage of the flexibility the scheme allows. However, SPL’s complex set of employment status, time in service and earnings eligibility criteria exclude many working parents and are extremely difficult for most parents and their employers to understand. Take up is consequently too low to have a significant societal or economy-wide impact. (Conclusion, Paragraph 91)

The Government must consider steps to address flaws in SPL, increase take up and widen access. The Government’s review must examine the function and necessity of SPL’s complex eligibility criteria, with a view to simplifying or removing the employment status, time in service and earnings criteria. Its objective for reforms of SPL must be to widen access to as broad a range of working parents as possible, including the self-employed and those on lower incomes. (Recommendation, Paragraph 92)

The Government’s review should examine barriers to flexibility in the SPL scheme, including the requirement for employees to give employers eight weeks’ notice of blocks of leave and changes to start and end dates for leave. This should be with a view, subject to consultation with employers, to reducing notice periods and maximising flexibility within the scheme. (Recommendation, Paragraph 93)

The Government’s review must consider financial incentives to increase take up of SPL. The review should examine approaches taken in overseas systems, including the German “partnership bonus” and Portugal’s “sharing 59 bonus”, which provide additional paid leave to couples in which both parents take a substantial portion of leave while the other returns to paid work. (Recommendation, Paragraph 94) Extending access to paid leave

The Government’s review must include consideration of the needs of kinship carers, with a view to including them in the paid parental leave system. This should include consideration of the costs and wider benefits of implementing statutory paid leave for kinship carers, in line with provision for parents by adoption and surrogacy. (Recommendation, Paragraph 102)

In reforming the parental leave system, the Government must address inequality for single parent families. Unlike in many developed countries, single parents do not receive any portion of the paid leave that would be available to the household if they had a co-parent. Extending paternity leave entitlements risks exacerbating this inequality. We recommend the Government’s review consider options for single parents to reallocate some or all of the entitlements of co-parents to nominated family friends or relatives who can share caring responsibilities. It should draw on experiences in overseas systems, including Norway and Sweden. (Recommendation, Paragraph 106)

Our paid parental leave system provides comparatively very poorly for parents of multiple births, who face unique financial, practical and emotional impacts in caring for their babies and young children and juggling work commitments. The Government’s review must consider options to mitigate these impacts through additional financial support. It should draw on lessons from overseas systems, including in Sweden, France and Spain, which provide extra paid leave for multiple births. (Recommendation, Paragraph 109) Modelling the costs and benefits and measuring the success of reforms

The Government has said the parental leave system is broken and promised to launch a “full review”. It is clear that the system has some fundamental failings, including low statutory pay across the board; inadequate leave periods for fathers and other parents; exclusion of many working parents and guardians; and design flaws and unnecessary complexity in the SPL scheme. We acknowledge that it is not feasible to solve all of these problems overnight. However, we expect the Government’s proposed review to lay the foundation for progress in each of these key areas over the course 60 of this Parliament and in the longer term. Working parents will be let down by a review that leads only to tinkering around the edges of the system. The Government should commit to meaningful reforms in the medium term, followed by an assessment of the impacts at the end of this Parliament, with a view to going further towards a more gender equal parental leave system. (Recommendation, Paragraph 120)

Producing much-needed substantial change to our paid parental leave system will require considerable financial investment. For example, the direct costs of extending and increasing paid leave for fathers and other parents to six weeks at 90% of average earnings are likely to be over £1 billion per year. The Government must, however, weigh these costs against the wider economic benefits. The model recently developed by the Centre for Progressive Policy for Joseph Rowntree Foundation demonstrates how this could be done. It projects a net economic benefit from this reform of £2.68 billion per annum around two years after full implementation. The Government must examine this model in detail with a view to adopting it or a similar approach to assessing the likely costs and benefits of necessary reforms. (Recommendation, Paragraph 121)

The Government’s review should have gender equality at its heart. Countries which provide a substantial period of well-paid leave for fathers and other parents have on average a four-percentage point smaller gender pay gap than those that allow less than six weeks. Increasing women’s labour market participation and earnings and reducing the gender gap pay should be key long-term objectives. Progress must be monitored at the household level, including by hours spent on unpaid caring and work in the home by gender; women’s rates of return to work after births; and take up of paid and unpaid parental leave by gender. The Government must ensure data on these measures are transparently available. (Recommendation, Paragraph 125) 61