Work–Family Policy Trade-Offs for Mothers? Unpacking the Cross-National Variation in Motherhood Earnings Penalties

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract Recent scholarship suggests welfare state interventions, as measured by policy indices, create gendered trade-offs wherein reduced work-family conflict corresponds to greater gender wage inequality. The authors reconsider these trade-offs by unpacking these indices and examining specific policy relationships with motherhood-based wage inequality to consider how different policies have different effects. Using original policy data and Luxembourg Income Study microdata, multilevel models across 22 countries examine the relationships among country-level family policies, tax policies, and the motherhood wage penalty. The authors find policies that maintain maternal labor market attachment through moderate-length leaves, publicly funded childcare, lower marginal tax rates on second earners, and paternity leave are correlated with smaller motherhood wage penalties. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may

Motherhood Penalties in the U.S., 1986–2014

“…There have been changes in work-family policies in some states in the United States, but these policies do not have the impact of a welfare state that integrates leave, child care, and other supports to working families (Barnett, 2010;Boeckmann et al, 2015;Budig et al, 2016;Gornick & Meyers, 2003). During our sample period, California (2004), New Jersey (2009), and Rhode Island (2014) began providing paid family leave, funded through employee payroll contributions, although restrictions based on tenure, hours worked, and employer size make only a small segment of workers eligible for a paid, job-protected leave.…”

“…Our findings may thus confirm that changes mothers can make-in their human capital investment as well as in their employment patterns-may not be enough to create real change. Policies aimed at supporting mothers' employment may be a necessary next step if we hope to lower the motherhood wage penalty (Boeckmann et al, 2015;Budig et al, 2016).…”

“…Mothers' employment resembles childless women's employment in countries with moderate-length paid leaves and universal child care (Boeckmann, Misra, & Budig, 2015). The motherhood wage penalty is also reduced where policy contexts are supportive (Budig, Misra, & Boeckmann, 2016), although policies are more effective where there is support for maternal employment (Budig, Misra, & Boeckmann, 2012).…”

Part-time or Full-time Employment: Choices and Constraints

“…Welfare state provisions are also known to influence women's participation in the labor market (Budvig et al, 2016;Crompton, 2006;Esping-Andersen, 2009;Gash, 2008;Saraceno & Keck, 2011). The typology for a social-democratic welfare regime (Esping-Andersen, 2009) is known to characterize the Norwegian welfare state.…”

Paying for care in Australia’s ‘wage earners’ welfare state’: The case of child endowment

“…In many countries, such tensions between paid employment and household work or care responsibilities result in a 'motherhood penalty' in wages (Grimshaw and Rubery 2015). Comparative analyses of welfare regimes show that countries with social protection regimes that strongly integrate work and family, including through fiscal policies supporting access to paid maternity and parental leave and child care services, also have less gender inequality in pay and labour force attachment (Gornick and Meyers 2003;Budig et al 2016). …”