EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 3.10.2008 
SEC(2008) 2596 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
accompanying the 
Proposal for a 
 
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 
 
amending Council Directive 92/85/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage 
improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who 
have recently given birth or are breastfeeding 
  
Impact Assessment Report  
  
{COM(2008)637} 
{SEC(2008)2595} 
 
 
EN 2   EN Disclaimer: This impact assessment report commits only the Commi ssion's departments 
involved in its preparation; it has been p repared as a basis for comment and does not 
prejudge the final form of any decisi on to be taken by the Commission. 
 
EN 3   EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 5 
2. Introduction................................................................................................................ .. 7 
2.1. Background and institutional context........................................................................... 8 3. Consultations............................................................................................................... .9  
3.1. Consultation of social partners................................................................................... 10 3.2. Consultation of the Member States and the Advisory Committee............................. 10 3.3. Consultation of European non-gove rnmental organisations (NGOs) ........................ 10 
3.4. External and other expertise....................................................................................... 11 3.5. Amendments to the impact assessmen t following the opinion of the Impact 
Assessment Board ...................................................................................................... 11 
4. Problem definition...................................................................................................... 12 4.1. An overview of the problem ...................................................................................... 12 4.2. Factors influencing fema le employment rates ........................................................... 13 
4.2.1. The impact of family responsibilities on labour market participation and on careers13 4.2.2. Provision of care facilities.......................................................................................... 16  
4.3. Labour market discrimination against parents of small children............................... 17 4.4. Gender gap in the use of parental leave ..................................................................... 18 5. Description of existing EU legislative in struments and the situation in the Member 
States ......................................................................................................................... . 19 
5.1. Description of different legal and policy approaches in the Member States ............. 20 
5.2. Likely developments in the absence of new EU action ............................................. 23 6. Objectives.................................................................................................................. . 26 
7. Policy options............................................................................................................. 2 6 
7.1. No action at all, non-binding measures, binding measures........................................ 26 7.2. Preliminary screening of options  other than no new EU action................................. 27 
7.2.1. Legally non-binding measures ................................................................................... 27 7.2.2. Legally binding measures .......................................................................................... 28 8. Impact analysis........................................................................................................... 29  
8.1. Impact of no new action at EU level (Option 1) ........................................................ 29 
8.2. Impact of dissemination of best practices (Option 2) ................................................ 30 
 
EN 4   EN 8.3. Impact of legislative measures (Option 3) ................................................................. 31 
8.3.1. Amending maternity leave provisions (Option 3a).................................................... 31 8.3.2. Amending parental leave provisions (Option 3b) ...................................................... 36 8.3.3. Introducing other forms of leave:  adoption leave (Option 3c)................................... 41 
8.3.4. Introducing new forms of leave:  paternity leave (Option 3d).................................... 42 
8.3.5. Introducing new forms of leave: 'filial leave' (option 3e) .......................................... 44 8.4. Comparison of options and conclusions .................................................................... 46 9. Monitoring and evaluation arrangements................................................................... 47 9.1. Possible indicators and monitoring ............................................................................ 47 9.2. Transposition............................................................................................................. . 48 
ANNEX I: Legal framework.................................................................................................... 49 
ANNEX II: Consultation of European Soci al Partners, Member States and NGOs................ 53 
ANNEX III: Table on legal provisions in Member States....................................................... 64 ANNEX IV: Statistical data ..................................................................................................... 73 
ANNEX V: Table on gross cost s and benefits from im proved leave schemes........................ 83 
ANNEX VI: Study on the costs and benefits of  options to improve provisions for the 
reconciliation of work, pr ivate and family life......................................................................... 84 
 
EN 5   EN COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Proposal for non-binding measures  and for legislative action to  promote better reconciliation 
of private, family and working life and to supplement the existing EU framework  
Extended Impact Assessment 
1. E XECUTIVE SUMMARY  
Executive summary:  
The Commission prepared this Impact Assessme nt on the basis of the legislative options 
designed to improve reconciliation which were  outlined in the 2007 second-stage consultation 
of the European social partners1. In July 2008 the social partners confirmed their intention to 
engage in the negotiation procedure under Arti cle 138 EC on the basi s of certain of the 
options. The Commission is limiting its current pr oposal to a reform of the existing Directive 
92/85/EEC on maternity protection and leave, sin ce the social partners have confirmed that 
they do not intend to cover this in their negotiations. However the Impact Assessment is 
published in full since the option of amending the ma ternity leave provisions has to be seen in 
the broader context of fam ily related leave provisions. 
Gender equality is one of the main objectives of the European Union to be achieved via all the 
Union’s policies2, and the Commission's Roadmap on Equality between women and men3 
highlights the need for women and men to particip ate to an equal extent in the labour market. 
The importance of policies to support the reconc iliation of professional, private and family 
life is now widely recognised4 – and has become an economic imperative as demographic and 
competitive pressures highlight the need to optim ise labour market partic ipation. Furthermore, 
there is a positive correlation between fertility rates and labour market participation: Member 
States with more women in employment are the countries where the fertility rates are higher. 
But in practice, it is mainly women who – for reasons of economic necessity rather than free 
choice - make use of reconciliation facilities like  family-related leave, flexible working hours, 
part-time work and so on in order to balance their privat e and professional lives. As a 
consequence there is a gap in women's and me n's participation in the labour market. The 
employment rate of women falls when they have  children while the opposite is true for men. 
In 2007, the employment rate of women between  25 and 49 with dependent children was 65% 
compared with 92% for men with dependent chil dren. The gender pay gap is also caused to a 
certain extent by reconciliation problems wome n face: they have disjointed, slower and 
shorter careers which are thus less financially rewarding. The fact that mainly women and not 
men take long parental leave periods perpetuates gender-related stereotypical assumptions 
about women's domestic responsibili ties and aptitudes for employment.  
                                                 
1 http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_dialogue/docs/reconciliation2_en.pdf 
2 Article 2 and 3(2) EC Treaty. 
3 COM (2006)92. 
4 COM(2008) 599 
 
EN 6   EN The current legal framework5 provides for a minimum entitlement of 14 weeks of maternity 
leave paid at least at the leve l of sick leave, and for a three-month unpaid parental leave 
entitlement for each parent. The duration and the exact conditions of adoption leave are not fixed in the current framework nor is the right to  paternity leave and 'filial' leave (leave to care 
for dependent family members).  
The Commission consulted the European social partners in a two-stag e process in 2006 and 
2007 as well as Member States and NGOs in 2007 and 2008 to obtain their view on possible 
legislative and non-legislative measur es in the area of reconciliation. 
The objectives of any action would be to achie ve more gender equality in labour market 
participation rates and a better reconciliation of  professional, private and family lives. These 
main objectives would translate into boosting th e employment rates of women with children, 
widening the scope of family-related leave and making it more worthwhile as well as 
reducing the gender imbalance in doing so, prov iding financial support during family-related 
leave and reducing discrimination. A number of possibilities were examined and then 
narrowed down to the following options: no action at EU level, dissemination of good 
practice, amending the maternity leave rules (Directive 92/85EEC), amending the parental 
leave rules (Directive 96/34/EC), making mo re specific provision for adoption leave and 
introducing two new forms of leave - paternity and filial leave.  
The conclusion is that failing to act at EU level is not an option. Raising the female 
employment rate is a central part of the Grow th and Jobs strategy and, given the impact that 
having children has on women’s labour market participation, th e Commission has identified 
enhanced reconciliation as on e of the six priorities in its Roadmap on Equality between 
women and men. There is widespread support from Member States and stakeholders for 
action, though views differ on its form. 
Non-legislative measures (exchanges of good practice, social partners' initiatives, for 
example) will continue in any case as will other measures to increase the employment rate of 
women. But they will not be e nough to address the specific pr oblem of gender imbalance in 
the take-up of family-related leave. Action at th e EU level is justified in order to adapt the 
already existing provisions to th e new challenges and continue to maintain a level playing 
field between Member States in term s of protection of pregnant women.  
Taking into account the results of the consultati on process as well as the results of a study 
commissioned by the Commission, the remaining op tions are considered to be of value in 
helping to better reconcile work and family life and achieving more gender equality in labour 
market participation rates.  
The option of extending the duration of maternit y leave and offering better compensation was 
considered to be a good way to improve the ab ility of women to reconcile childbearing with 
remaining in the labour market. It would give the mother longer to re cover from giving birth 
and to bond with the child. (It should be noted that no change  would be needed in many 
Member States.) Also, it seems appropriate to pr ovide for the right to ask for flexible working 
conditions when coming back from maternity leave in line with the revised working time 
                                                
 
5 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage 
improvements in the safety and h ealth at work of pregnant work ers and workers who have recently 
given birth or are breastfeeding; Council Directive 96/34/EC of 3 June 1996 on the framework 
agreement on parental leave.  
 
EN 7   EN directive currently under discus sion in the Council and the European Parliament. Taken 
together, these measures could ma ke it easier for women to return to work after childbirth and 
so avoid that they drop out of the labour market altogether. This is espe cially relevant for the 
14% of households with dependent children whic h are managed by a single parent, usually the 
mother. 
The costs of this option arise from longer leave and higher compensation in the Member 
States where change is needed as well as the costs of replacing the absent worker. To avoid 
that these costs fall unduly on businesses especially smalle r ones, the Commission proposal 
allows Member States to cap the maternity allowance. Member States also remain free, as now, to determine the share of the allowance which is financed by the state.  
For two parent households in pa rticular, an important compleme nt to maternity leave would 
be to extend parental leave for one month under the condition that both
 partners take a certain 
amount of that leave and ensuri ng a payment for this leave as well as the introduction of 
other/new forms of leave (adoption leave equal to parental leave,  10 days paid paternity leave 
and 1 month unpaid filial leave).  
Safeguards should be introduced to ensure that  parents taking these forms of leave will not 
suffer discrimination.  
In conclusion, improving the en titlement to family-related leave alongside other measures 
notably the better provision of childcare wi ll help women and me n to achieve better 
reconciliation between wo rk and private like. The starting point is an adequate maternity 
leave provision for the mother complemented by parental leave to be taken by either parent. 
The impact assessment therefore concludes that  a proposal for amending the maternity leave 
rules (Directive 92/85/EEC) remains at this stag e a very useful measure in order to improve 
reconciliation and can be taken into account by the social part ners in their negotiations on 
other forms of family-related leave.  
2. I NTRODUCTION  
Gender equality is one of the main objectives of the European Union to be achieved via all the 
Union’s policies6. The Lisbon Strategy is one of the means to achieve it. Measures to improve 
gender equality can contribute to the goal of mo re growth and better jobs. Europe’s welfare 
states are confronted with new family models and gender roles as well as with demographic 
pressure from an aging population. As Europe shifts towards 'dual earner' families7, 
employees increasingly face new challenges, such  as reconciling work and family life, single 
parenthood, providing care for relatives and insufficient social security coverage8. Among the 
major instruments available to help women and men cope with a changing society are 
reconciliation measures a nd reconciliation policies9.  
                                                 
6 See in general, on development in this area 2008 report of the Commission on equality between women 
and men, COM(2008)10 final. 
7 Commission Communication: Access and solidarity: towards a new social vision for 21st century 
Europe, COM(2007) 726 final. 
8 The EU and new social risks: the need for a differentiated evaluation, Treib/Falkner, paper 2004. 
9 Measures supporting a combined prof essional, family and private life, and as such may refer to a wide 
variety of policies, including childcare services, leave facilities, flexible working arrangements and 
other measures, such as financial allo wances during family-related leave. 
 
EN 8   EN 2.1. Background and institutional context 
Gender equality has been  an objective of the European Employment Strategy (EES)  since 
its inception in November 1997 and since the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty, when the EES was launched. The new EES is framed in  the (renewed) Lisbon Strategy for Growth 
and Jobs establishing th e Integrated Guidelines
10. At the Lisbon Eur opean Council (March 
2000), the European Union set itself a new strategic goal for the next decade — the 'Lisbon 
Strategy'  — to make Europe more dynamic and competitive. The importance of gender 
equality in the Lisbon process is reflected in  the quantitative targets to be achieved by 2010, 
namely a female employment rate of at least 60%. The Barcelona European Council in March 
2002 concluded that Member Stat es should remove disincentiv es to female labour force 
participation and fixed targets for childcare11.  
The Joint Employment Report 2006/2007  called for further policies to promote child and 
elderly care and stated that re conciliation of work and family life would continue to improve 
the position of women12. The Joint Employment Report 2007/200813 recognised that ‘ the 
progress in the field of gender equality has been mixed '. It also stated that Member States 'are 
far from reaching the childcare targets and most do not even re fer to them in  their national 
strategies' .  
The European Parliament  has consistently called for improvements to the existing 
Community legislation on mate rnity and parental leave14 and, in its May 2008 proposals to 
amend the new Employment Guidelines, called for the provision of pare ntal and other leave 
schemes15. In its resolution of 21 February 200 8 on the demographic future of Europe16, 
Parliament called on the Member States to ad opt best practices as regards the length of 
maternity leave and pointed out that it is possi ble to influence birth-ra te curves favourably 
through coordinated public policies, by creatin g a family- and child-friendly material and 
emotional environment. In its resolution of 27 September 200717 it urged the Member States 
to mutualise the costs of maternity and parental  leave allowances in order to ensure that 
women no longer represent a more costly s ource of labour than men and welcomed the 
consultation procedure on reconciliation with the social partners. It also called on the Member 
States, in conjunction with both sides of industr y, to combat discrimination against pregnant 
women on the labour market and to take all necessary steps to ensure a high level of 
protection for mothers, and asked the Commissi on to make a more detailed assessment of 
                                                 
10 In the Integrated Guidelines 2008-10, gender equality is mentioned as a general principle (gender 
mainstreaming), and is also dealt with under Guidelin e 18 (‘promote a lifecycle approach to work’), see 
COM(2007)803, part V, http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/european-dimension-200712-annual-
progress-report/200712-annual-report-integrated-guidelines_en.pdf  
11 Provision for at least 90% of children between three years and the mandatory school age and for at least 
33% of children under three years. 
12 See footnote 6, p. 10. 
13 Of 3 March 2008 adopted by the Council (EPSCO) at its session on 29 February 2008, page 9. 
Moreover, the Joint Employment Report 2007/8, page 4, makes the point that ‘ the responsiveness of 
European labour markets to the challenges of globalisation and ageing remains insufficient ’. 
14 For example, Resolution 2003/2129(INI), P5_TA(2004)0152), point 26. 
15 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc .do?pubRef=-//EP// TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2008-
0207+0+DOC+XML+V 0//EN&language=EN  
16 2007/2156 (INI), points 14 and 15, at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-
//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2008-0066+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN . 
17 2007/2065(INI) ) at: 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do? type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2007-
0423 , point 13, 28 and 29. 
 
EN 9   EN compliance with Community law in this area and to determine whether it needed to be 
revised. 
The Commission’s approach to gender equality is to combine mainstreaming with specific 
actions. The Roadmap for equality between women and men 2006-201018 sets six priorities 
for action, the first being to achieve equa l economic independence for women and men. 
Another of the priorities, reconciliati on, directly contributes towards this.  
The Commission’s approach and its prioritie s were backed by the March 2006 European 
Council in the European Pact for Gender Equality19. The Pact encourages the Member 
States to implement policies to promote women's employment and a better work-life balance for all (Barcelona targets in childcare, care f acilities for other dependents, and promotion of 
parental leave). The Council conclusions of December 2007 on 'Balanced roles of women and 
men for jobs, growth and social cohesion'
20 called on the Commission to  act in the area of 
reconciliation. 
The European social partners  play an important part in th e area of reconcil iation, too. Their 
framework agreement on parental leave in 199 5 was enacted, in its totality, via the 1996 
Parental Leave Directive. This was the first ag reement between the social partners to benefit 
from the provision under Article 139(2) EC Treaty wh ich gave the social pa rtners a privileged 
role in creating Community legislation. Fu rthermore, they adopted, in March 2005, a 
Framework of Actions on gender eq uality including as one of th e priorities act ions to support 
work-life balance (see further reference below under 5.1.).  
The Commission's work programme 2008  (CLWP) includes  a proposal to amend Directive 
92/85/EEC as a priority initiative21 while the catalogue complementing the CLWP 2008 
contains, firstly, a proposal amending Directive 96/34/EC22 in view to enhance the 
reconciliation of profe ssional, private and family life by improving existing parental leave 
provisions and, secondly, a proposal for a Dir ective providing for adoption, paternity and 
'filial' leave23 in line with the Commission's intent ion to review the existing EU gender 
equality legislation not include d in the 2005 recast exercise.  
3. C ONSULTATIONS  
As the Commission consulted the social partne rs, the Member States and several European 
NGOs active in the area, the inform ation received was considered to be sufficient in terms of 
representation of the different in terests. An additional public c onsultation was not considered 
necessary. 
                                                 
18 COM(2006) 92 final 
19 See paragraph 40 of conclusions in http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/89013.pdf . 
20 http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/07/st14/st14136.en07.pdf , particularly paragraphs 12 and 13.  
21 See under 2008/EMPL/025 in the catalogue of priority initiatives, 
http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/docs/clwp2008_roadmap_priority_initiatives.pdf  and in 
COM(2007)640 final, Commission Legislative and Work Programme 2008, COM(2007)640 final, p.26. 
22 See 2008/EMPL/024 in the Forward programming 2008. 
http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/docs/forward_programming_2008.pdf . 
23 See 2008/EMPL/026, http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/docs/forward_programming_2008.pdf . 
 
EN 10   EN 3.1. Consultation of social partners 
The European social partners were consul ted by the Commission in 2006 and 2007 in two 
stages24, following the procedure laid down in Article 138(2) and (3) of the EC Treaty. In the 
light of the responses to the first consultation, th e Commission identified a number of options 
for change, namely to amend the provisions for maternity leave, and an option to introduce 
other types of leave (paternity leave, adoption leave and 'filial leave' in order to care for 
dependent family members). A number of options  for possible amendments to the framework 
agreement on parental leave annexed to Direct ive 96/34/EC were also identified. In response 
to the second-stage consu ltation, four social partners25 decided to set up a joint working group 
within the context of the European social dial ogue to carry out a review of the framework 
agreement on parental leave. The social partners  confirmed in July 2008 that they will enter 
into formal negotiation in accordance with Article 138 EC.  
3.2. Consultation of the Member Stat es and the Advisory Committee 
In December 2007 the Commission consulted the Me mber States to gather information on the 
legal situation regarding all forms of family-re lated leave arrangements and to ascertain their 
views on options for amending the existing legi slation. The Member States’ views on possible 
amendments to the acquis  vary significantly26. Nine Member States ar e against any alteration 
of the leave arrangements at EU level27, three Member States28 are in princi ple opposed to 
changes but could support changes in some area s and the rest of the Member States supports 
changes.  
The Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men29 adopted an opinion 
on the introduction of new forms of leave (paternity leave, adoption leave and 'filial' leave) in written procedure on 3 July 2008
30. The majority of the Advisory Committee believes that 
there is a need for further European Union legisl ation in this policy area of reconciliation of 
work and family life with a particular em phasis on further developing statutory leave 
entitlements. The Advisory Committee further develops the possible c ontent of modernised 
legislation.  
The positions of the Member States and of the Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities 
are addressed later in this Report in the assessment of the different options. 
3.3. Consultation of European non- governmental organisations (NGOs) 
In December 2007 the Commission consulted several European NGOs by questionnaire to 
ascertain their views on options for amending and supplementing the existing legislation on 
leave arrangements in connection with reconcilia tion. In general, they welcome the idea to 
offer better reconciliation facilities. The result s of the consultation are given in Annex II. 
                                                 
24 Details in Annex II under 'Consultation of European Social Partners'. 
25 ETUC, BUSINESSEUROPE, CEEP and UEAPME (find explanations for the abbreviations in Annex 
II). 
26 See Annexes II and III.  
27 Czech Republic, Denmark, Ireland, Latvia, The Netherlands, Malta, Poland , UK and Sweden. 
28 Estonia, Finland and Romania. 
29 Including members from Member States, equality bodies, social partners and NGOs. 
30 see under 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/gender_equality/docs/2008/opinion_newforms_en.pdf. 
 
EN 11   EN 3.4. External and other expertise 
In December 2007 the Commission commissioned a study on costs and benefits  of 
reconciliation measures from the ECORYS Group (cited as 'ECORYS study'). The final 
results, entitled Study on the costs and benefits of opt ions to improve provisions for the 
reconciliation of work, private and family life , is published on the website31. The executive 
summary is reproduced in anne x VI. The study categorised the Member States according to 
the main characteristics of thei r parental leave and maternity leave schemes and their type of 
welfare scheme. ECORYS then selected eight Member States32 considered to be 
representative of the 27 Member States to calc ulate the costs and benef its of amended family 
leave schemes. The assumption in the study is that the implementation of the improved leave 
forms would start from 2008 and then the results  show the consequences for a twenty-year 
period, 2008-2027. (A full explanation of the met hodology is explained in the appendix to the 
study.) 
The network of national legal experts  on gender equality delivered a report in 2007 on 
Pregnancy, Maternity, Parent al and Paternity Rights33 and in 2008 a report on Legal 
Approaches to Some Aspects of  the Reconciliation of Work, Pr ivate and Family life (i.e. on 
questions such as part-time work, adjustme nt of working time, job sharing, lifecycle 
approaches in working patterns, support for child -care facilities) in thirty European countries 
34.  
In order to have input from other Commission services, an in ternal Interservice Group was 
established35. It met twice. 
3.5. Amendments to the impact assessment following the opinion of the Impact 
Assessment Board 
Following the opinion from the Impact Assessm ent Board of 16 July 2008, a more thorough 
analysis of the problem has been developed an d the discussion of the different options in 
sections 7 and 8 is better related to the achieveme nts of the two objectives of more equality in 
labour market participation and better reconcilia tion of professional, private and family life as 
well as to the specific objectives (the overvie w table after each option have been adapted). 
The problem definition under point 4 now high lights how the options address the problems 
and how the situation can be influenced by better  reconciliation measures. The analysis of the 
problem related to the lack of childcare facilities has been deep ened and is addressed in more 
detail under point 4.2.2. The differences between th e social models in the Member States are 
explained under point 5. using the example of parental leave.  The choice of the respective 
options has been explained more fully in the beginning and linked more clearly to the 
problems and the objectives.  
The conclusions for the different options now take into account Member States' need to adapt. 
A table on the comparison of the different opt ions has been added unde r point 8.4. Following 
analysis of the opinion of the Advisory Co mmittee on Equal Opportu nities for Women and 
Men, and the announcement of the social partners to negotiate in this area, the judgement on 
                                                 
31 http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/gender_equality/legislation/new_legislation_en.html. 
32 Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Spain,  France, Hungary, Poland and UK. 
33 http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/gender_equality/legislation/report_pregnancy.pdf. 
34  
35 Members from the following Di rectorates General: LS, ENTR, ECFIN, ESTAT, JLS, SG. 
 
EN 12   EN the options has been revisited taking into accoun t the evolving political context. In particular, 
the evaluation of the option to improve the cond itions of maternity l eave has been changed. 
As this resulted in significant changes in comp arison to the original draft impact assessment 
on which the Impact Assessment Board delivered  an opinion on 16 July  2008,, a revised draft 
of this impact assessment was submitted to the Impact Assessment Board on 17 September 2008 in order to receive a renewed opinion. 
Following the second opinion of the Board of 23 September 2008), further modifications to 
the report were introduced, mainly in Sections 1 (Executive summary), 5 (Description of existing EU legislative instruments and the s ituation in the Member States) and 8 (Impact 
analysis), in order to, i.a., demonstrate mo re clearly why the Maternity Leave Directive 
should be amended and provide a more thorou gh assessment of the impact of the proposed 
amendments. 
4. P
ROBLEM DEFINITION  
4.1. An overview of the problem  
The need for reconciliation policies is now accepte d at EU level. As explained in a recent 
Commission Communication36, successful reconciliation is rele vant to a number of key policy 
objectives while, at the personal level, they m ean that women and men do not have to make 
trade-offs between having a fulfilling private, fa mily and professional life. They can enable 
both women and men to exercise real  choices in this area and, in particular, they can result in 
an increase in the employment rate of wome n and a decreased women's unemployment rate. 
They can also reduce gender segregation in th e labour market and close the gender pay gap. 
However, the reality is that, even where various  flexible working arrangements have been put 
in place to support reconciliation, they are us ed much more by women than by men for 
reasons of economic necessity rather than free  choice. This means that these arrangements do 
not have the impact on female labour ma rket participation that they could. 
As noted in the Impact Assessment37 supporting the Commission Communication on A 
Renewed Social Agenda38: 
Both women and men do not always have sufficient oppor tunities to strike a work-family life balance 
(for instance, through access to childcare fac ilities and flexible working arrangements), but this 
affects women more: domestic and family respons ibilities are still unequally distributed. The 
disadvantaged position of women in accessing the labour market has consequences in terms of the 
higher risk of exposure to poverty among women, particularly older women. Among people over 65 
years, the risk was significantly higher for women than for men in the EU-25 in 2005 (21% as against 
16%). 
Despite the increase in th e participation of women in the labour market, the pay gap has 
remained steady at 15% from 2003 to 2007, an d has narrowed by only one point since 200039. 
This pay gap is to a certain extent due to th e problems women face in reconciling professional 
                                                 
36 Cf COM(2008)599  
37 SEC(2008)2156 
38 COM(2008)412 
39 Definition used by Eurostat: ‘The gender pay gap is given as the difference between average gross 
hourly earnings of male paid employees and of female paid employees as a percentage of average gross 
hourly earnings of male paid employees.’ 
 
EN 13   EN and private obligations. In its 2007 Communication40 on the Gender Pay Gap, the 
Commission pointed to the link to  the imbalance in this area: 
Although part-time work may be a personal choice and encourage the involvement of women in the 
workplace, the gap between women and men underlines th e fact that they do not use their time in the 
same way and that the task of looking after depende nt family members is largely borne by women. The 
lack of accessible, affordable and good quality child care reinforces this lack of  balance. In the same 
way, far more women than men choose to take par ental leave. Parenthood permanently reduces the 
employment rate of women but not that of me n. As a result, women have careers which are more 
disjointed, slower and shorter and thus less financially rewarding . 
This part of the Report reviews the difficulties women and men – but especially women - face 
in reconciling their professional and private/family  lives and the impact that this has both on 
gender equality and on growth and jobs. The interd ependence of the problems is illustrated by 
the following diagram: 
Gender pay gap Traditional family roles Low fertility ratesInsufficient childcare Insufficient leave arrangementsLow maternal employment rates
Discrimination of parents
taking parental leaveSlow career
of women
 
The following sections look firs t at the factors re lated to reconciliation which influence 
female/maternal employment rates, then at workplace discrimination experienced by the parents of small children, and lastly at the gender imbalance in the take-up of family-related leave.  
4.2. Factors influencing female employment rates  
4.2.1. The impact of family responsibilities on labour market participat ion and on careers  
Female employment has been the main factor in  the steady growth of employment in the EU 
in recent years. Between 2000 and 2007 employme nt in EU-27 grew by nearly 16 million, 
including almost 10 million women. The employment rate gap  between women and men fell 
from 17.1 percentage points in 2000 to ar ound 14 percentage points in 2007. However, these 
figures conceal the stark impact of having ch ildren : the employment rate for women with 
dependent children in 2007 was only 65.5%, compared with 91.7% for men
41, a difference of 
more than 26 points. The figures for 2007 show  that the employment ra te of women between 
the age of 25 and 49 falls  by around 12 percentage point s when they have children42, while 
that of men rises by  around seven points43. Maternal employment rate s are particularly low for 
                                                 
40 COM(2007)424, 'Tackling the gender pay gap between women and men'. 
41 See Table 7a in Annex IV. 
42 See Table 6a in Annex IV. 
43 Eurostat, Labour Force Survey, see Annex IV Table 7a.  
 
EN 14   EN women with two or more children44. Time series about the deve lopment of employment rates 
of women with and without childr en can be found in Annex IV, Ta ble 6b. It can be seen that 
for both groups labour market participati on increased by around 5% from 2000 to 2007, but 
the gap between these two groups remains stable  at EU level at around 12 percentage points. 
Therefore, the impact of having children on em ployment rates of women remains stable at EU 
level. 
In general, closing the gap between male and female employment rates would boost GDP 
significantly45. In EU-25 in 2003 the employment rate  of women aged 20-49 whose youngest 
child was between 6 and 11 was 67%, falling to 60% when the youngest  child was between 3 
and 5, and declining to 52% when the youngest child was between 0 and 246. The impact of 
motherhood on employment rates is more pronounced in some Member States than in others. 
According to tables compiled by Eurostat in  2007, the employment rates for women with 
children are highest47 (over 70%) in Slovenia, Lithuania, Denmark48, Portugal and the 
Netherlands, followed by Cyprus, Finland, Latvia  and Belgium. The rates are lowest (less 
than 60%) in Malta, Hungary, Italy, the C zech Republic, Greece, Slovakia and Ireland. The 
general employment rate of men aged 25-49 without children in EU-27 was 84.4% in 2007, 
while that for men with children was 91.7%49. The Nordic countries, namely Finland, 
Denmark and Sweden, plus the Netherlands, are those with the smallest differences between 
male and female part-time workers. Spai n, Germany, Austria and Luxembourg show the 
widest differences between male and female part-time rates50.  
Family responsibilities mean that wome n are more likely to work part-time  than men do51. 
This has negative implications for their career prospects and wages. Ac cording to figures for 
EU–2752, 31.4% of women work part-time compared with 7.8% of men and more than three-
quarters of part-time workers ar e women (76.5%). A quarter of  EU part-time workers state 
that ‘child and adult care reas ons’ lie behind their decision to work part-time. 75% of women 
reported that they did not work full-time because of care responsibilities for children53.  
Women today have achieved higher levels of edu cation than ever before and they account for 
over 40% of the global workforce. Yet, as a result of the dual burden that many face, women 
often do not find jobs and working hours that  fit in with their family arrangements54. They are 
                                                 
44 See Table 7b in Annex IV. 
45 See Global Economics Paper No 154, Goldmann Sachs 2007, p.7: For Spain, GDP would be 19% 
higher, the Eurozone 13%, Germany 9%, Fran ce 9%, the US 9%, the UK 8%, Denmark 5% and 
Sweden 3% . 
46 Eurostat, statistics in focus, Gender gaps in the reconciliation between work and family life, 4/2005; in 
France, a child decreases women's labour market participation by 1 hour/week per child, see Majnoni 
d'Intignano, Egalité entre femmes et homes, Paris 1999, p. 95. 
47 Eurostat, Labour Force Survey, see Annex IV, Table 6a. 
48 Data for Denmark are not included in Table 6a of Annex IV, but Denmark's employment rates have 
been around 80% for women with and without children; in Sweden the employment rate for women 
with children is traditionally very high too.  
49 Eurostat, Labour Force Survey 2006, see Annex IV, Table 7a.  
50 European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Part-time work in 
Europe, 2007, pp. 3 and 4. 
51 See Table 8 in Annex IV. 
52 See Table 4 in Annex IV; see also European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working 
Conditions, Fourth European working conditions survey, 2007, p. 7;  
53 Ibid, Table 39. 
54 Working Conditions in the European Union: The gender perspective, European Foundation for the 
Improvement of Living and Working conditions 2007, p. 45. 
 
EN 15   EN also under-represented in th e area of self-employment55. A study conducted in Italy in 2006 
shows that one out of seven wo men gives up her job in the fi rst year after the birth of a 
child56. More than 35% of mothers with small children who stayed in employment reported 
difficulties in reconciling work and family life. Inflexible working hours are given as the main 
difficulty in this respect. Accord ing to another study car ried out in Italy, 40% of women with 
children give up working completely57. It transpires from a study carried out in France58 that 
on average 50% of women declared they had put as ide their career intenti ons to care for their 
children. 14% of workers and employees and 9% of women in management reported they had 
been pensioned off because they took maternity leave59. A study carried out in Germany in 
2003 came to the conclusion that 40% of women who had been in  employment before giving 
birth did not return to wo rk after the child was born60. According to a st udy carried out in 
2002 in 16 European countries, the preference of  couples was for working time to be more 
equally distributed between partners. However, in 47% of households with a child under six 
years of age, women were not in paid work, ev en if they wanted to be. Thus the present 
division of paid work corresponds much le ss to a voluntary choice than to necessity61.  
Furthermore, there is a positive correlation betw een high fertility rates and high female labour 
market participation. Europeans have a fertility rate  which is insufficient to replace the 
population62. Member States with high female empl oyment rates are also countries where the 
fertility is higher63. Research points to the role of work-family reconciliation policies64. Some 
fear that the changing traditional family model is contributing to lower fertility, but the evidence contradicts this view
65. A significant trend in recent years has been the reversal in 
the correlation between fertility and female labour force participation rates across OECD66. 
Until the mid-1980s, the correlation was consisten tly negative: countries with high average 
female participation rates displayed lower peri od fertility rates. During the late 1990s, the 
correlation started to become positive in some countries a nd by the early 2000s, the EU 
Member States with the highest female particip ation rates also displayed the highest fertility 
rates. The Member States that currently have the lowest levels of fertility (Spain, Italy and Greece) are those with relatively low levels of female labour force participation, while the 
                                                
 
55 See table 9 in Annex IV. 
56 S. Vogliotti, Der Wiedereinstieg in die Arbeit nach der Mutterschaft, 2006, p. 8; see also 
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/ studies/tn0703019s/tn0703019s_8.htm . 
57 See EIRO at http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/studies/tn0703019s/tn0703019s_8.htm . 
58 Direction de la recherche des études de l'évaluati on et des statistiques, DRESS No 531, October 2006, 
p. 6. 
59 Ibid, p. 6. 
60 Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen  und Familie, Betriebswirtschaftliche Effekte 
familienfreundlicher Maßnahmen, Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse 2003, p. 14; around one out of seven women 
in the 'Trentino-Alto Adige' Region in Nothern Italy gave up working in their child’s first year; see: Der 
Wiedereinstieg in die Arbeit nach der Mutterschaft, Vogliotti, 2006, p. 8. 
61 Working time preferences in 16 European countries, 2002, European Foundation for the Improvement 
of Living and Working Conditions, p. 99; only 14% to 15% of couples wanted the woman not to be 
gainfully employed at all; see also table 13 in Annex IV.  
62 Communication from the Commission, Green paper “Confronting demographic change: a new 
solidarity between the generations ”, COM(2005) 94 final. 
63 The demographic future of Europe – from challenge to opportunity, Communication of the 
Commission, COM(2006) 571 final, p. 18; see also Table 6c and 6d in Annexe IV. 
64 H. Engelhardt et al., Fertility and female employme nt reconsidered: A macro-level time series analysis, 
MPIDR Working paper n° 21, 2001. 
65 See Global Economics Paper No 154, Goldmann Sachs 2007, p.7. 
66 D'Addio A. C. and M. Mira d'Ercole (2004) "Trends and determinants of fertility rates and the role of 
policies" OECD social policy division www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/33/35304751.pdf 
 
EN 16   EN countries with higher fertility levels (Denma rk, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, France, UK) 
have relatively high female labour  force participation rates.  
4.2.2. Provision of care facilities 
Childcare  facilities in the Member  States are insufficient67 and are not always adapted to 
family needs68. In Denmark and Portugal only, formal  childcare for more than 30 hours per 
week is available for over 30% of children under the age of three. A Commission report on childcare
69 gives more details on the current situati on in the Member States. From the report it 
transpires that only 10 Member St ates have more or less achiev ed the targets agreed in 2002 
at the Barcelona European Council of 30% ch ildcare coverage for children under 3 years, 
whereas 10 Member States provide for less than  10% coverage for this age group. Some of 
the MS with a low childcare coverage for th is age group also show the lowest employment 
rates of women (CZ, MT, PL, EL, HU for instan ce). According to rese arch carried out in 
Germany, around 90% of women who gave up employment because of small children 
reported that the main reason for not work ing was a lack of childcare facilities70.  
Women also bear the main responsibility of caring for the elderly . A Eurobarometer survey 
conducted in 200771 indicates the huge difficulties in m eeting work and caring commitments. 
According to research carried out  in the Member States, from one  quarter to one fifth of the 
population reported extra responsibilities for car ing for someone who had a long-term illness, 
was disabled or elderly72. One of the dominant features of demographic change over the 
coming decades will be the rise in the number of people aged 80 years and over. Their share 
in the total EU population will increase three- to four-fol d, rising to around 12% by 2050. A 
large percentage of these over-80s  will be frail and dependent on help from others, frequently 
for prolonged periods73. A study completed in 2003 shows that in 1999, 29% of persons over 
75 in EU–15 were severely hampered in everyday life74.  
Problems in this respect vary widely among the Member States. These in clude the availability 
of affordable, quality care for dependants.  In many cases, informal care for dependent 
relatives at home is the only available option. Between 65 and 80% of the informal carers are 
women. According to studies carried out in the UK, more than 54% of those caring for 
disabled family members, the elderly and others (more then six million in the UK) give up work in order to be able to do the caring work. Two out of three working-age carers are not in 
paid employment
75. German and Austrian statistics also show that providing care may have an 
                                                 
67 See tables 11 and 12 in Annex IV on ch ildcare coverage in the Member States.  
68 See recent report: Platenga/Remery, Th e Provision of Childcare Services, 2008. 
69 COM (2008)598 
70 Rump/Eilers, Beschäftigungswirkungen der Vere inbarkeit von Beruf und Familie, 2006, p. 98; 
however, verification of this result might be difficult, it thus only reflects the answers women gave. 
71 See http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_283_en.pdf : Health and Long-Term care in the 
European Union, December 2007. 
72 Family matters, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working conditions, 2007, p. 
13. 
73 The demographic future of Europe – from challenge to opportunity, Communication of the 
Commission, COM(2006) 571 final, p. 3. 
74 Feasibility Study, Comparative Statistics in the area of  care of dependant adults in the European Union, 
Office for Official Publications of the European Union, 2003, p. 83. 
75 Carers UK, the voice of carers, May 2007, Carers UK's  research into the financial impact of caring, see 
http://www.carersuk.org/Policyandpr actice/Research/ResearchLibrary /ResearchRealchangenotshortcha
ngeMay2007.pdf , p. 3. 
 
EN 17   EN adverse impact on labour market par ticipation, particularly among women76. In Germany, for 
instance, the employment rate of women car ing for someone other than a child is 75% 
percentage points lower than for women without such a responsibility77. 
Cross-country studies, conducted by the OECD am ong others, find that subsidised childcare 
boosts female participation by raising the rate  of return to work. Public expenditure on 
childcare averages 0.7% of GDP in the OECD. It is relatively low in countries such as Japan 
(0.3%), Spain (0.4%), the US and UK (both 0.5%);  it is relatively high in Denmark (2.7%), 
Sweden (1.9%) and France (1.3%)78. 
As regards care infrastructure, this report will not go into further details, because the 
Commission has no competence to  act with legislative measures  in this area and non-binding 
measures are already in place.  
4.3. Labour market discrimination ag ainst parents of small children  
As long as mothers rather than fathers forgo participation in the labour force when they 
become parents and make use of parental-leave  provisions, employers might perceive women 
as less committed to their careers than men and will  be less likely to invest in female career 
opportunities79. According to a survey on parental leave conducted by the European 
Foundation for the Improvement of Living a nd Working conditions and published in 200780, 
the fact that mainly women – and not me n – take long family-related leave periods 
perpetuates gender-related, stereotypica l assumptions about women’s domestic 
responsibilities and aptitudes for employment81. In Germany, it was established that 20% of 
all firms feel a strong disi ncentive to employ young women82. Employers will try to limit 
women to jobs where absences are least cost ly, thereby increasing occupational segregation83. 
Some NGOs in their reply to the ques tionnaire sent out by the Commission84 also report 
difficulties women experience in finding a job becau se employers expect them to fall pregnant 
and take parental leave85. One NGO reports difficulties father s experience in taking paternity 
or parental leave because they face hostil ity and prejudice from their colleagues.  
The former Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) in Britain86, referring to a survey carried 
out among employment agencies, reported that more than 70% of these agencies had been 
                                                 
76 Feasibility Study, Comparative Statistics in the area of  care of dependant adults in the European Union, 
2003, p. 91. 
77 Ibid p. 93. 
78 See Global Economics Paper No 154, Goldmann Sachs 2007, p.7. 
79 See further research in: Babies and Bosses, Rec onciling Work and Family life, OECD 2007, p. 59. 
80 Anxo, Fagan, Smith, Letablier, Perraudin, Parental leave in European Companies, European Foundation 
for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Survey on Working Time 2004/2005, Luxembourg 2007. 
81 Ibid, page 9.  
82 Janneke Plantenga & Chantal Remery,  Reconciliation of work and private life, A comparative review of 
thirty European countries, EU Expert Group, European Commission, 2005, page 76. 
83 C. Ruhm, The Economic consequences of Parental leave Mandates: lessons from Europe, (1998) 
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131, pp. 285-317 (288) with further reference to research carried out for Sweden.  
84 See replies in Annex II. 
85 According to press information of 24 September 2004 about an online poll carried out in the UK by 
Croner, an UK-based provider of business information, four-fifth of human resource managers say that 
bosses think twice before employing women of child-bearing age. 
86 EOC, Fairness and Freedom, 2007, page 75.  
 
EN 18   EN asked by their clients to avoid hiring pre gnant women or women of childbearing age87. There 
is a survey showing that extended and very lo ng family related leave provisions which are 
mainly taken by women lead to employers shunning women88. In the UK, women are 23% 
less likely to be employed than men and wome n with a child under 11 are 49% less likely to 
be employed compared with men89. Women returning from family-related leave sometimes 
have to contend with the belief among employers  that their skills have become obsolete. 
Women also suffer a long-term negative impact on  their careers in terms of being sidelined or 
having relatively low-status jobs90. The discriminating act might be for instance allocation of 
inadequate work91 or non-participatio n in training.  
4.4. Gender gap in the use of parental leave  
Maternity and paternity leave are, by definition, taken by the mother or the father. But with 
parental leave, parents can choose which of them takes this form of leave. So it is relevant to 
examine whether they do in fact take up this l eave and which parent does so. This will help to 
understand why there is a gender gap in the use of reconciliation possibi lities. A comparative 
review of reconciliation po licies in thirty European  countries, published in 200592, noted that 
the main factors affecting take -up of parental leave are: 
level of payment  (which affects whether  the leave will be taken and by whom),   
organisational culture (the report suggested that  both sexes suffer from unsupportive 
organisational cultures when it comes to  the take-up of parental leave),  
flexibility ( take-up is more likely if the leav e can be taken in installments),  
labour market sector  (take-up seems to be higher in the public sector) and  
educational level  (the take-up rate of parental leave for men seems to be positively related to  
the educational level of the parent). 
The evidence confirms that there are, indeed , major differences betw een women and men in 
the take-up of parental leave93, which is mainly taken by women94. According to a 2004 
Eurobarometer survey for EU–15, on average 84% of men said they had not taken parental 
leave, nor were they thinking of doing so95. Rates of men taking parental leave were highest 
in Sweden and Denmark, with respectively 18% and 11% of fathers having taken or 
                                                 
87 Ibid, page 77; there is also evidence that in the UK discrimination against women in the workplace - 
with the lost tax revenue and in creased welfare benefits it causes - costs between £15 billion and £23 
billion each year, adding up to as much as 2% of GDP: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/apr/23/worklifebalance.discriminationatwork
.  
88 http://www.management-issues.com/2007/8/2/research/legislation-making-women-less-employable.asp  
89 EOC, Fairness and Freedom, 2007, page 70; Gallagh er/O'Leary, Recru itment 2020: How recruitment is 
changing and why it matters, DEMOS 2007, page 40. 
90 Malo/Munoz-Bullon, Career breaks of women due to family reasons: A long-term perspective using 
retroactive data, 2004 working paper;  
91 See in this connection a German cas e pending, Focus online, 18/02/2008, 
http://www.focus.de/jobs/ber ufsalltag/arbeitsrecht/diskriminierung_aid_261874.html ; according to 
information in the Flash report 3/2008 of the Le gal Experts Network on gender equality, Latvia has 
already introduced such a clause. 
92 http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/publications/2005/ke6905828_en.pdf . 
93 European Parliament Report on reconciling professional, family and private lives 2003/2129 (INI). 
94 European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Parental leave in 
European Companies, Establishment Survey on Working Time 2004-2005, p. 9.  
95 Eurobarometer- Europeans attitude to parental leave, published May 2004, p. 9. 
 
EN 19   EN considering taking parental leave, while in 2004 the average fo r EU–15 was 4%. In 2003, 
42% of fathers reported that inadequate financ ial compensation was the main reason they did 
not take parental leave96. Again in 2003, 34% of fathers said they feared that taking parental 
leave would adversely affect their careers, while higher financial compensation during the 
period of leave and better guarant ees with respect to their careers would encourage them to 
take leave97. The fact that in the majority of cases only women take parent al leave perpetuates 
traditional gender roles in families. 
5. D ESCRIPTION OF EXISTING EU LEGISLATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND THE SITUATION IN 
THE MEMBER STATES  
Two Directives deal with leave for family reasons and related rights, namely Directive 
92/85/EEC98 (hereinafter 'Maternity Leave Directive') and Directive 96/34/EC99 (hereinafter 
'Parental Leave Directive'). Th e two Directives date from 1992 and 1996 respectively. Annex 
I describes their content. Neither of these two Directives was included in the ‘recast’ directive 
2006/54EC which brought together seven other ex isting directives in the field of gender 
equality but their revision was addressed in the two rounds of formal consultations of 
European social partners that the Commission launched in 2006 and 2007 respectively. In 
July 2008, the European social partners indicat ed to the Commission that they would start 
official negotiations on a review of the Pare ntal Leave Directive but not on the Maternity 
Leave Directive. 
A possible revision of the Maternity Leave Directive was submitted to the European social 
partners' consultations because its present c ontent seems outdated and in some respects 
inadequate. Thus, there are regularly ECJ cases  on its implementation in the Member States, 
brought mainly by preliminary ruling request s. These cases concern the insufficient 
protection of women against dism issal or discrimination during or after maternity leave and 
show that there is room for improvement of the current Directive in forc e, in the sense of a 
strengthening of the protection and the rights of the women concerned. The Maternity leave 
Directive currently provides for remunerating ma ternity leave at the same level of sickness 
leave. While the Directive emphasises that this  should not be interpreted as suggesting an 
analogy between pregnancy and illness, this is often how it is perceived. Finally, the 
Directive currently in force provides for a duration of maternity leave of 14 weeks.  
As the tables in Annex III show, there are mark ed differences between the Member States in 
terms of policies adopted in order to enhance rec onciliation. Mate rnity leave  provisions range 
roughly from 14 to 52 weeks, with payments ra nging from 55% and subj ect to a ceiling, to 
100% with no ceiling. Parental leave  provisions involve entitleme nt to leave ranging from 
three months to three years. Payments, where granted, are made for a period of between 15 
days and two years. Entitlement to adoption leave  varies from 10 days to that for parental 
leave. Some Member States provide for no payment, others provide for a payment similar to 
                                                 
96 Eurobarometer- Europeans attitude to parental leave, published May 2004, p. 20. 
97 Eurobarometer- Europeans attitude to parental leave, published May 2004, p. 18; see also 
Han/Ruhm/Waldfogel, Parental leave Policies and Parents' Employment, IZA DP No. 3244, 2007, p. 5. 
98 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage 
improvements in the safety and h ealth at work of pregnant work ers and workers who have recently 
given birth or are breastfeeding (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1). 
99 Council Directive 96/34/EC of 3 June 1996 on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded 
by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (OJ L 145, 19.6.1996, p. 4). 
 
EN 20   EN that for parental leave. There is no entitlement to paternity leave  in a number of Member 
States. Where such entitlement exists, it covers  from one to 10 days. In some Member States, 
a part of parental leave is earmarked for fath ers. Some Member States provide for no payment 
at all, others for a flat-rate payment of up to 100% pay. Some Member States have no 
provision for any entitlement to filial leave . The duration varies from two to 10 days for a 
disabled or sick child and in some cases for ot her relatives too. In some Member States this 
leave is paid on a lump-sum basis at the ra te applicable to sickness or another rate. 
Not all the leave arrangements in place in th e Member States contribute to more gender 
equality and support women, wh o may wish to go back to work. If the payment during 
family-relataed leave is low, this leave will be taken by the partner earning less, which very 
often will be the mother.  
5.1. Description of different legal and policy approaches in the Member States 
The following tables demonstrate different appr oaches towards the orga nisation of parental 
leave100, which can be seen as an example of how Member States organise family-related 
leave. The Member States are presented in th e five tables below according to the level of 
payment for parental leave. From the second table on maternal employment rates it can be 
seen that Member States with high and moderate  earnings-related paymen ts for parental leave 
have high employment rates an d relatively small differences be tween the employment rates of 
women with children and women without child ren (exception: Hungary). Some of these 
Member States, namely Denmark, Sweden, Slove nia and Finland are the ones where childcare 
is available for more than 30 hours per week for nearly (or over) 30% of children under the 
age of three (Barcelona target).  
As regards the pay gap the situation is more co mplex. However, in the last two categories of 
moderate and high earnings-rela ted payments there are Member States with a low pay gap 
like Slovenia and Hungary but also Member Stat es which are clearly below the average of 
15%, namely Estonia and Finland. 
As regards fertility rates, the Member States in the last two categories three include three of 
the seven Member States with the highest fe rtility rates, namely Sweden, Denmark and 
Finland. 
It can be seen from these tables that there s eems to be no approach which could solve all the 
problems. However, a high or moderate earnings-related payment for family-related leave 
seems to correlate positively with high maternal employment rates and seems to have a positive impact on fertility rates too. 
 
  No payment Lump-sum 
payment Low 
earnings-related payment Moderate 
earnings-related payment High 
earnings-related payment 
Baltic States    LT EE, LV 
                                                 
100 For Germany the tables do not take account of the recent change towards a high earnings related 
payment. 
 
EN 21   EN type 
Central and 
Eastern European type BU, PL CZ, SK, RO  HU SI 
Conservative-
corporatist type CY, EL, 
ES, NL, PT, MT AT, BE, 
DE, FR, LU IT   
Liberal type IE, UK     
Social-
democratic type    FI SE, DK 
Source: COWI/ IDEA Consult based on Moss, P. and O’Brien, M. (2006),  Anxo, D., Fagan, C., Let ablier, M.T., Perraudin, 
C., and Smith, M. (2007), European commission  
 
EN 22   EN Employment rates of women aged 25-49, depending on whether they have children 
(under 12) - 2007
79,6
67,0
0102030405060708090
BG PL CY EL ES NL MT IE UK RO AT BE CZ DE FR LU SK IT FI HU LT EE LV PT SIwithout children with children
Source  : Eurostat, European Labour Force Survey, annual averages.
Notes : No data avaialble for DK and SE. No payment for parental leave Lump sum payment for 
parental leaveLow 
earnings -
related paymentModerate 
earnings-
related paymentHigh earnings-related 
payment
Children 0-2 (=under 3) covered by formal childcare (less and more than 30 hours) - 2006
12101020304050607080
UK IE PL CY EL ES NL MT PT AT CZ SK BE DE FR LU IT LT HU FI EE LV SI SE DKpercent>30 1 to 29
Source : Eurostat, EU-SILC.No payment for parental leave Lump sum payment for 
parental leaveLow earnings-
related 
paymentModerate earnings-
related 
paymentHigh earnings-related 
payment
 
EN 23   EN Pay gap between women and men in unadjusted form in EU Member States - 2006 (1)
051015202530
BG PL CY EL ES NL PT MT IE UK RO CZ SK AT BE DE FR LU IT LT HU FI DK EE LV SE SIpercentDifference between men's and women's avera ge gross hourl y earnin gs as a percenta ge of men's avera ge gross hourl y earnin gs)
Source : Eurostat. Administrative data are used for LU, Labour Force Survey for FR and MT. Provisional results of EU-SILC (Statistics on income 
and Living Conditions) are used for BE, IE, EL, ES, IT, AT, PT and UK. All other sources are national surveys. 
EU27, BE, FR, CY, PT and SI provisional results.
(1) Exception to the reference year: 2005: EE, IT, NL.
NB: EU27 estimates are population weighted-averages of the latest available values. CZ: calculations based on the median earnin gs.No payment for parental leave Lump sum payment for 
parental leaveLow earnings
-
related paymentModerate earnings-
related 
paymentHigh earnings-related 
payment
 
Total fertility rate - 2006 (1)
1,91,8
1,7
1,51,41,4 1,4 1,41,3 1,31,4 1,31,42,0
1,21,7
1,3 1,3 1,3 1,31,8
1,31,8
1,41,9
1,6
0,00,51,01,52,02,5
IE UK NL CY MT PT EL ES RO PL BG CZ AT FR SK LU DE IT LT HU FI SI DK LV SE EEpercent
Source : Eurostat.
(1) EU 27 without BE, BE: not available. For IT: 2005.EU 27 (1) averageNo payment for parental leavelump-sum
paymentLow 
earnings related 
paymentModerate 
earnings 
related 
paymentHigh earnings related 
payment
 
5.2. Likely developments in the absence of new EU action  
If no new EU-wide action is taken, the cu rrent programmes, targets and directives  will still 
continue to apply. The Lisbon  targets will be evaluated in 2010 and new guidelines and 
targets will be fixed in the context of the EES. The Roadmap  for Equality101 will come to an 
                                                 
101 COM(2006) 92 final. 
 
EN 24   EN end in 2010 and a new policy framework will be developed in the light of experience. 
Funding of measures to support gender equalit y, such as awareness- raising, training and 
exchange of good practice under th e Community Progress programme  for 2007-13102, will 
continue. The Progress programme  supports the effective implementation of the principle of 
gender equality and promotes gender mainstreaming in all Community policies. The European Social Fund
 (ESF) programmes for 2007-13103 will continue to contribute to the 
Community's priorities as re gards strengthening economic a nd social cohesion by improving 
employment and job opportunitie s and encouraging a high level of employment and more and 
better jobs. 
It can be assumed that the attenti on of the European social partners  to these issues will 
continue. Work-life balance is a major elemen t of the five-year Framework of Actions on 
Gender Equality104 agreed in 2005. 
At international level, ILO and OECD  activities will continue. The OECD carries out broad 
research on current reconciliation policies in all OECD countries105. The ILO will continue to 
carry out analysis and resear ch in the area of gender eq uality. The ILO Convention on 
maternity protection concluded in 2000 will apply where it has been ratified106. 
A marked difference in labour market partic ipation will, however, remain. According to 
Commission projections, the rate of female empl oyment will continue to increase, reaching 
65% in 2025107. But it will then still be about 6 percentage points below the current 
employment rate for men. The problem stem ming from the unequal share between mothers 
and fathers of the task of caring for children will persist. In some Member States, men still do not have the option to take paternity leave. It seems unlikely too that there will be much 
change in the gender pay gap.  
Even though the demographic problem of an ag eing society and the need to increase labour 
market participation rates should induce the Memb er States to take measures to encourage 
more women to enter the labour market, it could take a long time before the Member States 
themselves adopt such measures and before they take effect. The Joint Employment Report for 2007/08 points out that ‘ the responsiveness of European l abour markets to the challenges 
of globalisation and agei ng remains insufficient ’
108 and the latest progress report on the 
Lisbon strategy states that ‘ Member States should take further steps to promote gender equality 
                                                 
102 Decision No 1672/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 
establishing a Community Programme for Employm ent and Social Solidarity  — Progress (OJ L 315, 
15.11.2006, p. 1). 
103 Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 (OJ L 
210, p. 12). Article 6 provides for the monitoring  of gender equality in the context of the ESF. 
104 March 2005 framework programme; see at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/news/2005/mar/gender_equality_en.pdf .  
105 Babies and Bosses — Reconciling Work and Family Life: A Synthesis of Findings for OECD 
Countries; new volumes are published annually; see: 
http://www.oecd.org/document/45/0,3343,de_2649_201185_39651501_1_1_1_1,00.html . 
106 Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Rumania, Slovakia. Source: ILO 28 
July 2008. 
107 see Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and 
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on equality between women and men — 2007 
(COM(2007) 49 final), p. 5, footnote 17. 
108 Joint Employment Report 2007/8, p. 4. 
 
EN 25   EN on the labour market ’109. It t herefore seems that some of the Member States’ own efforts 
currently lack drive. 
To continue at the same pace will clearly be insufficient. The Member States will need the 
participation of more women on the labour market, not only fo r solving the problems of an 
ageing society but also for competitiveness at globa l level. In recent years, most of the jobs 
created in the EU have been taken by wome n. But economic growth will decline from around 
2.4% today to 1.2% in 2030-50 if more people do not enter the labour market110. Greater 
participation by women is therefore vital. The Member States also need a stable birth-rate if they are to cope with the demographic pr oblem. As noted above in section 4.2.1, Member 
States with high rates of female employment al so have fertility rates significantly above the 
average
111. To a large extent they are also the Member States that offer the most effective 
reconciliation policies. 
The added value of EU action 
The contribution of the successful  reconciliation to key policy ob jectives is recognised at EU 
level. However the reconciliation measures intro duced by the Member States vary in terms of 
policy priorities, legal entitlements, and an e xplicit focus on gender equality. Some encourage 
the supply of public and privat e care services, others seek to improve part-time working 
opportunities. In some countries re conciliation is still regarded as essentially a woman's affair, 
while others recognise the role of men in care and family responsibilities, notably by 
encouraging men to take up parental or patern ity leave. Some Member States have recently 
created new rules to encourage women to have  children (Estonia for instance, by providing a 
payment of 100% of average earnings with a high ceiling). Other Me mber States have 
focussed on providing a high earnings-related pa yment during parental leave as well as on 
involving more fathers in taking family-re lated leave (Germany recently, for instance; 
Finland, Denmark and Sweden traditionally, too). Some Member States have recently created 
paternity leave rights (Sloveni a and France, for example).  
A Community-wide measure is necessary to en sure a common minimum standard and thus a 
level playing-field between the Member States. M easures in this area can help Member States 
which do not have in place specific reconciliatio n policies to adapt to the new challenges. The 
EU could create more harmonised rules by ad opting specific measures focusing on better 
reconciliation measures, and th e participation rates of women with children, thus offering 
more choice for fathers to sh are family responsibilities.  
While national traditions and policy choices have  to be respected, the EU must take further 
action in order to promote women's employment  and exploit the full potential of women's 
talents. Since large discrepancies remain between  actual and preferred employment patterns, it 
seems clear that women in general want to wo rk more. There is therefore great potential for 
increasing female labour-market participation112. Some comprehensive studies on European 
countries show that introducing parental leave legislation has raised female employment rates 
                                                 
109 Strategic report on the renewed Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs: Launching the new cycle (2008-
2010),COM(2007) 803 of 11 December 2007, p. 6. 
110 See Commission Communication The demographic future of Europe (COM(2006) 571 final), p. 5. 
111 Ibid . p. 18. 
112 Jaumotte, Female labour force participation: past trends and main determinants in OECD countries, 
OECD Economics Department Working Paper No 376, 2003. 
 
EN 26   EN by 3% to 4%, and even more for women of childbearing age113. Under the conditions 
provided in some Member States  fathers do not avail themselves of family-related leave.  
Does the EU have the right to act? 
The Commission has a right to act accord ing to Article 137(1) and 141 EC Treaty114. 
6. O BJECTIVES  
The overall objectives  are to contribute to the strategy for more growth and better jobs by 
achieving more gender equality  in labour market participatio n rates and allowing women and 
men to achieve a better reconciliation  of their professional, private and family lives.  
The more specific objectives  are (in order of importance) to: 
(1) reduce the difference in employment rate s of women with and without children; 
(2) widen the scope of family-related le ave and the conditions for taking it; 
(3) reduce the gender imbalance in taking the leave115;  
(4) give financial support during leave; 
(5) ensure that taking family-related leave does not  lead to discrimination or to weakened 
job security.  
7. P OLICY OPTIONS  
This section will explain the options which are av ailable to achieve the objectives. As regards 
the legally binding options, significant elements will be dealt with in the social partners' 
negotiations on parental leave. At the end of the period of  the social partners negotiations 
(maximum nine months), the Commission will th en take the necessary action to give legal 
effect to the new agreement by means of a Direc tive or, if the negotiations fail, will consider 
whether to present its own legislative proposal(s).  
7.1. No action at all, non-binding measures, binding measures 
No new action at EU level 
No action at EU level would mean that the Memb er States continue to move at their own pace 
as has been shown under section 5.2. 
Non-binding measures 
Recommendation:  A recommendation to the Member Stat es could urge them to step up the 
process of developing better reconciliation measur es including the provisi on of care facilities.  
Communication:  A communication could address the relati onship of reconciliation policies to 
other key policies and the c onsequences of not acting. 
                                                 
113 The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies in Denmar k and Sweden on Mothers'  career Interruptions due 
to Childbirth, Pyllänen/Smith, Institute for the Study of Labour, 2004, IZA DP No 1050, p. 1 with 
further references. 
114 See details in Annex I. 
115 See also the demands and objectives included in 2007 ILO report 'Equality at work: Tackling the 
challenge', p. 87. 
 
EN 27   EN Report:  a report could present the state of play of reconciliation measures in the different 
Member States. 
Open method of coordination  (OMC): the effectiveness of this method depends to a large 
extent on jointly agreed and easily applicable indicators. These could include targets for female employment rates, female poverty rates,  childcare rates, and rates to measure the 
gender balance in the take–up of pa rental leave. Some of these i ndicators already form part of 
the Lisbon strategy. The EES uses an  OMC based on five key principles
116. The OMC uses 
quantified measurements, targets and benchmar ks with a view to proper monitoring and 
evaluation of progress. 
Exchange of information  and good practice: various measures  could be considered, such as 
setting up a committee of national senior civil servants or making use of the existing ones. 
Legally binding measures 
Legally binding measures could be directives or  regulations. According to Article 137(2) EC 
only directives (and not regulations) are allo wed in order to improve working conditions. 
Therefore, the only suitable legally binding meas ure in the area of reconciliation would be a 
directive . A directive  based on Article 137(2) EC could  lay down a minimum  framework. 
However, a directive could not c over care facilities, because this  issue is not linked to labour-
market opportunities or equal treatment at work. 
7.2. Preliminary screening of options other than no new EU action  
Preliminary screening of options other than no new EU action has taken account of the 
principle of subsidiarity (the EU only takes action wher e it is more effective than action taken 
at national, regional or local level), proportionality (the exte nt of the action must be in 
keeping with the aim pursued), efficiency (a n appropriate relationship between ends and 
means), effectiveness (ability to achieve the de sired effect) and consis tency (with fundamental 
principles and othe r Commission policies). 
7.2.1. Legally non-binding measures 
As has been demonstrated above in  section 5.2, not to act at all at  EU level is not  a preferable 
option. A recommendation, a communication or a report  could offer guidance to the Member 
States on ways of introducing new measures in  the area of reconcil iation. However, the 
Member States are free to react as they see fit to such recommendations, communications and 
reports. Even minimal progress is hard to pred ict and cannot be guaranteed by such measures. 
Furthermore, elements of these policies form part of the existing OMC (see below). Targets 
already exist for childcare as agreed in Barcelona and the Commission report in autumn 2008 
looks at the Member States’ achievements in meeting them117. Moreover, the European Pact 
for Gender Equality  agreed by the Member States at  the 2006 Spring European Council 
encouraged them to promote a work-life balance for all by achieving the Barcelona targets in 
terms of provision of childca re facilities. Lastly the European social partners'  Framework of 
actions on gender equality  adopted in 2005 acknowledges the need  to increase the availability 
                                                 
116 Subsidiarity (balance between action at EU and Me mber State levels), convergence (concerted action), 
mutual learning (exchange of good practice), integr ated approach (structural reforms extending to 
social, educational, tax, enterprise and regional policies) and management by objectives. 
117 COM(2008)598 
 
EN 28   EN of accessible, affordable childcar e facilities of good quality. Furt her targets in this area do not 
seem necessary and a general recommendation on better reconciliation policies is likely to 
have little practical effect. The OMC  is already used in connecti on with the Lisbon targets for 
employment and the Barcelona targ ets for childcare. It therefor e already covers a major area 
of reconciliation policies. This measure theref ore does not seem to be an effective option. 
An exchange of information  remains useful and will be in stituted as indicated above.  
Dissemination of best practice  for reconciliation policies could provide a good means of 
achieving the above objectives. As from 2008 and in  collaboration with the High-Level Group 
on Gender Mainstreaming, the Commission will or ganise the exchange and dissemination of 
good practice inter alia  on reconciliation. The Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities 
could exchange information with the Comm ission on national reconciliation policies and 
provide their opinion on developments.  
In conclusion , legally non-binding measures on thei r own cannot ensure that sufficient 
progress is made towards reaching the objectives  set out above. Moreover, certain targets in 
the area of reconciliation are already covere d by the existing OMC. However, dissemination 
of best practices could make an important c ontribution to improving reconciliation policies. 
7.2.2. Legally binding measures 
A legally binding instrument creates a clear fr amework of minimum right s and obligations. In 
1992 and 1996 respectively, maternity and parental  leave were introduced by legally binding 
instruments at European level. Many societal  and other developments have taken place since 
then as highlighted by the Commission in ‘The Renewed Social Agenda: Opportunities, 
access and solidarity in 21st century Europe’.118  
As the problem analysis demonstrated, there is potential (and a need ) for a higher female 
participation rate on the employment market. The Lisbon strategy has been instrumental in 
inducing the Member States to help bring this about . However, maternal participation rates 
still remain relatively low. Setting new minimum standards by legislation could trigger 
change. New legislation could al so provide more scope for fathers to participate in family-
related leave. The option of legally binding measures will therefore be assessed in further detail. The following sub-options were identified in the second- stage consultation paper sent 
to the European social partners
119: amending the existing Directive 92/85/EEC ; amending the 
existing Directive 96/34/EC ; introducing provisions on other forms of leave namely adoption 
leave, paternity leave and 'filial' leave to care for elderly or dependent family members120.  
Conclusion : a legally binding measure could ensure  that common minimum standards apply 
in all Member States. A legislative instru ment has potential in terms of achieving the 
objective of providing a more equal sharing of  family responsibilities and higher labour-
market participation of women with children . However, any such instruments could be 
combined with non-binding measures, such as dissemination of good practice. On childcare, a 
binding measure is not possible, as  the Commission has no competence. 
                                                 
118 COM(2008)412 
119 See at http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc ial_dialogue/docs/ reconciliation2_en.pdf , p. 9. 
120 See at http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc ial_dialogue/docs/ reconciliation2_en.pdf , p. 8. 
 
EN 29   EN 8. I MPACT ANALYSIS  
Following the preliminary screening, the following options have been identified: 
• No new action at EU level ( Option 1 ) 
• Dissemination of best practice (Option 2)  
• One or more directives to improve leave arrangements ( Option 3 ). The following options 
will be assessed: Option 3a  — amending Directive 92/85/EEC; Option 3b  — amending 
Directive 96/43/EC; Option 3c  — introducing adoption leave; Option  3d — introducing 
paternity leave; and Option 3e  — introducing filial leave. 
Each option will be assessed as to economic a nd social impact (environmental impact appears 
to be negligible and will therefore not be assessed). 
8.1. Impact of no new action at EU level (Option 1) 
If no action is taken at EU leve l, the pace of creating better r econciliation measures in some 
Member States will remain slow and so will  the increase in labour-market participation by 
women with children. Furthermore, women will continue to be the main carers in these 
countries (see also section 5.2). 
Economic and social impact 
As mentioned above, according to  Commission projections in 2007121, even in 2025 women 
will not have achieved equality in terms of pa rticipation in employment. A large number of 
women with children will continue to participate insufficiently or not take part at all in the 
labour market. This generates economic costs: a significant percentage of women are not 
paying social security contributions and are not accumulating pension rights, and society is 
not taking advantage of th eir education and training122. As the gap between the employment 
rate of women with children an d those without children has not  changed very much at EU 
level in recent years, it seems that some Memb er States' own efforts lack drive at present. 
Children have a huge impact on the mother's em ployment for instance in the Czech Republic, 
Hungary, Malta and Slovakia. With the excep tion of Malta the situ ation in 2007 has even 
worsened slightly compared to 2000123. 
If no action is taken, the present situation will  prevail in several Member States, shaping 
caring and family work in a way which does not reflect the needs or potential of women. It 
will perpetuate the limited ability of women with children to participate in the labour market 
and to have careers on a par with  their training and capacities. It will mean that the gender pay 
gap decreases only slowly. The pay gap has de veloped, at EU-27 level, from 17 % to 16 
percentage points in 1999 to 15 % in 2003 thereafter remaining stable until 2006124. However, 
as regards more flexibility in working hours li nked to reconciliation, the political agreement 
reached by the Council in June 2008 regarding amendment of the Working Time Directive125 
provides inter alia that Member States shoul d encourage employers to examine requests for 
changes to such working hours and patterns, su bject to business needs and to the need for 
                                                 
121 Report from the Commission on equality between women and men – 2007. COM(2007) 49 final, p. 7. 
122 In recent research for the UK, the under-utilisation of women's skills has been calculated to cost around 
£11bn a year: see TUC, Closing the gender Pay Gap, 2008, p. 5. 
123 See table 10 in Annex 4. 
124 See COM(2007)424, Tackling the Pay gap between women and men, page 18. 
125 Of the European parliament and of  the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the 
organisation of working time, OJ 2003 L 299/9; see the exact wording of the proposal in Annex I. 
 
EN 30   EN flexibility on the part of both employers and wo rkers. It cannot be taken for granted that the 
proposed changes will enter into force. Measures  to improve flexibility will therefore be dealt 
with in the context of amendi ng maternity leave taking into a ccount the existing proposal.  
Conclusion:  Overview table — Option 1: no new action at EU level 
Objective to be 
achieved/problem addressed Rating of impact 
against baseline 
scenario Comments 
Reduce differences in 
employment rate of women with 
and without children 
 0 Existing framework continues; Member States will try to achieve 
Lisbon employment targets 
 
Widen the scope of family-related 
leave and the conditions for taking 
it 0 Existing measures continue but  progress cannot be taken for 
granted. However the option to ask for flexible working could be 
introduced (cf therevised proposal to amend the Working Time 
Directive) 
Reduce the gender imbalance in 
taking leave  0 Men's share of family responsibilities will not increase 
substantially 
Give financial support during 
leave 0 Increases in payments po ssible, albeit unpredictable 
Enhance job security and fight 
discrimination  0 No progress 
8.2. Impact of dissemination of  best practices (Option 2) 
Encouraging the dissemination of best practices  may be a good way to address reconciliation 
issues in both the private and publ ic sector. It may be used in or der to target specific problems 
where the general nature of legislation is not  always suitable. The dissemination of best 
practices could suppo rt the work of European social part ners in the field. Its effectiveness 
would depend on the degree of application of thes e practices in the resp ective Member States.  
Economic and social impact 
It is difficult to assess the impact of the disse mination of best practices, because it will depend 
largely on the content and coverage. Howeve r, according to the co st/benefit calculation126 in 
the work-life-balance project carried out in  Germany, in 2020 Germany’s GDP would be 
1.3% higher, the country would have produced 221 000 new jobs and it would have a higher 
birth-rate and lower social-security contributions if effective reconciliation measures were offered for 30% of employed persons. Like the economic impact, the social impact is expected to be positive. 
Conclusions: the dissemination of best practices coul d help to achieve a better work-life 
balance. From the viewpoint of subsidiarity, th is option provides for decision-making at the 
level concerned. From the proportionality viewpoin t, the dissemination of best practices goes 
no further than necessary. However, there is no  assurance that Member States will introduce 
these best practices.  
Overview table — Option 2: Dissemination of best practices 
Objective to be achieved/problem 
addressed Rating of impact 
against baseline 
scenario Comments 
                                                 
126 'Work-Life-Balance als Motor für wirtschaftliche s Wachstum und gesellschaftliche Stabilität'; report 
with the same name was published in 2005 by the 'Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen 
und Jugend' see p. 8. 
 
EN 31   EN Reduce differences in employment rate of 
women with and without children 
 0/+ By offering better reconciliation policies, 
women's employment rates could increase 
Widen the scope of fa mily-related leave and 
the conditions for taking it 0/+ Could generate positive results  
Reduce the gender imbalance in taking 
leave  0/+ Could have an influence on men's decision to 
become involved more in family responsibilities  
Give financial support during leave 0/+ Could have an influence on payment during 
family-related leave 
Enhance job security and fight 
discrimination  0/+  Progress not predictable 
8.3. Impact of legislative measures (Option 3) 
Legislative measures are based on Article 137 EC  Treaty and for some of the options possibly 
on Article 141 EC Treaty. The different options will first be presente d separately and then 
together as a 'package', taking the non-l egislative measures into account too.  
8.3.1. Amending maternity leave provisions (Option 3a) 
Longer maternity leave and offering better compen sation were considered in the second-stage 
consultation of the social partners127. The European social partners have informed the 
Commission in July 2008 that they will engage in formal negotiations on parental leave but 
not on maternity leave. 
This assessment focuses on the followi ng option for amending Directive 92/85/EEC 
(Maternity Leave Directive): 
• extending maternity leave from 14 to 18 weeks with payment increased from sickness pay 
to 100% of former salary (with ce iling not lower than sickness pay); 
• flexibility measures such as a right to ask for flexible work patterns after the end of 
maternity leave (part-time for instance);  
• protection of women returning to their work fr om maternity leave is ensured in the existing 
directives128 but, for reasons of clarity, this provis ion should be included in Directive 
92/85/EEC too129.  
Choice of option/exclusion of other options:  an option which is too far removed from the 
current situation in Member St ates could not be considered as a 'minimum standard' and 
would therefore not be compatible with the legi slative instrument of a directive. Four more 
weeks of maternity leave takes into account th e current provisions in place in a considerable 
number of Member States. A maternity leave of  18 weeks with full pa y is in line with the 
recommendations issued by the ILO130. The extension could help women to stay in 
employment while having children, particularly  if combined with other measures. Also, a 
                                                 
127 See http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_dialogue/docs/reconciliation2_en.pdf , p. 9. 
128 See Annex I. 
129 As to the correct application of the current legal provisions, the Commission is commissioning a study 
on penalties which will be completed in 2009 in order to find out whether penalties applicable in the Member States in cases of discrimination, among others, on grounds of gender are dissuasive and 
applied in a way consistent with other comparable cases. 
130 ILO Maternity Protection Recomme ndation R 191, 2000, Article 1. 
 
EN 32   EN payment of between 80% and 100% is already ava ilable in the majority of Member States and 
thus can be considered as the 'minimum standard'.  
Economic impact 
• Economic impact of longer a nd better paid maternity leave 
There are two main types of cost related to ma ternity leave: the allowance paid to the woman 
and the cost of replacing her.  
As Annex III shows, many Member States alr eady provide for payment of between 80% and 
100% of average earnings131 during maternity leave and seve ral Member States provide for 
maternity leave of 18 weeks or longer. As the ECORYS study shows, the actual economic 
costs vary from Member State to Member St ate and will depend on how close the existing 
provisions in the relevant Memb er State are to the options unde r consideration. The table in 
Annex V gives a detailed list of generalised factor s to be considered in order to calculate costs 
and benefits of extended leave schemes.  
However, in general, the socio-economic costs of  this option are estimated to be low. They 
comprise some production losses du e to a slight increase in th e number of persons making use 
of the leave scheme and some tax distortion costs132 needed to finance the higher rates of 
payment. These additional co sts range from 0.006% of GDP  in Hungary to 0.05% in 
Belgium133, and in absolute terms, from €9196  million in France to €101 million in 
Hungary134. To get some idea of public expenditure and shares of GDP, it is important to 
know that in the OECD countries for example, on average 0,7% of GD P is spent on childcare 
and early education services135.  
The ECORYS study calculated that in the eight Me mber States chosen an average increase of 
about 0.1 percentage points in female labour-marke t participation would be needed to offset 
the additional cost incurred. The study is inconclu sive as to whether this increase in female 
labour-market participation can be achieved or not. In any event, some comprehensive studies on European countries conclude that legislation on family-rela ted leave has raised female 
employment rates by 3% to 4%, and even more for women of childbearing age
136. The 
ECORYS study furthermore states that it is very  difficult to assess the benefits of the options 
in a quantitative way. Of course , the costs calculated by the EC ORYS study can be reduced if 
Member States introduce a ceiling to the payment granted during maternity leave. However, 
the option provides that the ceiling ca nnot be less than sickness pay.  
                                                 
131 See comparative tables on so cial protection (MISSOC) at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/spsi/missoc_tables_fr.htm#table2007 ; it is not always clear 
whether this is the case because sickness pay equals  a 100% payment of former salary or whether 
Member States granting 100% payment have gone beyond sickness pay. 
132 Tax distortion costs arise as a result of an increase in the income from other taxes needed to finance the 
higher payment for leave. 
133 0.01% in Denmark, 0.01% in Spain, 0.03% in France, and 0.02% in the UK. 
134 €2287 million in Belgium, €290 million in Denmark,  €1493 million in Spain, €5962 million in the UK; 
Poland and Estonia have already put this option into operation; the total costs are calculated on a 20-year basis measured as Net Present Values (NPV). 
135 See OECD under 
http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_2649_34637_38141385_1_1_1_1,00.html . 
136 The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies in Denmar k and Sweden on Mothers'  career Interruptions due 
to Childbirth, Pyllänen/Smith, Institute for the Study of Labour, 2004, IZA DP No 1050, p. 1 with 
further references. 
 
EN 33   EN The extent to which the cost of the matern ity allowance falls on businesses depends on the 
extent to which the payment is financed by th e employer or the state. Other costs for the 
employer arising from maternity leave can be hiring a temporary replacement for the absent 
worker and a temporary reduction in productivity137.  
However, a positive effect of longer maternity l eave could be that female workers in some 
cases do not need to take parental leave afte r maternity leave, thus making it easier for her 
employer to calculate the length of her absence. 
• Economic impact of flexibility measures 
The right to ask for fl exible working time is included in Article 2b of  the proposal to amend 
Directive 2003/88/EC on the organisation of working time (see exact wording in Annex I). 
Should this article be retained  in the final text, its appli cation to women returning from 
maternity leave could ease their re-entry into  employment and possibl y reduce the need to 
take additional parental leave after their maternity leave.  
As such a right implies no obligation  on the employer, there are no calculable costs. A 
common type of flexibility is the possibility to  work part-time but othe r possibilities could be 
full-time working but with a different distri bution of hours. As disc ussed above, part-time 
working has a negative effect on sala ry, promotion and career prospects138, but the type of 
flexibility here would enable the mother to re turn, in time, to full time working rather than 
having to find part-time employment. In the UK, where the right to request flexible working 
patterns was enacted in 2003139, it has had a major influence on women staying with their 
original employer140. 
In general, flexible working pa tterns are advantageous to companies. For example, stress for 
employees could be reduced; less absenteeism could reduce costs for employers. Estimates 
suggest that stress-related  absenteeism generates major costs for companies.  
By introducing family-friendly policies, HSBC bank trebled the number of women returning 
to work after maternity leave, saving the bank millions of pounds in recruitment costs141. 
According to the work-life-ba lance project carried  out in Germany, Germany’s GDP in 2020 
would be 1.3% higher, the c ountry would have produced 221 000 new jobs and would have a 
higher birth-rate and lower social-security cont ributions if reconcilia tion facilities were 
available for 30% of employed persons. The be nefits for employers therefore could be: 
savings from reduced recruitment; lower absentee142 and sickness rate; sa vings from a higher 
retention rate, better morale and productivity; increased returns on inve stments in training; 
and enhanced corporate image. Enterprises offeri ng flexible working patterns are also able to 
                                                 
137 Reconciliation of work and private life, A comparative review of thirty European countries , EU Expert 
Group, European Commission, 2005, p. 74; Rump/Eilers, Beschäftigungswirkungen der Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie, 2006, p. 54. 
138 See above under 4.4.1. 
139 See evaluation in BERR, May 2008, Right to request flexible working. 
140 Maternity and Paternity, Rights and Benefits, Survey  of Parents 2005, Smeaton/Marsh, p. 57; in the 
UK, 87% of workers agree that empl oyers should make a special effo rt to accommodate the particular 
difficulties parents of young and disabled children face and 92% feel that they can work best when they 
can balance their work and the other aspects of thei r life, see Employment relations research series no. 
86, Department for Business, November 2007, p. 8.  
141 See Reconciliation of work and private life, A comparative review of thirty European countries , EU 
Expert Group, European Commission, 2005, p. 75. 
142 Family-friendly measures reduced absenteeism by 34%; see Schaffnit-Chatterjee, Frauen auf 
Expedition – in das Jahr 2020, Deutsche Bank Research, Mai 2008, p. 16. 
 
EN 34   EN attract more women143. Canadian estimates of the direct a nd indirect costs of  workers lacking 
reconciliation facilities are between C$3.9 billion and C$8.7 billion per year144. A model 
analysis for a fictional medium-sized company in Germany came to the conclusion that savings due to the introd uction of family-friendly policies would be around 25%
145. Some of 
these benefits could also occur if following ma ternity leave a woman is entitled to ask for 
flexible working hours. Moreover, measures to f acilitate reconciliation are the most effective 
in attracting more women and thus he lping enterprises to perform better146. 
Social and health impact 
A longer period of being at hom e and of breastfeeding helps the mother to avoid certain 
illnesses, as was stressed in the contribution of the 'Ordre des sages-femmes' (see Annex II) referring to recent studies. It would allow mother s to build up a stable relationship with their 
child and recover completely from giving birth.  It also allows more  time for breastfeeding. 
Payment which reflects previous earnings would mean that women do not lose out financially 
during maternity leave. Also, it might become eas ier to return to the labour market after a 
longer period of maternity leave
147, when the child has become a little bit older, thus making 
it easier to find appropria te care facilities.  
While there is some evidence that entitlement  to a lengthy leave pe riod which can only be 
taken by the mother can have a negative impact on women's employability148, this research 
concerned very long maternity leave periods (in some of the OECD countries covered in the 
research, maternity leave lasts for more than a y ear) so the risk does not seem relevant to an 
option which only extends maternity leave by four  additional weeks in ten Member States.  
The view of the Advisory Committee and Member States 
The Advisory Committee,  in its opinion of 3 July 2008, recommends extending maternity 
leave to 24 weeks and guaranteeing an in come equivalent to full salary.  
                                                 
143 According to recent research, en terprises with women on the board also show better performance: 
Desvaux e.a;, McKinsey Report, Women matter, 2007, pp. 12 and 13; other US research ('Catalyst', The 
Bottom Line) came to the same conclusion in 2007; see: 
http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/bottomline2.shtml ; also see the same result for Finland: Kotirnata 
e.a., Female leadership and Firm Profitability, EVA Analysis No 3, 2007, p. 3.  
144 Quoted in: Babies and Bosses, reconciling wo rk and Family life, OECD 2007, p. 184. 
145 Erziehung, Haushalt und Beruf: Anforderungen und Unterstützung für Familien, Monitor 
Familienforschung, Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend, Ausgabe 4-8, 2006, 
p. 36; see also: Work Life balance, Management Practices and Productivity, Bloom/Kretschmer/Van Reenen, Centre for Economic performance, 2006, p. 26. The latter finds that there is neither a positive 
nor a negative influence on productivity. 
146 Desvaux e.a., McKinsey Report, Women matter, 2007, p. 20; see also Global Economics Paper No 154, 
Goldmann Sachs 2007, p. 16 on the 'Woman 30' index. 
147 See Rüling/Kassner, Familienpolitik aus der Gleichstellungsperspektive,  Ein europäischer Vergleich, 
2007, p.91; Schönberg/Ludsteck, Maternity leave legislation, Female Labor Supply and the Family Wage Gap, IZA DP No 2699, p.33. 
148 See above under the heading 'Labour market discrimination against women (or parents) with small 
children'; D'Addio/D'Ercole, Trends and Determinants of Fertility Rates in OECD Countries: the role of 
policies, OECD Social, Employment and Migration working paper 27, 2007, p.56; as this research 
points out, negative effects can be counterbalanced by incentives for employers to favour the return of 
mothers into work. 
 
EN 35   EN In their replies to the questionnaire, some Member States  stressed that this option should not 
lead to additional burden for employers149. Otherwise, employers would try to avoid 
employing women. Some Member St ates are in favour of increas ing the duration of maternity 
leave (AT, BU, EE, EL, FI, HU, IT, PT, SK, SL ); some Member States are in favour of 
increasing the payment (BU, FR, IT, SL, ES). Some Member States poi nt out that pregnancy 
cannot be seen as an illness; theref ore the idea of sic kness is misleading.  
The Austrian and Bulgarian contribution stress ed that any amendmen ts should not have 
negative effects on women's empl oyability. Sweden, referring to  both maternity and parental 
leave, stressed that increasing the payment a nd extending the duration would in the short term 
imply an overall reduction in job offers for wo men but that, on the other hand, high levels of 
payment and long leave periods improve the circum stances for parents to have the number of 
children they wish and to give parents bett er opportunities to combine their careers and 
private life. The French and th e Italian contribution both made the point that a high payment 
has a positive impact on demography. The Lithua nian contribution emphasised that a more 
flexible framework for maternity leave would be helpful. The Belgian government stressed 
that a longer duration should only be considered if women's health is the goal; otherwise other 
forms of leave like pare ntal leave should be improved. Spai n stressed that the amendments 
should not lead to an additional burden on em ployers. The German contribution presented the 
view that there is no new medical research l eading to the conclusion that maternity leave 
should be longer. 
Conclusion: Although a high level of payment  seems already to be ensured in many Member 
States, the guarantee of full payment during maternity leave improves the conditions of this form of leave in some Member States (see next  paragraph). Some Member States will have to 
make adjustments to the current level of pa yment during maternity l eave (i.a. BU, CZ, HU, 
IE, IT, RO, SE, SK, UK
150). Furthermore, with respect to the length, even if in many Member 
States 18 weeks maternity leave is already in place, some Member States will have to adapt 
their legislation (AT, BE, DE, ES, FR, LV, MT, NL, PT, SI).  
Providing better payment and a longer duration for maternity leave therefore is a meaningful 
and valuable means of support in terms of be tter reconciliation measures. The objectives will 
be met with the exception of reducing the gende r gap in taking family-related leave. As some 
Member States have stressed, better maternity leave provisions could also have a positive impact on birth rates.   
In terms of impact on female employment rate s, longer maternity leav e can have a positive 
effect. It might be easier for women to stay in the workplace
151. A longer maternity leave 
period could be a helpful way to  bridge the time before childcare is available. This is 
especially relevant for the 14%  of households with dependent  children which are managed by 
a single parent, mainly the mother. 
Subsidiarity and proportionality:  A directive would respect th e principle of subsidiarity, 
since it is necessary to adapt already ex isting common minimum st andards to the new 
                                                 
149 Annex II: Bulgaria, Italy, Sweden; Spain stress that there should be no additional burden for employers. 
150 Here and in the following assessments for the othe r options only the information is used which Member 
State have transmitted as a reply to the questionnaire, see Annex II and III. 
151 Rüling/Kassner, Familienpolitik aus der Gleichstellung sperspektive, Ein europäis cher Vergleich, 2007, 
p. 91; Schönberg/Ludsteck, Maternity Leave Legislation, Female Labor Supply and the Family Wage 
Gap, IZA DP No 2699, 2007, p.33. 
 
EN 36   EN challenges  of increasing the employme nt rate of women with ch ildren and offering better 
reconciliation opportunities in gene ral. It will thus continue to provide for a level playing field 
between the Member States for th e protection of pregnant worker s. It would also respect the 
principle of proportionality  (a directive amending Directive 92/85/EC in the way discussed 
here introducing improved standards would be a proportionate action to  achieve the aim of 
better reconciliation and could help to increase the employment rates of women with children. 
The proposed levels do not go beyond internati onal agreed standards (ILO recommendation). 
This could help to increase employment rates of women with children). A directive would be 
efficient  since it would leave the widest latitude to the Member States to implement the 
measure in the context of thei r national social model (many Member States have already 
introduced a longer duration of leave and a hi gher payment and would not need to make 
major changes to their legislation). A directive would be effective  because it would create the 
desired effects and would be in line with fundamental principles and other Commission 
policies, namely the principle of ge nder equality and the Lisbon strategy. 
Overview table — Option 3a: amending Directive 92/85/EEC on maternity leave 
Objective to be 
achieved/problem 
addressed Rating of 
impact 
against 
baseline 
scenario Comments 
Reduce differences in 
employment rate of women 
with and without children 
 0/+ By offering longer leave, female empl oyment rates could increase but this 
cannot be predicted with certainty  
Widen the scope of family-
related leave and the 
conditions for taking it 0/++ 4 extra weeks will help mothers to recover more fully and build a stable 
relationship with the child. Some Member States will have to increase the 
duration; more flexibility in working time when returning to work could help 
mothers to reconcile their responsibilities 
Reduce the gender 
imbalance in taking leave  - Such leave is available only to women  
Give financial support 
during leave 0/+ Depending on the Member State, better payment will be provided  
Enhance job security and 
fight discrimination  + In terms of maternity leave, a high st andard of protection has already been 
achieved (right to return to the same  or equivalent pos t, no dismissal, 
employment rights ensured); a clause  banning discrimination included in 
Directive 2002/73/EC for reasons of clarity should be included in the 
Maternity Leave Directive 
8.3.2. Amending parental leave provisions (Option 3b) 
A preliminary remark: as the European social pa rtners have decided to negotiate on the issue, 
the Commission will have to refr ain from coming up with proposal s on parental leave for nine 
months, according to Article 138(4), second sentence, EC Treaty. 
As mooted in the second-stage c onsultation of the social partners152, several changes could be 
made to Directive 96/34/EC (Parental Leave Directive). This assessment focuses on the 
following: 
• one additional month of parental leave, granted only  if both partners have taken at least one 
month of parental leave beforehand, the whole period of parental l eave being remunerated 
at a rate of 66% of the last salary; 
                                                 
152 See at http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc ial_dialogue/docs/ reconciliation2_en.pdf , pp. 10-13.  
 
EN 37   EN • a clause prohibiting discrimination of workers taking parental leave153.  
Explanation of the option : this option would mean that families would receive one more 
month of parental leave, which could be taken by  either parent. But this  additional month will 
only be granted if both  parents have already taken some pa rental leave. The partner who was 
less involved must take at least one month of parental leave, before the family can benefit 
from the additional month. Under this option,  Member States remain free to adapt the 
conditions to the special needs of single-pare nt families including widows/widowers or same-
sex couples. Whereas for same-sex couples the a bove option might be app licable as well, in 
single-parent families the condition that the seco nd partner must also be  involved in taking the 
leave is inapplicable. In order to help these families, the additional month could be granted without this condition. Introducing a right to  more flexible working arrangements was 
discussed under the amendments to maternity leav e. It should also be introduced with regard 
to parental leave. 
Choice of options/exclusion of other options
: The 'no payment  for parental leave’ option is 
not discussed here for a number of reasons . First, children are costly in general154. Secondly, 
the 'no payment' option is clearly no incentive for fathers to take parental leave. According to a study carried out in the UK, fathers do not  take parental leave when it is unpaid
155. This also 
applies to the 1995 Swedish refo rm introducing the paid 'daddy'  month, which increased the 
percentage of fathers taking pa rental leave from 9% to 47%156. The experience in Iceland is 
similar, with roughly 90% of fathers using th eir right to parental leave, which is non-
transferable and paid at a rate of 80% subject to no ceiling157. Setting the payment at 100%  or 
at the equivalent of sick pay  is not a realistic option given the high costs, although Member 
States and employers remain free to go beyond the minimum level fixed in a Directive. 
Setting the payment to a lower level than around 66%  would not offer fathers a real incentive 
to avail themselves of parental leave as can be  seen from the experience in Iceland referred to 
above158. Therefore, this option focuses on a payment of 66% of former salary. 
The option of introducing tw o or three more months  of parental leave has been excluded too. 
As can be seen in Annex III, many Member  States which go beyond the present minimum 
level of six months' parental leave do not provide for a paymen t or only offer payment at a 
lower rate. Therefore, a moderate increase in duration could figure as a new 'minimum' 
standard. 
Economic impact 
• Economic impact of one additional month of parental leave, granted only where both 
partners have taken at least one month of  parental leave beforehand, remunerated at 
a rate of 66% of the last salary (subject or not to a ceiling). 
                                                 
153 To the effect that workers who have exercised, ar e exercising or are entitled to exercise the right to 
parental leave are not treated less favourab ly in terms of their working conditions. 
154 In France, on average, couples spend 10% to 20% of their income on a child, see: Majnoni d'Intignano, 
Egalité entre femmes et hommes, Paris 1999, p. 25. 
155 Employment relations, Research series No 50, Maternity Rights and benefits: Survey of Parents 2005, 
pp. 80-82.  
156 Parental Leave – A Policy Evaluation of the Swedis h ‘Daddy-Month’ Reform, Friebel, 2005, Institute 
for the Study of Labour, IZA DP No. 1617, p. 22. 
157 Gislason, Parental Leave in Iceland - Bringing the Fathers in, 2007, p. 22.  
158 The same argument applies to an op tion where the payment is related to  an average worker's salary, as 
the average is normally too low to attract enough fathers. 
 
EN 38   EN At present, a right to at least seven months of parent al leave exists in a majority of Member 
States. Member States whic h go beyond the existing minimu m standard of six months' 
parental leave (three months to fathers, thr ee months to mothers) often provide for a low 
payment or no payment at all. Parental leave is paid in a majority of Member States, but the 
rate varies considerab ly (ranging from tax relief to a 100% payment)159. Granting a benefit 
equal to 66% of the last salary will therefore have an impact on costs in two thirds of the 
Member States. As less than one third of the Member States have currently made parental 
leave non-transferable, introducing a strict non-tr ansferability clause for one month under this 
option (meaning that at least one month must be  taken by the partner who has previously been 
less involved) would cause a major change  for two thirds of the Member States160. It could 
bring additional salary replacemen t costs because a certain period of leave must be taken by 
the other, previously less involved, partner; th is will very often be the father, who generally 
has a higher salary than the mother. 
The ECORYS study emphasises th at the biggest economic imp act will arise from a higher 
rate of payment during parental leave161. They have calculated the cost of an extra month of 
parental leave at a 66% pa yment rate without ceiling162. Of course, a ceil ing could bring down 
the costs considerably and the Member States would be free to introduce one. In the ECORYS 
study the economic impact was calculated on the ba sis that the extra month would be taken by 
women. Since women on average earn 15% less an hour than men across the EU (gender pay 
gap), a non-transferability clause would increa se the costs at EU level, if the additional 
month’s leave were to be ta ken by the father. The ECORYS  study concluded that over a 
period of 20 year s the total costs163 in the eight Member States selected would range from €20 
million in Hungary to €1131 million in Spain. Thes e costs would amount to a percentage of 
GDP164 ranging from 0.0006% in the UK to 0.006% in Spain and Poland165. A higher female 
participation rate ranging from 0.01 percenta ge points in Belgium, France and Hungary to 
0.05 percentage points in Poland would be need ed to offset the cost of this option166. The 
required increase in female labour market part icipation rates will most probably result from 
this measure, according to the ECORYS study.  
Some comprehensive studies on European countries conclude that legislation on family-
related leave raises female employment rates by 3% to 4%, and even more for women of 
                                                 
159 Six Member States already offer a benefit equal to or higher than 66% of in come. Some Member States 
are in favour of a payment during parental leave; th e UK is strictly against any payment, see Annex II 
and III.  
160 In their contributions many Member States stress the importance of increasing the participation of 
fathers (Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, France, Ital y, Romania and Spain). So me Member States are 
explicitly in favour of making parental leave non-tr ansferable (Austria, Bulgaria, Italy, Romania and 
Spain).  
161 A high payment is granted in some Member States al ready but only for a shorter period; in others there 
are long periods but the payment is low. 
162 It was not possible to factor a ceiling because ceilings would vary too much in Member States. 
163 €130 million in Belgium; no extra cost in Denmark and Estonia; €174 million in France; €370 million 
in Poland; €182 million in the UK. 
164 In order to give an idea about public expenditure an d shares of GDP, it is im portant to know that for 
example in the OECD countries 0,7% of GDP was spent on average on childcare and early education 
services, see http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_2649_34637_38141385_1_1_1_1,00.html . 
165 Belgium: 0.03%; France 0.001%; Hungary: 0.001%;. 
166 0.04 percentage points in Spain, no indication for the UK. 
 
EN 39   EN childbearing age167. In particular, paid  parental leave helps to raise female employment rates. 
There is evidence that countries granting paid parental leave (and childcare subsidies) in 
general have higher female labour-market particip ation rates and that such policies stimulate 
full-time participation168. However, research also shows that schemes to increase leave have 
only brought greater equality between men and women on the labour market where the extra 
leave was deliberately earmarked for fathers169.  
There is evidence that the increase in the labour- market participation ra te of mothers (and the 
relatively stable fertility rate ) in Sweden was achieved in particular by introducing very 
flexible parental leave schemes encouragin g fathers' involvement (and State childcare 
provision)170. Incentives for fathers could contribute  to closing the gender employment gap, 
because the Member States with a gender employment gap of less than 10% (Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Estonia and Sl ovenia) generally offer strong incentives for 
fathers to take parental leave.  
• Economic impact of a clau se banning discrimination 
No increase in the number of claims or any other potential costs is anticipated as a result of a 
clause banning discrimination
 on grounds of taking parental leave171. A clause banning 
discrimination on grounds of taking maternity leav e is already in place and has so far not led 
to a noticeable increase in claims.  
Social impact 
A portion of parental leave earmarked for th e less involved partner (mostly fathers) and  
payment of leave will make it attractive to fa thers too. This option could therefore help to 
broaden the choices of fathers.  It would support the idea of ac tive fatherhood and would thus 
ensure that the proposed additional one month of parental leave is not taken by mothers172.  
Some Member States have in pl ace a system allocating a certai n amount of parental leave to 
fathers. This is the case in Germany, for example173. It therefore shows that also in Member 
                                                 
167 The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies in Denmar k and Sweden on Mothers'  career Interruptions due 
to Childbirth, Pyllänen/Smith, Institute for the Study of Labour, 2004, IZA DP No 1050, p. 1 with 
further references. 
168 C. Ruhm, The Economic consequences of Parental leave Mandates: lessons from Europe, (1998) 
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131, pp. 285-317  (287). For instance, entitlement to 40 weeks’ 
parental leave is predicted to increase the employment-to-population ratio of 25-34 year old women by 
7% to 9%; Reconciliation of work and private life, A comparative review of thirty European countries, 
EU expert group, European Commission, 2005, p. 8. 
169 The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies in Denmar k and Sweden on Mothers'  career Interruptions due 
to Childbirth, Pyllänen/Smith, Institute for the Study of Labour, 2004, IZA DP No 1050, p. 20; In that 
case, the leave taken by moth ers decreased, ibid p. 23. 
170 Ibid., p. 22. 
171 This would cover situations involving indirect discrimination where a particular practice, such as 
allocating unsuitable work to a parent returning from parental leave, would put the latter at a disadvantage.  
172 see: The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies in De nmark and Sweden on Moth ers' career Interruptions 
due to Childbirth, Pyllänen/Smith, Institute for the St udy of Labour, 2004, IZA DP No 1050, p. 1 with 
further references; as to the negative influence on wages: see C. Ruhm, The Economic consequences of 
Parental leave Mandates: lessons from Europe, (1998) Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131, pp. 285-
317 (311): with leaves longer than 3 months wages decrease by 3-5% of hourly earnings. 
173 Germany in 2007 introduced an entitlement to 14 months’ paid parental leave benefits. If the other 
partner does not take at least two months, those months are lost. In response, more than twice as many 
fathers took parental leave as in the previous year see: Bankenverband, Interesse (Informationen, Daten, 
 
EN 40   EN States with more traditional gender roles this option would increase the fathers' share in taking 
parental leave. In Denmark, Iceland and Swed en, when a given share of paid leave was 
earmarked for fathers, most of them made use of it (about 90% in Iceland174, 70% in Sweden 
and almost 50% in Denmark in the 1990s)175. Overall experience in the Nordic countries 
shows that fathers' parental-leave take-up rates rose sharply when a fixed share of leave was 
set aside for them (fathers' quota or 'daddy months '). Men will take parent al leave to a greater 
degree only if a reasonable payment is gua ranteed. This has been seen in the UK and 
Germany176.  
The view of the Advisory Committee and Member States 
The Advisory Committee  in its opinion of 3 July 2008, take s the view that parental leave 
should be extended to 24 weeks and a payment of at least an average industrial wage should be provided. Also, measures shou ld be taken to ensure that th e leave is taken equally between 
the partners. Some Member States
 in their contribution support the idea that parental leave 
should not be transferable to only one partner an d that measures should be taken to encourage 
more fathers to take this leave (AT, EL, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, LT, RO). Some Member States 
are in favour of, or at least are not against in creasing the duration of pa rental leave (EE, EL, 
HU, IT, LT); some are in favour of a better payment (IT, LT, SL). 
Conclusion: According to the ECORYS study, it can realistically be supposed that 
earmarking one month’s parental leave for fathers will produce the slight increase in female labour-market participation rates necessary to outbalance the costs. Women could return to work earlier or have better options to stay in employment if the father s also take parental 
leave. However, the actual outcome is difficu lt to predict because findings on the impact of 
introducing such a quota for fathers are few and far between. However, as the month’s leave 
is lost if the father does not take it, fathers ma y be encouraged to do so, and all the more so if 
it is combined with a high payment. A compen sation rate of 66% seems sufficient to entice 
fathers to take the leave. As the following tabl e shows, the objectives will nearly all be met. 
This option is thus a step towards more ge nder equality. A longer peri od of leave can also 
help to bridge the time before childcare is avai lable. Some Member States will have to adapt 
the duration of leave (BE, MT , NL, PT, RO), and some will have to provide for a better 
payment (i.a. AT, BE, BU, ES, IE, MT, NL, PT, RO, SK, UK). 
Subsidiarity and proportionality : A directive would respect the principle of subsidiarity
 (the 
situation shows that there is a need for action at EU level to adapt the existing provisions to the new challenges of increasing the employment  rate of women with children and fathers’ 
share of family responsibiliti es). It would also respect th e principle of proportionality
 (a 
directive amending Directive 96 /34/EC in the way discussed here introducing new minimum 
standards would be a proportionate action to achieve the aim of in creasing the employment 
rate of women with children and to have more  fathers taking parental  leave). A directive 
would be efficient  (in order to achieve th e aim it would leave the widest latitude to the 
Member States, many of which have already introduced a longer duration of leave and a 
higher payment and would not need to make majo r changes to their legislation; they would 
                                                                                                                                                         
Hintergründe)12/2007, p. 7; Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden also have leave earmarked for 
fathers which is otherwise lost. 
174 Gislason, Parental Leave in Iceland - Bringing the Fathers in, 2007, p. 22.  
175 Parental Leave Policies and Parents' Employment and Leave-taking, Han/Ruhm/Waldfogel, 2007, 
Institute for the Study of Labour, IZA DP No 3244, pp. 2 and 23. 
176 See examples from the UK and Germany in section 7.3.2 above. 
 
EN 41   EN only need to specify that one m onth of parental leave would be lost if both partners have not 
taken at least one month beforehand ). A directive w ould be effective  because it would create 
the desired effects and would be  in line with fundamental pr inciples and other Commission 
policies, namely the principle of ge nder equality and the Lisbon strategy. 
Overview table — Option 3b: amending Directive 96/34/EC on parental leave 
Objective to be achieved/problem 
addressed Rating of impact 
against baseline 
scenario Comments 
Reduce differences in employment 
rate of women with and without 
children 
 0/+  By offering payment, fathers would take up parental leave; 
female employment rates could increase slightly  
Widen the scope of family-related 
leave and the conditions for taking 
it 0/+ Flexible working patterns for some of the parental leave would 
support women's needs, but would not be compulsory in a 
directive. Effects cannot th erefore be predicted.  
Reduce the gender imbalance in 
taking leave  ++ Men's options to engage in caring responsibilities will increase 
if some of the parental leave is earmarked for them (made non-
transferable) and if parental leave is paid at a good level 
Give financial support during leave 0/+ A higher payment will be granted in some Member States 
where the leave is not paid or paid at a low rate 
Enhance job security and fight 
discrimination  + Clauses on prohibiting discrimi nation for taking such leave 
would increase job security and take-up rate 
8.3.3. Introducing other forms of leav e: adoption leave (Option 3c) 
A preliminary remark: as adoption leave is men tioned as an entitlement  in Directive 96/34/EC 
on parental leave and as the European social pa rtners have decided to negotiate on parental 
leave, the Commissi on should refrain from coming up with proposals on adoption leave 
during the social partners' negotiations. 
This assessment focuses on the option of granting adoption leave on the same conditions as 
parental leave (six months plus one additi onal month on condition that  both partners have 
taken at least one month’s parent al leave beforehand, payment of 66% of last sa lary), meaning 
that the entitlement to adoption leave would be th e same as for parental leave. Explanation of 
the choice and exclusion of other options : the same reasoning as for parental leave applies. 
Economic and social impact 
Nearly all the Member States have introduced  a right to adoption leave ranging from four 
weeks to two years and linked in many cases to the duration of maternity  or parental leave. 
The majority of the Member States have linked it to a payment at the same rate as for maternity leave or parental leave respectively. A duration of seven months or more is already 
the rule in many Member States. However, the payment ranges from zero to 100% of previous 
average earnings. The ECORYS study points out that there are no comparable figures on the 
number of adoptions in the eight Member St ates selected, so no pr ecise calculation is 
possible. However, for a large part of the economic impact, the same considerations as for 
parental leave apply
177, but it must be borne in mind that  adoptions, and the associated taking 
of parental leave, are much less frequent than bi rths of children in 'natural' families. As the 
situation resembles that of parental leave, a payment should be provided for reasons equating 
to those which have been disc ussed for parental leave.  
                                                 
177 See Section 7.3.2. 
 
EN 42   EN The view of the Advisory Committee and Member States 
The Advisory Committee,  in its opinion of 3 July 2008 takes the view that adoption leave 
should give access to the different forms of family-related leaves. Some Member States'  
contributions show that they are in favour of adoption leave (FR, IT, LT, PT, SK). As 
contemplated in the second-stage c onsultation of the social partners178, a clear right to 
adoption leave could be introduced. In principl e, Directive 96/34/EC introduces a right to 
adoption leave but leaves it to Member States to lay down the concrete rules179. 
Conclusion: In all other respects, the same reasoning as  for parental leave applies. As can be 
seen below, the objectives will partly be me t. A directive would resp ect the principles of 
subsidiarity, proportionality, efficiency and ef fectiveness (same arguments as for parental 
leave apply).  
Overview table Option 3c: shaping adoption leave in the same way as parental leave  
Objective to be 
achieved/problem addressed Rating of impact 
assessed against the 
baseline scenario Comments 
Reduce differences in 
employment rate of women with 
and without children 
 0/+ By offering payment, fathers wo uld take up adoption leave; paid 
leave will have a positive impact on female employment rates 
because women could return to the labour market while their 
partners take parental leave 
Widen the scope of family-
related leave and the conditions 
for taking it 0/+ Flexible working patterns for some of the adoption leave would 
support women's needs, but would not be compulsory in a 
directive; effects ther efore not predictable  
Reduce the gender  imbalance in 
taking leave  ++ Men's options to engage in carin g responsibilities will increase if 
some of the adoption leave is  earmarked for them (made non-
transferable) and if adoption leave is paid at a good level 
Give financial support during 
leave 0/+ A higher payment will be granted in some Member States where 
the leave is not paid or paid at a low rate 
Enhance job security and fight 
discrimination  + Clauses on prohibiting discrimina tion for taking this kind of 
leave would increase job security and take-up level 
8.3.4. Introducing new forms of leave:  paternity leave (Option 3d) 
A preliminary remark: at present, the Commission should await the outcome of the social 
partners' negotiations because there is a close link between paternity and parental leave.  
The introduction of new forms of leave, namely a right to paternity leave, was considered in 
the second-stage consultati on of the social partners180. This assessment focuses on the 
following option: 
• 10 days’ leave with a payment of 66% of the last salary181. 
Choice of this option/ex clusion of other options : 10 days' paternity leave already exists in a 
number of Member States. This duration of pa ternity leave therefore seems to represent a 
minimum standard. As to the level of payment in this option, the same arguments as for parental leave apply. From the point of view of setting an incentive for fathers to avail 
                                                
 
178 See at http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc ial_dialogue/docs/ reconciliation2_en.pdf , pp. 10-13. 
179 See clause 2(3)c of the framework agreement in Directive 96/34/EC, Annex I. 
180 See http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_dialogue/docs/reconciliation2_en.pdf , pp. 10-13.  
181 The no-pay-scenario is not discussed further here, b ecause it provides no incen tive for fathers to take 
leave: see arguments in section 7.3.2 on parental leave above. 
 
EN 43   EN themselves of parental leave, the experience in  Member States shows that this leave is not 
attractive to fathers. Therefore, the pa yment should be set sufficiently high.  
Economic and social impact 
A right to paternity leave exists in the majority  of the Member States, while over a third have 
introduced a right to 10 days’ leav e or more around the child’s birth182. A right to a minimum 
of 10 days’ paternity leave will therefore have no impact on most Member States. Nearly half of the Member States have introduced a paymen t for fathers on paternity  leave. The ECORYS 
study calculated the costs for a two-week period  of paternity leave on the basis of a 100% 
payment. According to the ECORYS study, only  two of the eight Member States selected
183 
would have to change their legislation. In Hungary, introducing a second week and pay for 
both weeks at a level of 100% of the last sala ry would imply extra co sts equal to 0.014% of 
GDP. Offsetting those costs woul d call for an increase in female labour-market participation 
of 0.08 percentage points. In th e UK, where two weeks are paid by a lump sum, a rise in the 
rate of payment to 100% of the last salary would amount to 0.002% of GDP (€ 0,7 billion), 
which would require an increase in female labour-market participa tion of 0.01 percentage 
points. The assessment for parental leave shows th at fathers will only take paternity leave if it 
is paid184.  
As mentioned in the opinion of the Adviso ry Committee of 3 July 2008, in Slovenia a 
research project has shown that, in general, fa thers support the idea of a more active role for 
men in the family and that introducing patern ity leave is seen as a good way of promoting 
active fatherhood. Fathers availed themselves to 74%  of the paid part of  paternity leave in 
2006 (15 days). It seems reasonab le to set the minimum no lower than 66% of the last salary. 
Therefore, the costs will be considerably lower than calculated by the ECORYS study. The 
introduction of paternity leave across the EU coul d have a significant impact on the choices of 
fathers. It could become normal and common fo r fathers to care for their children and take 
leave for that purpose. It might also change employers' attitude to women. 
The view of the Advisory Committee and Member States 
The Advisory Committee,  in its opinion of 3 July 2008, takes the view that one month's paid 
paternity leave shoul d be introduced.  
Some Member States, in their contributions, have expres sed support for introducing this form 
of leave (FI, FR, IT, LT, PT, SK).  
Conclusion: As the following table shows, the objectives  will be met in part. As the leave is 
very short, the effect on women's employment  rates will not be measurable. Some Member 
States would have to introduce or extend pate rnity leave (AT, BU, CZ , DE, HU, IE, IT, MT, 
NL, PL, PT, RO, SK), while some would ha ve to introduce or increase the payment185. A 
directive would respect the principle of subsidiarity  (the situation at present shows that there 
is a need for action at EU level in order to encourage fathers to take family-related leave). It would also respect the pr inciple of proportionality
 (a directive on paternity leave in the way 
                                                 
182 Some Member States are explicitly in favour of introducing a right to paternity leave at EU level. 
183 Hungary, where there is provision for one week’s leave only, and the UK, where there is provision for a 
lump sum amounting to less than 66% of the last salary. 
184 See under 7.3.2. 
185 The indications obtained from Member States are not sufficient to give further information.  
 
EN 44   EN discussed here would be a propo rtionate action to achieve th e aim of having more fathers 
taking parental leave). A di rective would be efficient  (in order to achieve the aim it would 
leave the widest latitude to the Member States , many of which have already introduced paid 
paternity leave). A directive would be effective  because it would create the desired effects and 
would be in line with fundamental principl es and other Commission policies, namely the 
principle of gender equality.  
Overview table - Option 3d: 10 days' paternity leave, 66% payment 
Objective to be achieved/problem addressed Rating of impact 
against baseline 
scenario Comments 
Reduce differences in employment rate of 
women with and without children 
 0 No effect on women's employment 
Widen the scope of family-related leave and 
the conditions for taking it + This increases the available scope of leave  
Reduce the gender imbalance in taking leave  ++ Men's options to take family related leave will 
increase  
Give financial support during leave + A valuable support will be given not to women but 
to the family as a whole  
Enhance job security a nd fight discrimination  0/+ Clauses on prohibiting disc rimination for taking 
this kind of leave would increase job security and 
take-up rate 
8.3.5. Introducing new forms of leave:  'filial leave' (option 3e) 
A preliminary remark: at present, the Commission should await the outcome of the social 
partners' negotiations because this  issue could also be raised in their discussions on parental 
leave.  
As contemplated in the second-stage consultation of the social partners186, a right to filial 
leave could be introduced. This could enable wo rkers to care for a de pendent relative with a 
disability, illness or impairment. This assessment will focus on the following option: 
• Introducing a filial leave of one month to care for a depende nt family member (including 
children above 8 years of age). 
Explanation of the option : Member States will have to decide who is a 'dependent family 
member'. 
Choice of option/exclusion of other options : nearly all Member States have introduced an 
entitlement to leave to care for dependent fam ily members, arranging in length from 2 days to 
120 days linked to 'cases of emergencies' at  home, in most cases related to a sick child187. One 
month could form a minimum standard consider ing the existing entitlements in the Member 
States. One month seems to be a good basis fo r providing care for a certain time and/or 
making further arrangements for the care of th e family member concerned. Member States are 
free to grant a payment188. If the definition of 'dependent family members' is wide-ranging, 
                                                 
186 See under http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/s ocial_dialogue/docs/reconciliation2_en.pdf , pp. 10-
13. 
187 In March 2008, Germany introduced a law reforming care services ('Pflegezeitg esetz'), providing for 6 
months' unpaid filial leave covering children, gran dchildren, and grandpare nts. The employee keeps 
social security coverage and is guaranteed the right to return to the workplace.  Dismissal is prohibited. 
188 With the option of a payment of 66%, the ECORYS st udy provided a rough estimate of the cost of such 
leave, based on the assumption that every worker would take one additional month of filial leave once 
 
EN 45   EN the granting of a payment will be very costly  and difficult to monitor. The majority of 
Member States have allocated a payment to this kind of leave, but then only for a few days. In 
their contributions, some Member States explicitly state the need to introduce filial leave189. 
As for parental leave, a right to ask for flexibility as regards working patterns should be 
introduced. 
Economic and social impact 
The ECORYS study emphasises that according to th eir findings from the eight Member States 
filial leave arrangements differ greatly betwee n the Member States. Furthermore, they are 
mostly not provided as a single, specific arrangement but are integrated into existing labour 
market leave schemes or social security schemes in different ways. Hence it is difficult to find 
a basis with which to compare the new provisi ons. According to the ECORYS study the costs 
are not calculable because the take-up rates canno t be determined. However, in the calculation 
for parental  leave the ECORYS study found that the co st of four additiona l weeks’ of paid 
leave in the eight Member States ranged from €20 million in Hungary to €1131 million in 
Spain190. However, the take-up rate for filial leave c ould be higher than for parental leave. But 
as no payment is proposed so far, four weeks of filial leave are much less expensive than parental leave. Introducing f ilial leave will improve the situ ation of people caring for a 
dependent family member. Four weeks could pr ovide the time needed to make arrangements 
for formal care or to spend some time with a term inally ill relative. If there is a need for this 
type of leave, even if occurri ng more than once in a lifetime, women (and men) do not have to 
drop work but can find other solutions whic h allow them to stay in employment.  
The view of the Advisory Committee and Member States 
The Advisory Committee in its opinion of 3 July  2008 takes the view that a form of paid 
carer's leave should be introduced. There ar e some Member States which, in their 
contributions, indicate that they are in favour of introducing this new type of leave (GR, IT, 
LT, PT, SK).  
Conclusion: As can be seen below, the objectives wi ll partly be met. Most Member States 
will have to introduce or extend this form of l eave. A directive would respect the principle of 
subsidiarity
 (the situation at present shows that there is a need for action at EU level in order 
to help carers reconcile professi onal and private life). It would also respect the principle of 
proportionality  (a directive on filial leave in the way discussed here would be a proportionate 
action to achieve the aim of giving a minimu m support to carers). A directive would be 
efficient  (in order to achieve the aim it would leave th e widest latitude to the Member States). 
A directive would be effective  because it would create the desire d effects of helping carers.  
Overview table option 3e: introd ucing one month of filial leave  
Objective to be achieved/problem 
addressed Rating of 
impact 
against 
baseline Comments 
                                                                                                                                                         
in her/his life-time. The calculation fo r parental leave by the ECORYS st udy found that th e cost of four 
additional weeks’ leave in the eight Member States selected as a model would be roughly the same as 
for parental leave. The cost of filial leave could be higher if the take-up rate for such leave is higher 
than for parental leave.  
189 France, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia and Spain. 
190 €130 million in Belgium; no further costs in Denmark, the UK and Estonia; €174 million in France; 
€440 million in Poland. 
 
EN 46   EN scenario 
Reduce differences in employment rate 
of women with and without children 
 0/+ This leave could have a positive impact on female 
employment rates, but might ha ve a negative impact on wages 
and employability of women if only taken by women  
Widen the scope of family-related leave 
and the conditions for taking it ++ Helps to offer better reconcili ation and broaden the available 
options 
Reduce the gender imbalance in taking 
leave  0 Men's take-up might remain lo w; no special incentive for men 
is set 
Give a financial support during leave 0/- As no payment is proposed, no additional support is given.  
Enhance job security and fight 
discrimination  0/+ Clauses on prohibiting discrimina tion for taking this kind of 
leave would increase job security and take-up level 
8.4. Comparison of options and conclusions 
If no action is taken, the reconciliation measur es throughout the EU are unlikely to improve. 
Given the Commission’s commitments, the call s from the Council and from Parliament and 
the stakeholders’ expectations, this option would also be di fficult to defend politically.  
Amending Directive 92/85/EEC  would bring benefits to wo men workers. The ECORYS study 
has identified the option of amending this Directive in the proposed way as the most 
promising one for harmonisation measures, beca use the provisions do not differ very much 
throughout the Member States. The amendments to  maternity leave examined in this report 
are in line with international recommendations as well as with the practice in many Member 
States.  
In order to mitigate the costs, the Commission' s proposal would allow Member States to cap 
the level of maternity pay provided that it is not below the level provided in the current 
Directive. The financing of the maternity pa y, and notably the share to be borne by the 
employer, is also left to the Member States.  
Furthermore, the above assessment s hows that amending Directive 96/34/EC  as proposed 
would have the desired impact on the two main  objectives, namely slightly increasing the 
employment rate of women with children (ECORYS study) and achieving a better gender 
balance in taking family-related leave. The best  option would be an extension of one month, 
subject to the condition that both partners have ta ken at least one month’s parental leave, with 
a payment of 66% of the last salary for the whole parental leave period.  
New types of leave  should be introduced. Paternity leave in particular will ensure a better 
gender balance in taking family-related leave and will also help women to  recover after giving 
birth, because the fathers can stay at home.  Filial leave and adoptio n leave will provide 
meaningful support in certain family situations  and can help to incr ease maternal employment 
rates.  
Furthermore, the dissemination of best prac tices should be increased and encouragement 
should be given to improving the availabili ty and quality of childcare services 
Conclusion : The most promising option would be to combine all measures in a package of 
proposals as they are complementary. But as the so cial partners have just  started to negotiate 
on parental leave and that they could include th e new forms of leave in their negotiations, the 
Commission will not make a proposal in this area for the time being.  
Under these circumstances, and given that the duration and conditions of maternity leave 
provide the starting point for the design of an  family-related leave system, a proposal for 
amending maternity leave remains a very useful measure in order to im prove reconciliation 
 
EN 47   EN and can be taken into account by the social pa rtners in their negotiations on other forms of 
family-related leave. Of course, improved mate rnity leave will not, of itself, improve 
reconciliation or gender equality  on the labour market but, in relation with other measures 
such as better childcare provision, it will incr ease the possibilities for women with children to 
become or remain economically active. 
Comparison of options: overview table 
 No 
new 
action Dissemina-
tion of best 
practices Amending 
maternity 
leave Amending 
parental 
leave Introdu-
cing 
adoption 
leave Introducing 
paternity 
leave Introducin
g filial 
leave 
Reduce differences in 
employment rate of 
women with and 
without children 0 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0 0/+ 
Widen the scope of family-related leave 
and the conditions for 
taking it 0 0/+ 0/++ 0/+ 0/+ + ++ 
 
Reduce the gender 
imbalance in taking 
leave 0 0/+ - ++ ++ ++ 0 
Give financial support 
during leave  0 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ + 0/- 
Enhance job security 
and fight 
discrimination  0 0/+ + + + 0/+ 0/+ 
 
9. M ONITORING AND EVALUATION ARRANGEMENTS  
9.1. Possible indicators and monitoring 
The employment rate of women with children is an indicator of the success of reconciliation 
arrangements. This objective can be monitore d via the Labour Force Survey, which gives 
tables on employment rates of  women with children. The figures are included in the 
Commission’s annual report on  equality between women and men, which will go on 
monitoring and analysing them. The second objec tive, namely to improve the gender balance 
in the parental-leave take-up rate, has not been monitored systematically by Eurostat to date. 
However, data on fathers' share of parental  leave exist in some Member States. The 
Commission could endeavour to im prove the availability of st atistics on this point. Data 
would be published regularly. If figures on fath ers’ take-up rate could be determined, they 
could also be published regular ly in the Commission’s annua l report on equality between 
women and men. 
In the future, preferably four years after transposition, thought will be given to assessing the 
impact of the directive/s on wo men's participation in  the labour market and the increase in 
fathers taking parental and paternity leav e. The effectiveness of the proposed non-
 
EN 48   EN discrimination clause could be monitored by a report of the Legal Netw ork and/or an opinion 
of the Advisory Committee as we ll as via the Equality Bodies. 
9.2. Transposition  
The time limit for transposing the dire ctive/s would be two or three years191. It is suggested 
that six years after adoption, the governments of  the Member States and the national equality 
bodies should send the Commission information for a report to Parlia ment and the Council on 
the application of the directive/s. The report could put forward proposals for any revision or 
updating of the directive/s. 
                                                 
191 For the existing Parental Leave Directive three y ears were given, for the existing Maternity Leave 
Directive two years have been given. 
 
EN 49   EN 9.3. ANNEX I: Legal framework 
The Maternity Leave Directive  92/85/EEC192 is a directive in the area of health and safety at 
work. It is the tenth individual Directive within  the meaning of Article 16(1) of the 'mother'-
Directive 89/391/EEC193 based on Article ex-118a EC Tr eaty. It provides for a minimum 
level of 14 weeks of leav e with a payment which should be at least equivalent to sick leave. 
Two weeks must be allocated before and/or afte r confinement. According to Article 2 (7) of 
Directive 76/207/EEC as amended by Directiv e 2002/73/EC, the woman has the right, after 
maternity leave, to return to the same or an equivalent post. According to the same provision, 
less favourable treatment of a woman related to pregnancy or maternity leave shall constitute 
discrimination. A woman cannot be dismissed during maternity leav e. The rights linked to the 
employment contract are ensured. 
The Commission reported on the implem entation of the Directive in 1999194. 
The Parental Leave Directive  96/34/EC195 including the Framework Agreement on parental 
leave provides for an entitlement of both parents to a minimum of three months in the case of 
the birth or adoption of a child. The entitlement to leave ‘ should in principle be granted on a 
non-transferable basis ’ meaning that one partner cannot sh ift his or her entitlement to the 
other partner. There are no rules on payment duri ng parental leave. It is therefore up to the 
Member States to decide upon this. The leave can be taken until the child is 8 years old. 
As regards flexibility in taking  parental leave it is for Memb er States to decide whether 
parental leave is granted on a full -time or part-time basis, in a piecemeal way or in the form of 
a time-credit system. Also, as regards the requirement to fulfil a length-of-service criterion or to establish a notice period, this is left to Member States. 
Member States are requested to take the n ecessary measures to protect workers against 
dismissal on the grounds of an application for,  or the taking of, parental leave. Rights 
acquired by the worker on the date on which pare ntal leave starts shall be maintained. All 
matters relating to social security ar e to be decided by the Member States. 
The Commission reported on the implem entation of this directive in 2003
196. 
As regards more specifically adoption leave , the Parental Leave Directives requests the 
Member States to 'adjust conditions of access and detail ed rules for applying parental leave 
to the special circumstances of adoption ’197 However, in general, the agreement in clause 2(1) 
grants an individual right of three months' leave to each parent on the grounds of adoption. 
As to flexibility measures, according to the polit ical agreement of the Council in June 2008 on 
an amended proposal for a Directive of the Eur opean Parliament and of the Council amending 
                                                 
192 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage 
improvements in the safety and h ealth at work of pregnant work ers and workers who have recently 
given birth or are breastfeeding (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1).  
193 on the introduction of measures to encourage improv ements in the safety and health of workers at work  
OJ L 183 du 29/06/1989 p. 1 – 8. 
194 COM(1999)100 final. 
195 Council Directive 96/34/EC of 3 June 1996 on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded 
by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (OJ L 145, 19.6.1996, p. 4). 
196 COM(2003)358 final. 
197 See Clause 2(3)(c) of the Framework Agreement. 
 
EN 50   EN Directive 2003/88/EC concerni ng certain aspects of the or ganisation of working time198, the 
following article could be introduced into Directive 2003/88/EC199: 
'Article 2b 
Reconciliation of work and family life The Member States shall enc ourage the social partners at the appropriate level, without 
prejudice to their autonomy, to conclude agreem ents aimed at improving reconciliation of 
work and family life. 
The Member States shall ensure, without  prejudice to Directive 2002/14/EC and in 
consultation with the social partners, that em ployers inform workers in due time of any 
substantial changes in the pattern or organisation of their working time. 
Taking into account workers' needs for flexibility in their working hours and patterns, the 
Member States shall, in accordance with nati onal practices, also encourage employers to 
examine requests for changes to such working hours and patterns, subject to business needs, 
and to both employers' and wo rkers' needs for flexibility ." 
In some other directives, the new forms of  leave are mentioned. These provisions do not 
exclude EU legislation on this issue, because they only refer to the present situation where 
these rights do not ex ist at EU level. 
Recital 27 of Directive 2006/54/EC
200 mentions adoption leave as follows: 
‘Similar considerations apply to  the granting by Member St ates to men and women of an 
individual and non-transferable right to leave subs equent to the adoption of a child. It is for 
the Member States to determine whether or no t to grant such a right  to paternity and/or 
adoption leave and also to determ ine any conditions, other than di smissal and return to work, 
which are outside the scope of this Directive .’ 
Adoption leave and paternity leave are menti oned in Article 16 of Directive 2006/54/EC as 
follows: 
‘Article 16 
Paternity and adoption leave 
This Directive is without prejudice to the right of  Member States to recognise distinct rights to 
paternity and/or adoption leave. Those Member St ates which recognise such rights shall take 
the necessary measures to protect work ing men and women against dismissal due to 
exercising those rights and ensure t hat, at the end of such leave, they are entitled to return to 
their jobs or to equivalent posts on term s and conditions which are no less favourable to 
                                                 
198 See COM(2005)246 final; see also Council of the European Union, Interinstitutional File, 11 June 2008, 
(2004)0209 COD. 
199 Of the European parliament and of  the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the 
organisation of working time, OJ 2003 L 299/9. 
200 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the 
implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in 
matters of employment and occupation (recast), OJ L 204, p. 23. 
 
EN 51   EN them, and to benefit from any improvement in  working conditions to which they would have 
been entitled during their absence .’ 
The same wording is included in Article 2(7)  of Directive 2002/73/EC. As regards paternity 
leave , the Parental Leave Directive does not provide  for special entitlements. In the part on 
'general considerations' of the Framework agreement it is, however, mentioned that ‘ men 
should be encouraged to assume an e qual share of family responsibility, ’201. 
Furthermore, in recital 13 of Directive 2002/73/ EC paternity leave is mentioned as follows: 
‘In the Resolution of the Council and of the Ministers for Employment and Social Policy 
meeting within the Council of 29 June 2000 on the balanced participation of women and men 
in family and working life, Me mber States were encouraged to  consider examining the scope 
for their respective legal system s to grant working men an indi vidual and untransferable right 
to paternity leave, while maintaining their rights relating to employment. In this context, it is 
important to stress that it is fo r the Member States to determine whether or not to grant such 
a right and also to determine any conditions, other than dismissal and return to work, which 
are outside the scope of this Directive .’ 
Also, Article 16 of Directive 2006/54/EC cited a bove mentions the right to paternity leave. 
As regards filial leave , the Parental Leave Directive requests ‘ Member States and/or 
management and labour to take the necessary measures to entitle workers to time off from 
work on grounds of force majeure for urgent fam ily reasons in cases of sickness or accident 
making the immediate presence of the worker indispensable .’202  
Furthermore, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights203 also provides protection for 
pregnancy/maternity, parental and paternity leav e. Article II-93(2), as incorporated in the 
Constitutional Treaty, states that ‘ to reconcile family and professional life, everyone shall 
have the right to protection from dismissal for a reason connected with maternity, and the 
right to paid maternity leave and to parental leave following the birth or adoption of a child .’ 
Commission's right to amend legal Framework 
Legally binding measures in the area of reco nciliation are to be based on Article 137 EC 
providing that, ‘ with a view to achieving the objectives of Article  136, the Community shall 
support and complement the activit ies of the Member States in ’ certain fields. The fields 
concerned, according to Article 136 EC, are ‘ promotion of employment , improved living and 
working conditions, so as to make possible th eir harmonisation while the improvement is 
being maintained, proper social protecti on, dialogue between m anagement and labour, the 
development of human resources with a view to  lasting high employment and the combating 
of exclusion. ’ 
The amendment of existing directives on maternity  and parental leave as well as the creation 
of new forms of leave concerning adoption, filial and paternity leave could be seen as 
measures to improve living and working conditions.  
                                                 
201 General considerations 8. 
202 Clause 3(1) of the Framework Agreement. 
203 OJ [2000] C 364/1. 
 
EN 52   EN Article 137 (1) EC provides that ‘ The Community shall  support and complement the activities 
of the Member States ’ in fields which include 'improvement in particular of the working 
environment to protect workers' health and safety ' (first indent) and ‘ of equality between men 
and women  with regard to labour market opportunities and treatment at work ’(fourth indent). 
To this end the Council may adopt, by means of directives, ‘ minimum requirements for 
gradual implementation, having regard to the conditions and technical rules obtaining in 
each of the Member States. Such directives s hall avoid imposing administrative, financial and 
legal constraints in a way which would hold back the creation and development of small and 
medium-sized undertakings. ’204 
The amendment of Directive 96/ 34/EEC on parental leave as well as the creation of new 
forms of leave concerning adoption, filial and paternity leave could be seen as measures in the field of gender equality. The amendment c oncerning Directive 92/85/EEC on maternity leave 
has to be seen as a measure in the area of health and safety. 
Article 137(2) EC only allows for a directive, no t a regulation. Furthe rmore, a directive  could  
set out only a minimum
 framework for gradual  implementation. The Member States are 
flexible in adapting the principles establishe d to their domestic legal order. As far as 
amendments to existing provisions, which ca me into force pursuant to Article 139 and 
following an agreement of the social partne rs, are concerned, the Commission may propose 
amendments, if the social partners do not negotiate or propose an agreement.205 
As far as legislative measures are concerned which deal with provisions more related to 
gender equality than to health and safety and wo rking conditions, the legal basis of article 141 
EC could contribute as  a double legal basis. 
                                                 
204 Article 137(2)(b) EC. 
205 Callies/Ruffert, EUV, EGV, Kommentar, 3. Auflag e, 2007, Art 138 EGV, no. 34, page 1605; J. 
Schwarze (Hrsg), EU-Kommentar, 2000, Article 137, no. 27, p. 1479. 
 
EN 53   EN ANNEX II: Consultation of European So cial Partners, Member States and NGOs  
General remark : It was decided not to ope n up a public consultation via the internet because 
the issue seems quite specifi c and not suited to public  consultation. 
1. Consultation of the European Social Partners 
First-Stage Consultation of th e European Social Partners 
The first-stage consultation of the soci al partners was launched on 20 October 2006.206 
Thirteen European social partners responded to the consultation document. In general, all of 
them acknowledged the importance of reconcilia tion and the majority recognised that more 
needs to be done in this area. However, employe rs' organisations take the view that existing 
Community legislation is adequa te, whereas trade unions consider  that the legislation should 
be improved.  
Second-Stage consultation 
The document makes the following sugges tions in relation to legislation: 
Parental leave  
(i) the introduction of in centives for fathers to take parent al leave e.g. such leave could be 
made strictly non-transferable between the parent s; a general clause requiring Member States 
to adopt provisions which encourage fathers to  avail themselves of their entitlement to 
parental leave could be adopted; a minimum period of parental l eave could be reserved for the 
father in situations where the entitlement to  leave is a family one; or fathers could be 
encouraged to avail themselves of their entitlement to parent al leave by providing that the 
parents/each parent will get an additional pe riod of parental leave if the father takes a 
specified minimum period of leave.  
(ii) improvement of the provisions in relati on to employment rights and a prohibition of 
discrimination on grounds of parenthood. 
(iii) introduction of a right to a payment during parental leave; 
(iv) increase in the dura tion of parental leave; 
(v) introduction of a right to  flexibility in relation to  the taking of leave; 
(vi) increase in the age of the child in re spect of which parental leave can be taken. 
Maternity Protection  
(i) increase in the duration of leave  
(ii) increase in the level of payment during maternity leave; 
                                                 
206 See under: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_dialogue/docs/carcinogens_I_en.pdf . 
 
EN 54   EN (iii) to integrate Arti cle 2(7) of Directive 2002/73/EC (right to return to the same job 
following maternity leave and to benefit from  any improvements in working conditions). 
Other types of leave  
Introduction of provisions in relation to new forms of leave as follows: 
(i) Leave to care for dependent family members ('filial' leave); (ii) Adoption leave; (iii) Paternity leave. The document also asks for the social part ners' views in relation to the following: 
(i) how to increase the availability, a ccessibility and quali ty of childcare; 
(ii) how best to facilitate the exchange of good practices. 
After having analysed the re sponses of the social partners, the Commission launched the 
second-stage consultation on reconciliation of professional, private and family life on 30 May 
2007
207. In the second-stage consultation document,  the Commission invite d the views of the 
social partners on a range of legislative and non-legislative m easures and it indicated that 
depending on the outcome of the second-stage c onsultation, of negotiations  between the social 
partners, and of a de tailed impact assessment, the Co mmission would consider bringing 
forwards proposals to complement the existi ng legislation in the area of rec onciliation. 
The social partners had six weeks to respond to the consultation document. 
BUSINESSEUROPE208 sought an extension of the deadlin e for providing their response to 13 
July and Eurochambers209 requested an extension to the end of July. 
On 25 July, a joint letter was received from ETUC210, BUSINESSEUROPE, CEEP211 and 
UEAPME212. In addition, individual responses have b een received from the following social 
partners: BUSINESSEUROPE, ETUC, UEAPME, CEEP, CEC213, EuroCommerce214, 
Eurociett215, Eurochambers and HOTREC216. 
Joint letter from ETUC, BUSINESSEUROPE, CEEP and UEAPME 
In their joint letter, ETUC, BUSINESSEUROPE, CEEP and UEAPME , acknowledge that 
more than 10 years after the adoption of the Pare ntal Leave Directive, th ere may be a need to 
assess the progress made with its implementation. They therefor e announced to set up a joint 
working group to carry out an evaluation of the framework agr eement, in cooperation with 
                                                 
207 See under: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/s ocial_dialogue/docs/reconciliation2_en.pdf . 
208 'Confédération des entreprises européennes'. 
209 Association of more than 1200 European Chambers of Commerce and Industry. 
210 European Trade Union Confederation. 
211 Centre Européen des Entreprises à Participation publique. 
212 European Association of Crafts Sm all and Medium-sized Enterprises. 
213 European Confederation of Ex ecutives and Managerial Staff. 
214 An association for retail, wholesale and international trade interests. 
215 European Confederation of Private Employment Agencies. 
216 The trade association of hotels, restau rants and cafes in the European Union. 
 
EN 55   EN their national member organisations. They ann ounced their intention to  evaluate parental 
leave arrangements in connection with othe r arrangements supporting parents and work-life 
balance, such as flexible work arrangements a nd childcare as well as other forms of leave, to 
assess if the need fo r any joint action.  
Individual responses of social  partners on legislation 
BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME  and CEEP  welcome the statements that any new 
reconciliation polic ies should be in line w ith the growth and jobs  strategy and should be 
conducive to employment and that any more ge nerous leave policies should not result in a 
disproportionate increase in the costs of hiring workers, as SMEs in particular would be 
affected by such higher costs.  
BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME  and EuroCommerce  are against further regulation at 
European level.  
ETUC  stressed that the necessary update of th e regulatory framework should not be limited 
itself to leave facilities, but should also address the regulation of working time and of part-time work, for the sake of policy coherence. ET UC supports the introduction of new types of 
leave but argues that they should include edu cational leave. With regard to maternity 
protection, ETUC shares the Commission’s opinion that the current legal framework 
(Directive 92/85/EEC) should be improved. 
ETUC is ready to start discussions and negotiatio ns with employers' organisations at EU level 
about the options for the possibl e legislative changes outlined a bove in the framework of the 
evaluation of Directive 96/34/EC . It urges the Commission to come up with legislative 
proposals should these discussions  and negotiations not  lead to any concrete proposals. 
CEC  considers that the existing Community le gislation needs upda ting and supports the 
introduction of paternity leave, adoption leave and leave to care for dependants. CEC  is in 
favour of initiating the negotiati on process under Article 138(4). It is also in favour of a 
review of the framework agreement on parental leave. 
UEAPME expresses disappointment about the Commi ssion's call on the social partners to 
become more involved in ways and means of r econciling work, private and family life as it 
feels that this means that the Commission is i gnoring the work being ca rried out by the social 
partners in this area. 
ETUC regrets that the important issue of essent ial household and domestic services in terms 
both of its organisation and the employment an d working conditions of those providing the 
services, raised by ETUC in the first stage of  the consultation, has not  been taken up by the 
Commission in the second-stage document. 
They provided a progress report to the Comm ission and the Tripartite Social Summit of 
March 2008, declaring that 'joint actions' need to be taken. They  decided definitely in July 
2008 that they will enter into the negotiation procedure according to Article 138 and 139 EC. 
In that case, the Commission has to refrain from  taking action in this area for at least nine 
months (Article 138(4) EC).  
2. Consultation of Member States 
 
EN 56   EN By means of a questionnaire requesting details of legislation in force in the respective 
Member State and seeking their opinion on pos sible amendments, the Commission consulted 
the Member States in December 2007. Two Member States have not replied to the questionnaire (Cyprus and Luxembourg).  
The Austrian
 reply stresses the necessity of reconci liation measures, also with regard to 
demographic change. Therefore, a longer duration of maternity leave as well as parental leave 
could be important. Any amendments should be  in conformity with Regulation (EEC) No 
1408/71 on the application of soci al security schemes to empl oyed persons and their families 
moving within the Community  and Regulation (EC) NO 883/ 2004 on the coordination of 
social security systems in order for the parents to qualify as migrant worker. The government supports the idea that parental leave should not be  transferable, but then childcare should be 
enhanced in the Member States to compensate for a shorter parental leave period for mothers. 
In any event, greater involvement of fath ers in caring could have a positive impact on 
women's employment participation. Part-time work  should be made available for parents with 
the Member States deciding on the details. A hi gher age of the child does not seem necessary 
in their view. Moreover, the Austrian government  is in favour of leave to care for dependent 
family members. 
According to the Belgian
 reply it seems useful to increas e the obligatory pa rt of maternity 
leave in order to improve women's health. Howe ver, every further incr ease in duration should 
be targeted at improving women's health. If women's health is not the goal then other forms of 
leave like parental leave should be improved. Payment for parent al leave should be left to 
Member States. However, Belgium makes the po int that too long a peri od of parental leave 
and total suspension of work is not always he lpful for women's careers. Therefore, all forms 
of part-time work should be made possible for a parent on parental leave. The child's age 
restricting parents' choice to take parental leave should be increased.  
According to the Bulgarian re ply, maternity leave and paymen t could be extended, although it 
should be borne in mind that this may have  a negative effect in terms of women's 
qualifications and employability. As regards parental leave, improvements should be 
discussed with trade unions. Pare ntal leave should be made st rictly non-transferable, thus 
encouraging fathers to avail themselves of this form of leave. Lengthy pa rental leave had been 
introduced in Bulgaria in order to boost fert ility rates. New forms of leave should be 
evaluated on the basis of  concrete proposals. 
The Czech  reply is not in favour of a ny modifications at EU level. In their view there should 
not be a focus on women's reintegration into the labour market but on parent's possibilities to 
reconcile work and family life. Caring for child ren should be viewed as an alternative to 
occupational activity. 
According to the Danish  contribution, no amendments at EU level are necessary. 
The Estonian  reply stresses that, in general, no cha nges are necessary at EU level. However, 
they could support a modest extension of maternity leave and they would agree on a 
maximum of four months of parental leave fo r every partner, although they would prefer to 
see no change in the duration of parental leave at EU level. Sp ecifically, they ar e not in favour 
of a compulsory payment during parental  leave and they are against making it non-
transferable between the partners. 
 
EN 57   EN In its reply, Finland  states that, in principle, the provisi ons for maternity leave should not be 
changed at EU level. However, Finland thinks that it may be reasonable to evaluate the total 
length of maternity leave. In any event, the li nks between maternity and parental leave in the 
Member States should be taken into account. Another factor to be considered is that a long period od maternity leave might weaken women's labour market position. Therefore, it seems 
more justifiable to provide a parental leave that may be taken by both parents. Also, as 
regards parental leave, a stronge r participation of fathers in th e taking of family leave would 
promote equality between women and men. However, Finland considers that national 
legislation should still be the starting point. As regards the new forms of leave, Finland takes 
a positive view on legislation related to paternity leave at EU level. 
The French
 reply is in favour of incr easing the payment during mate rnity leave, because from 
France's own experience this has a positive impact on demography. Amendments should be 
made in order to prevent the total of 'family ' leave from having a negative impact on women's 
careers. As regards parental leave, there is th e possibility of introducing a payment for such 
leave. Also, the possibility to work part-time has a very positive effect. It does not seem necessary to increase the age of the child in connection with taking parental leave. However, 
it seems very important to increase the rate of fathers taking parental le ave in order to better 
integrate women into the labour market and to help close the pay gap, which is partly due to the time spent by women on 'family' leave. As regards adoption leave, this is essential to allow for the new children to be integrated into the family. Paternity leave is a very important 
instrument for creating a bond between father a nd child. It seems very important to provide 
for these new forms of leave in order to tackle both gender equality and demographic 
problems. 
The German
 contribution acknowledges that more effo rts are necessary in order to achieve 
better reconciliation measures. However, Germ any thinks that amendments may not be 
necessary at European level. 
The Greek  contribution stresses that the payment fo r maternity leave shoul d not be sickness 
pay because being pregnant cannot be consider ed as being ill. Greece is in favour of 
increasing the duration of maternity and parental leave. As to an increase in the payment for 
maternity leave and the introductio n of a payment for parental leav e, this should be decided at 
Member States' level. Greece is also in favour of  introducing filial leave at European level.  
The Hungarian  contribution stresses that the payment for maternity leave should remain at its 
present level. The 14-week leave period is co nsidered to be too short. The payment for 
parental leave should remain within Member States' competence. In order to encourage 
fathers to avail themselves of parental leave, it  would be useful to have a minimum part of the 
leave which is reserved exclusively for them . Parental leave coul d be extended beyond its 
present duration at EU level. ar ea concerted effort is consider ed necessary to find effective 
ways to combat gender stereotypes by promoti ng family-friendly workplaces and encouraging 
men to take the available leave related to parenthood. 
The Irish  contribution stresses that  any improvements to the existing provisions should be 
made at national level. 
Italy points out that it is a good idea to increase the level of allowance for maternity leave in 
order to ensure that the level of income available to mothers remains unchanged. This could in their view also boost birth rates and influe nce the sustainability of pension schemes. A 
further view expressed is that increasing the duration of maternity leave would represent a 
 
EN 58   EN step towards better maternity protection and would support the development of the child. 
Furthermore, it will increase female employme nt if special tax arra ngements are made for 
social contributions. Accordingly, efforts should be made to ensu re that this kind of approach 
becomes an integral part of business thinking an d is viewed as a win-win situation. Therefore 
it would be useful to make the system as sta ndard as possible throughout the EU in order to 
avoid 'social dumping' in the EU. 
As regards parental leave, the Italian contri bution points out that it would be a good idea to 
increase the duration of leave and provide for an allowance of  at least 30% of salary. The 
right should be made non-transferable as a way to  encourage fathers to take parental leave. 
However, as fathers very often constitute the main source of income, the idea of non-
transferability does not seem suitable as long as there is no adequate level of remuneration in 
place. Also, an indication as to flexibility woul d be useful, but here Me mber States should be 
free to adapt to their own needs. It would also be  useful to be able to take parental leave until 
the child reaches a higher age. By spreading the leave over a longer period instead of being 
forced to take it in the first years, mothers'  availability for the labour market would be 
enhanced and leave could be more fairly distributed between the parents. 
Italy also supports the idea of introducing ne w forms of leave and thus providing uniform 
protection at EU level. Introduc ing adoption leave is seen as a particularly useful move. 
Paternity leave is deemed to be another importa nt measure in order to stress that childbirth 
does not only concern the mother. The measur e could thus support a new model of active 
fatherhood which is a prerequisite for reconc iliation policies and non- discrimination against 
women in the labour market.  
According to the reply from Latvia  no amendments at EU level are necessary. 
The Lithuanian  contribution stresses that the paym ent entitlement provided for in the 
Directive should remain at its pr esent level though Lithuania has more generous provisions at 
national level. They consider that a more flex ible framework for matern ity/paternity leave will 
have a positive impact on women's capacity to return to the labour ma rket. They support the 
idea of providing a payment for parental leave which should not be lower than sickness pay. 
The right should be made stric tly non-transferable. The durati on of parental leave could be 
increased and Lithuania is in favour of providi ng more flexibility. L eave facilities should be 
offered until the child reaches the age of 3. Th e three new types of leave should be introduced 
at EU level. 
According to the Netherlands , no amendments at EU level are necessary. Amendments if 
necessary should be made at national level. 
The Maltese  view is that no amendments at EU level are necessary. 
The Polish  contribution is not in favour  of changes as regards matern ity or parental leave. In 
their view, also, the new forms of leave do not have to be legislated at EU level. 
Romania in principle thinks that there is no n eed to amend legislation at EU-level. However, 
it is felt that parental leav e should be granted on a non-tran sferable basis and employment 
contract rights as well as social security ri ghts should be more protected at EU-level. The 
impact of modifications to the present scheme of parental leave should be subject to a study 
and analysis at EU-level. 
 
EN 59   EN The Portuguese  contribution suggests that  the payment for maternity leave should remain at 
its present level. However, the duration of ma ternity leave could be increased to 15 or 16 
weeks. It should be examined if a payment dur ing a minimum period of parental leave could 
be introduced. The three new types of leave shoul d be introduced given the low birth rates in 
the Member States. 
The Slovakian  contribution suggests that the payment fo r maternity leave should remain at its 
present level. However, the duration of maternity  leave should be extende d. Parents' ability to 
take parental leave in a flexible manner is also considered to be particularly necessary. However, it is not considered necessary to extend parental leave beyond the child's 8
th 
birthday. As regards the three new types of leav e, the feeling is that all of them should be 
provided at EU level. 
According to the reply from Slovenia , maternity leave at EU level is too short and should be 
extended to at least 105 days. As regards the allowance they take the view that payment 
during maternity leave can not be  equated to sickness pay, because pregnancy can not be 
equated to sickness. Therefore, payment should be  higher than sickness  pay. Slovenia is also 
in favour of introducing an allowance for parent al leave and of ensuring the highest possible 
protection of workers with family obligations. 
The Spanish  contribution stresses that full payment s hould be granted duri ng maternity leave. 
As regards duration, Spain stresses that there should be no additional burden put on 
employers. It therefore provides for an exem ption of employers' contribution to Social 
Security for temporary replacement staff. Parental/paternity leave should be made non-
transferable. Paternity leave should be introduced  in order to encourage fathers to take over 
more responsibility. It should la st four weeks. Amendments to  parental leave will have a 
positive impact on women's employment. Elderly care is also a big problem, necessitating 
special leave and flexible working hours. 
The Swedish  contribution stresses that though there should be effective leave arrangements 
and accessible child care availabl e in the Member States, it is up to the Member States to 
regulate matters in this area at  a national level. Ex tending leave rights woul d in the short run 
imply an overall reduction of job opportunities for women but would in the long term improve 
circumstances for parents to have more children. 
According to the United Kingdom,  no amendments to maternity leave and parental leave 
provisions are necessary. Particularly, as regards a payment for parental leave, the feeling is 
that this would put an additional burden on employers. It should be left to Member States to adapt these forms of leave to their own needs. 
3. Consultation of NGOs 
By a questionnaire seeki ng their views on amendments to the legislation in force at European 
level, the Commission, in December 2007, c onsulted NGOs active in the field.  
The organisation AGE
 (The European Older People's Platform) welcomes the Commission's 
willingness to consider a period of three to si x months' leave to care for dependent family 
members. They advocate measures like work-tim e adjustment, flexible working hours, leave 
for family reasons, telework, job-sharing and part -time work. They stress that for employees it 
seems easier to ask for time off in order to care fo r a sick child than for an older relative. They 
do not want to be seen in a bad light by their employer. Emphasis should be placed on 
 
EN 60   EN changing the gender divisi on of unpaid work to a more equal sharing of caring tasks between 
women and men. In families where women have th e less secure work th e burden of caring for 
elderly persons usually falls on them. Therefore, the EU s hould promote the role of men. 
AGA provides an in-depth analysis of the current situation and, among other things, 
recommends special measures on elder care and the use of structural funds to finance care 
services. 
The 'Centre d'action laïque'  (member of COFACE) believes that the payment for maternity 
leave should be fixed according to the actual  salary without there being a ceiling. The 
payment should not be less than 85% of the former salary. Furthermore, they take the view that the duration of maternity leave could be extended without necessarily impacting 
negatively on women's career. In  any event, a group of expert  should give its view on how 
long mothers need to recover from giving birth a nd how long is necessary to ensure the child's 
health. This period should then be fixed at EU  level. However, the organisation thinks that 
there could be a relation between an increase in premature births  and the fact that women are 
allowed in some Member States to defer maternity leave to the time after having given birth. Therefore, they propose to give women the possi bility to work reduced hours before giving 
birth. Also, coming back to work women should ha ve the possibility to work part-time. If a 
child is hospitalised, women should have the right  to interrupt their ma ternity leave. Women 
should be entitled to transfer any untaken part of maternity leave to the fathers. Member 
States should be encouraged to  fulfil their obligati ons as regards affordable and sufficient 
childcare. 
As regards parental leave, a payment should be  provided in order to make parental leave 
accessible and attractive for everybody and partic ularly for male workers. Research shows 
that fathers will only avail themselves of parent al leave if the total salary is maintained and 
their career will not suffer. In any event, the payment should not be lower than an invalidity 
allowance or unemployment benefits. Parent al leave should be made non-transferable. 
According to research, parental leave should not exceed one year in order to exclude negative 
effects on parents. Therefore, each parent shou ld have 6 months of parental leave. There 
should be special arrangements for single pare nts and for parents with handicapped children. 
An added possibility is special arrangements for parents as regards working hours. In any 
event, parental leave should be granted with an optimum of flexibility as regards working 
time arrangements. The 8 years age limit should be repealed because parental leave can be necessary also during adolescence.  
Paternity leave provisions (around ten days) sh ould be introduced and a payment equal to 
maternity leave should be prov ided. Furthermore, adoption leave similar to maternity and 
paternity leave provisions should be made available at EU leve l. Moreover, a form of leave 
(three to six months) to care for dependent family members shoul d be introduced at EU level. 
However, Member States should be invited to  put in place sufficient care facilities. 
The Club of large Families in the Slovak Republic
 which was contacted by COFACE, replied 
that further efforts are require d to address demographic cha nge, raise the level of labour 
market participation of women and encourage also men to take an equal share of caring 
responsibilities. In their vi ew, caring for children should be included in the GDP, because 
parents work for the future of their country. 
COFACE  (Confederation of family organisations in the European Union) welcomes the 
Commission's willingness to improve and strengthe n leave rules. Furthermore, Member States 
should be encouraged to put into place quality , accessible and affordable care facilities for 
 
EN 61   EN children and dependent persons. A more flexible approach to working time seems desirable. 
Daytime schedules should be rethought (w ork, school, transport, opening hours of care 
facilities, shops etc.) and synchronised with private life. The organisation is in favour of a 
higher level of payment for maternity leave (a t about 85 % of the gross wage). Maternity 
leave should be increased to 18 weeks. Three weeks should be taken up before birth. As regards parental leave, a payment in the fo rm of a proportion of gross wage should be 
provided. The right should be made strictly non -transferable. Employments rights should be 
more protected. The length should be increased to  six months per parent. It should be possible 
to take it on a part-time or piecemeal basis. It should be pr ovided for every child up to 18 
years old. There should be no requirement of se niority for taking parent al leave. Paternity 
leave of 10 days' duration should be introduced at EU level. It  should be provided on the same 
conditions as maternity leave. Al so, adoption leave paid at the same level as maternity leave 
and a six months' filial leave arrangement paid at  the same level as parental leave should be 
provided at EU level. Both rights shoul d be made strictly non-transferable. 
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC
), a UK statutory equality and human 
rights body, reports changing family patterns as t oday's parents wish to contribute to family 
income while bringing up children. The focu s on maternity provisi ons fails to pay due 
attention to fathers' involvement. At present, women have their children  later, which might be 
a free choice but also reflect s a genuine concern that moth erhood impedes career. According 
to research, 8 out of 10 father s revealed that they would be happy to stay at home and look 
after the baby. The average amount of leave ta ken by fathers was slightly more than the 
statutory paternity leave entitlement of two we eks. Both mothers and fathers want change, 
namely women want more leave for men (71%), men want to be more involved (70%) and the 
male breadwinner model is rejected (60%). The EHRC recommends gr eater financial support 
in relation to maternity leave. Paternity leave at  EU level should reflect the desire of working 
parents to share family commitments. Caring res ponsibilities in general ca n fall to any family 
member. 
Eurocarers (European organisation working for carers)  welcomes the move to consider new 
forms of leave at EU level and focuses specifi cally on a leave to care for dependent family 
members. They think there is a growing need fo r more reconciliation m easures. They refer to 
research carried out in UK showin g that one out of five carers must give up work in order for 
him/her to take over care respon sibilities. In the organisation's view, carers are often forced to 
take up part-time work and are left with insuffi cient pension and social security rights. They 
can face discrimination as can be seen in th e ECJ-Coleman case (C/303/06) where a woman 
was dismissed because of absences due to caring for her disabled son. 
They think that a leave period of  three to six months would be  useful to care for dependent 
family members. Nevertheless, they add that a ma jority of carers provide care for a period of 
several years. For them, more strategies seem necessary in this respect. Accordingly, practical 
options could include more flexib le hours, part-time work, ad-hoc day-care facilities, telework 
and telecare. 
Eurochild , an active network of organi sations and individuals work ing in and across Europe 
to improve the quality of life of children an d young people, which wa s contacted through the 
Social Platform, replied that maternity and pare ntal leave times should be interrelated. Fathers 
should be encouraged to take parental leave. Therefore, it should be  made non-transferable. 
As studies reveal that financial reasons and fear of damaging th eir career are the main reasons 
why fathers do not take parental  leave, a payment should be provided. The maximum age of 
children should be increased to 18 years. The organisation also recommends the introduction 
 
EN 62   EN of paternity and adoption leave at EU level. In  their view it is very important also to boost 
childcare facilities. The Barcel ona targets for childcare set si x years ago are met by only a few 
Member States. 
The European Anti Poverty Network (EAPN)  informed via the Social Platform, wants 
adequate income provisions along with security provisions and flexibility to form part of 
legislative reforms. 
The European Women's Lobby (EWL)  supports the improvement of the existing European 
legislation and the introduction of new tools. They think th at maternity leave should be 
increased from 14 to 24 weeks on the basis of a fu ll salary. Parental leave should be increased 
and it should be made non-tran sferable. The specific needs of  parents undergoing artificial 
insemination should be incorporated  in the parental leave directiv e. The leave should be paid 
for 24 weeks. Fully paid paternity leave of at least 18 days should be introduced. Adoption 
leave and leave to care for an elderly parent a nd/or other dependants should be recognised and 
introduced.  
The European Youth Forum  (a platform of 95 national youth organisations in Europe, 
promoting the interests of young peopl e) believes that it is of utmost importance to create a 
'caring society' by developing a culture of reconciliation. The organisation calls on the 
Commission to develop strategies to agree on a common standard for Member Sates to 
organise reconciliation servic es and mechanisms. There shoul d be an exchange of good 
practices in the Member States. In thei r view youth autonomy is a precondition for 
reconciliation policies.  Therefore, decent employment should be increased for young people. 
The organisation 'Gezinsbond'  (a Flemish association in support of families) is in favour of 
increasing the payment for maternity leave to 80% of the former salary. Maternity leave 
should last at least six months. The organisation is  in favour of an additional period of three 
weeks' maternity leave before the expected date of birth. Research has confirmed that if there 
is a sufficient level of payment birth rates will in crease. As regards parent al leave, at least a 
minimum wage should be paid in order to make this form of l eave accessible to  all workers. 
This is the only way, furthermore, to also bring fathers into parental leave. It is important in 
their view to include more fathers in order to engender a attitudinal shift in society. At 
present, employers still hesitate to employ women because they expect them to become pregnant and take up parental leave. If fathers were to take this leave more often, this 
argument would loose ground. It would also decr ease the gender pay gap. They are also in 
favour of increasing parental leav e to at least six months per parent and provi ding it until a 
child is up to 18 years old. A wide range of fl exibility in the conditions for taking up leave 
should be available. Furthermore, 10 days of  paternity leave and 22 weeks of paid adoption 
leave should be introduced. On the basis of a minimum wage, a six months' leave period to 
care for dependent family members should be introduced, too. 
The organisation 'European Fatherhood
' (a European organisation supporting active 
fatherhood) replied that in their view maternity leave payment shou ld be raised to full pay in 
order to provide a safe financial background for young families. The duration should be raised to 26 weeks in order to consolidate breast-feed ing and ensure the health of the child. The 
organisation feels that it is necessary that pa rents receive payment durin g parental leave. The 
duration should be increased to one year and made available on a flexible basis. Fathers 
should be more active and involved. 
 
EN 63   EN According to the 'Institut pour l'égalité des femmes et des hommes ' in Belgium, instead of 
increasing the duration of maternity leave one should in general improve remunerated leave 
facilities for mother and father. As regards th e age up until which parents should be able to 
take parental leave, the government is in favour  of fixing the age at 10. Paternity leave should 
also be available for partners of the same sex. The negotiation of new framework agreements 
on all the different forms of leave should be pr ioritised and should have  binding force. Also, 
childcare and care facilities for handicappe d and elderly perons should be increased. 
The 'Ordre des sages-femmes'  (the mid-wives organisation)  in France, an organisation 
requiring obligatory membership for all midwives  who work in France, takes the view that 
maternity leave should not be paid according to  sick leave but should be remunerated on a 
100% basis. Maternity cannot be  compared to sickness. As regards duration of maternity 
leave, the organisation takes th e view that with regard to breastfeeding the period should be 
six months ideally. Referring to resear ch work carried out in this domain217, a three months' 
period of breastfeeding helps to diminish certain illnesses, like allergies and others, and is in 
general important for the child's progress. For the society, this helps to reduce costs in health 
insurance. Also, with regard to the mother's capacity to rejoin wor k, the duration should be 
increased. According to a study carried out in France218, more than 80% of women think that 
16 weeks' maternity leav e is too short. The organisation, be ing in favour of including fathers 
in care work, supports the idea of  a 10 days' paternity leave. 
The Social Platform , a platform of European Social NGOs believes that EU legislation is the 
best means guaranteeing an adequate level of  protection throughout Eu rope. The organisation 
encourages the Commission to develop an action plan outlining how policie s can contribute to 
increased investment in care services and stimulate the creation of quality jobs. The organisation also stresses that care leave coul d be needed by a single parent, in a blended 
family where not the natural or legal parent bu t a new partner would need leave or in a same-
sex partnership. Rights should apply also to se lf-employed people, to unemployed people or 
people looking for a job. Care leave should be paid in the organisation's view. The 
employment position should be preserved. New forms of leav e such as paternity leave, 
adoption leave and filial leave should be added. 
                                                
 
217 J. Van Odijk and others, Breastfeeding and allergic diseases: a multidisciplinary review of the literature 
(1966-2001), Allergy 58;833-843; W.H. Oddy and others, Breastfeeding and respiratory morbidity in 
infancy, Archives of Disease in childhood, 88/224-228 
218 Enqête de la DRESS, N° 531, octobre 2006, page 7 
 
EN 64   EN ANNEX III: Table on legal provisions in Member States  
I. Table maternity leave (according to informations given by the Member States in their 
contribution to the questionnaire)  
Member 
State Duration Obligatory period payment Piecemeal 
way 
AT 16 weeks 8 weeks before and 8 
weeks after 100% of average earnings No info 
BE 15 weeks 1 week before birth, 9 
after birth Dependent on SPF ('Sécurité 
sociale')  No info 
BU 315 days 45 days before and 95 
after birth 135 days are paid at 90% of 
average income, the rest at social security benefit No info 
CY No info 
received No info received No info received No info 
received 
CZ 28 weeks no 69% of average income of 12 
months with ceiling No info 
DE 14 weeks 6 weeks before, 8 weeks 
after birth 100% of last earnings No info 
DK 18 weeks no According to most collective 
agreements: 100% of salary No info 
EE 140 calendar 
days No, but maternity benefit 
decreases if maternity leave starts less than 30 days before expected date of birth 100% of average earnings of 
preceding calendar year No info 
EL 17 weeks 7 before, 9 after birth 100% No info 
ES 16 weeks, 
transferable to partner 6 weeks after birth for 
mother 100% of calculation basis yes 
FI 105 working 
days 2 weeks before estimated 
birth Payment is dependent on 
previous earnings (decreasing after the first 56 working days after birth) minimum amount is 15.20 EUR per day, otherwise dependent on collective agreements yes 
FR 16 weeks 2 weeks before and 6 100% of earnings in last 3  
 
EN 65   EN weeks after months with ceiling 
HU 24 weeks As a recommendation 4 
weeks before birth 70% of the former salary 
(sickness pay) No info 
received 
IE 42 weeks 2 weeks before birth, 4 
weeks after birth  26 weeks are paid at a level of 
80% of earnings with ceiling No info 
IT 5 months 2 months before, 3 
months after birth 80% of average daily 
remuneration paid in the month preceding leave No info 
LT 126 calendar 
days yes 100% of average earnings No info 
LU No info 
received No info received No info received No info 
received 
LV 112 days 2 weeks before and 2 
weeks after confinement 100 % of average earnings  
MT 14 weeks 4 weeks before, 6 weeks 
after birth Full pay No info 
NL 16 weeks 4 weeks before and 6 
weeks after birth Full pay No info 
PL 18 weeks 
(parts of which can be taken by father) 8 weeks after birth 100% of average earnings No info 
PT 120 days 6 weeks after birth 100% of the base salary No info 
received 
RO 126 days 42 days after delivery Maternity allowance on the 
basis of 85 % average income No info 
SE Seven weeks 
before and seven weeks after confinement, then until child is 18 months old 2 weeks before or after 
confinement 390 days are paid at 80% of 
earnings, 90 days are paid at a minimum allowance yes 
SI 105 days 28 days before due birth 
date 100% of average earnings no 
 
EN 66   EN SK 28 weeks 14 weeks  55% of daily assessment basis, 
upper limit 15 000 SKK (about 500 EUR)  
UK 52 weeks 2 weeks after birth Employer pays 90% of former 
income for first 6 weeks, then lump sum (about 151 EUR) no 
II. Table parental leave (according to informat ions given by the Member States in their 
contribution to the questionnaire) 
Member 
State Age of 
child Duration Transferable to 
partner or not Payment Piecemeal 
way 
AT 2 years (7 
years if suspended) In general, until 
the child is 2 years old  yes Lump sum yes 
BE 6 years 3 months  no Benefit yes 
BU 8 years 6 months for 
each parent no No no 
CY No info 
received No info received No info received No info received No info 
received 
CZ 3 years Up to three 
years for both parents No need, because 
they can take it at the same time Allowance from 
social security, three different amounts depending on age of child No info 
DE 3 years (if 
employers 
agrees 12 years) 3 years yes 67% of net income 
with ceiling for 12 
months or 14 months if partner takes 2 months parental leave yes 
DK 9 years 32 – 40 weeks 
for both parents no Maternity benefit 
during 32 weeks In 2 blocks 
EE 3 years 18 months (can 
be extended until child reaches 3, but will be paid only by lump sum) yes 100% of average 
earnings (ceiling: three times national average earnings); 
After expiration of 
18 months only No info 
 
EN 67   EN lump sum 
EL 3 1/2 years 7 months no No No info 
ES 8 years time-off for 3 
years; 1 hour off per week or part-time  no No yes 
FI To be 
taken, in principle, directly after maternity leave 158 days in 
total, starting after maternity leave yes Yes, but 
decreasing: around 75% of annual earnings (with ceiling) for the first 30 working days, then 70% with ceiling yes 
FR 3 years 3 years no Differentiated 
system of lump sums  Part-time 
HU 2 years (10 
years) 2 years (10 
years) yes 70% of former 
income with ceiling for 2 years (lump sum up to ten years) yes 
IE 8 years 14 weeks per 
parent Yes, if both parents 
work for the same employer who must 
agree No yes 
IT 8 years 10 months yes 30% of salary 
before child's 3rd 
birthday yes 
LT 3 years 3 years yes First year at 
100%, second year at 85% yes 
LU No info 
received No info received No info received No info received No info 
received 
LV 8 years 8 months No information 70% of average 
earnings yes 
MT 8 years 3 months for 
both parents No clear answer No payment Yes, 
blocks of 1 month 
 
EN 68   EN NL 8 years 13 weeks (26 
weeks from 2009) no Tax relief of 50% 
of statutory minimum wage Yes, 
depending on decision of employers 
PL 4 years 3 years yes Yes, a lump sum 
for 24 months if the income does not exceed a certain level yes 
PT 6 years 3 months or 
part-time for 12 months No  payment for 15 
days equal to 100% of the base salary, if the father takes parental leave yes 
RO 2 years 3 months for 
each parent yes Lump sum No info 
SE 8 years 18 months 
Seven weeks before confinement and seven weeks after (480 days) Yes, but 60 days out 
of the total share of 480 days must be taken by each parent80% of income 
(with ceiling) yes 
SI 8 years 260 days yes 100% of income Full-time, 
part-time and piecemeal 
SK 3 years (6 
years if poor health) Up to three 
years yes Lump sum yes 
UK 5 years 13 weeks for 
each parent No, but partner can 
take 26 weeks maternity leave, if mother returns to work No yes 
III. Table paternity leave (according to info rmations given by the Member States in 
their contribution to the questionnaire) 
Member 
State Duration Payment 
 
EN 69   EN AT 2-3 days (collective agreement) No info 
BE 10 days for 'congés de circonstances' Yes 
BU No No 
CY No info received No info received 
CZ No No 
DE No No 
DK 10 days 100% of salary with upper limit 
EE 10 working days 100% of salary 
EL 2 days 100 % 
ES 13 days (4 weeks in 2013) Yes 
FI 18 working days (in 2010, will be extended by 2 
weeks) Yes 
FR 11 days Like maternity benefit 
HU 5 days Lump sum 
IE No No 
IT No  No 
LT 1 month 100% of reimbursable remuneration 
sublect to seven months' prior coverage in social insurance scheme  
LU No info received No info received 
LV 10 days No info 
MT 1-3 days Yes 
NL 2 days No info 
PL 2 days Yes 
PT 5 days (proposed revision recommends 10 days) 100% of base salary 
RO 5 days Yes 
SE 70 days Yes (80% of income with ceiling) 
 
EN 70   EN SI 90 days 15 days 100%, for the rest social 
security contributions 
SK No (only parental leave) No 
UK 2 weeks Flat rate 151 EUR/week 
IV. Table on adoption leave (according to informations gi ven by the Member States in 
their contribution to the questionnaire) 
Member 
State Duration Payment 
AT Until child is 2 years old As parental leave 
BE 4 -6 weeks and parental leave No info 
BU 6 months for each parent No 
CY No info received No info received 
CZ Like maternity and parental leave Like maternity and parental leave 
DE 3 years 67% with ceiling 
DK 32 - 40 weeks Like parental leave 
EE 70 calendar days 100% of average earnings 
EL Like maternity and parental leave Like maternity and parental leave 
ES Like maternity and paternity leave rights Like maternity and paternity rights 
FI  234 working days Like parental leave, but allowance 
is only paid until 234 working days after birth of child 
FR 10 weeks Like maternity leave 
HU Like maternity and parental leave Like for maternity and parental 
leave 
IE 40 weeks 24 weeks paid, 16 weeks unpaid 
IT As natural parents Like maternity and parental leave 
LT As parental leave As parental leave 
LU No info received No info received 
LV 10 days No info 
 
EN 71   EN MT 3 months for both parents No payment 
NL 4 weeks Maternity allowance 
PL Like maternity leave 100% of salary 
PT 100 days for both adoptive parents together special allowance 
RO Like parental leave Like parental eave 
SE Like parental leave Like parental leave 
SI 120-150 days depending on age of the child Yes 
SK Maternity leave and parental leave As  for maternity leave and parental 
leave 
UK Similar to maternity leave Similar to maternity leave 
V. Table on filial leave (according to informations given by the Member States in their 
contribution to the questionnaire) 
Member 
State Duration Payment 
AT 1-2 weeks Yes 
BE 10 days (or more unpaid) Yes 
BU No  No 
CY No info received No info received 
CZ No info No info 
DE 5 days for children (plans to enhance leave 
provisions219) Yes 
DK No info No info 
EE On presentation of care  certificate up to 14 
calendar days, otherwise unpaid leave by agreement with employer between 80-100%, otherwise 
unpaid 
EL 4-12 days for children depending on number of 
children and motives yes 
ES 2 days Yes 
                                                 
219 After the questionnaire had been replied Germany introduced a law reforming care services. This law 
(Pflegezeitgesetz) will come into force on 1 Ju ly 2008 porviding for 6 months' unpaid leave. 
 
EN 72   EN FI Different rights for depende nt children but not for 
elderly No info 
FR Depending on the type of l eave Lump sum or unpaid 
HU For close relatives up to 2 years No  
IE 3 days per year Yes 
IT 3 days (or unpaid leave for serious reasons) Yes 
LT 14 -30 calendar days for di sabled/ill child or the 
employee herself/ himself Sickness pay for 7 days 
LU No info received no info received 
LV 3 days but only for disabled child yes 
MT Only according to collective agreements Unpaid 
NL Short or long term For short-term leave 
PL 60 days for sick child, 14 days for other 
dependent family members 80% of the sickness benefit 
PT special leave for sick or chronically  ill child  65% of base salary 
RO No  No 
SE 120 days for a sick child (indefinite leave for 
child with serious illness) Paid (80% of income with ceiling) 
SI 7 – 15 working days Yes 
SK No info received No info received 
UK 'Reasonable time off' No info 
 
EN 73   EN ANNEX IV: Statistical data  
Table 1: 
 
Table 2: 
Employment rates of older workers (women and men aged 55 - 64) in EU Member States- 2007
36,053,9
01020304050607080
SE EE FI DK LV UK LT PT DE CY NL IE FR BG RO CZ ES LU AT EL HU BE IT SI SK PL MTpercentWomen Men
Source:  Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS), annual averages. EU27, DE and FR: provisional value. MT: for women unreliable or uncertai n data.Lisbon target 
for  55-64 
aged workers employment rate in 2010
EU 
27
 Employment rates (women and men aged  15 - 64) in EU Member States- 2007
 
58,372,5
0102030405060708090
DK SE NL FI EE UK LV ATD E S I C Y  LT PT IE FR BG CZ LU BE ES SK RO HU PL EL IT MTWomen Men
Source:  Eurostat Labour Force Survey (LFS), annual averages..  
 Lisbon targe t 
for  tota l 
employmen t 
rate in 201 0
Lisbon targe t 
for women's 
employmen t 
rate in 201 0
EU-
27
Source : Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS), annual averages.  MT: for women unreliable or uncertain data. percent 
 
EN 74   EN Table 3: 
Pay gap between women and men in unadjusted form in EU Member States - 2006 (1)
15
051015202530
MT BE PT SI IE IT EL RO FR HU PL ES BG LU LT LV SE DK CZ NL AT FI UK DE SK CY EEpercentDifference between men's and women's avera ge gross hourl y earnin gs as a percenta ge of men's avera ge gross hourl y earnin gs)
Source : Eurostat. Administrative data are used for LU, Labour Force Survey for FR and MT. Provisional results of EU-SILC (Statistics on income 
and Living Conditions) are used for BE, IE, EL, ES, IT, AT, PT and UK. All other sources are national surveys. 
EU27, BE, FR, CY, PT and SI provisional results.
(1) Exception to the reference year: 2005: EE, IT, NL.
NB: EU27 estimates are population weighted-averages of the latest available values. CZ: calculations based on the median earnin gs.EU 
27
 
Table 4  
Share of part-time workers in total employment, in EU Member States - 2007
31,2
7,7
01020304050607080
BG SK HU LV CZ EL LT RO CY SI EE PL PT FI ES MT IT FR EU
27IE DK LU SE BE AT UK DE NLpercentWomen Men
Source:  Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS).
EU27: provisional results. IE: for women, unreliable or uncertain data. EE, IE, LU: for men, unreliable or uncertain data.
DE P i i l lt EE f li bl t i d t Source  : Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS). 
IE: for women, unreliable or uncertain data.  EE , IE, LU: for men, unreliable or uncertain data. 
 
EN 75   EN Table 5: 
At-risk-of-poverty rate after social transfers1for older people (women and men aged 65 years and 
over), in EU Member states, 2006 
21
16
0102030405060
NL CZ LU PL HU SK DE SE FR DK MT AT EU
25RO BG IT BE SI PT FI EL LT UK EE IE ES LV CYpercentWomen Men
Source: Eurostat. SILC and national sources.
NB: 1) At risk of poverty rate for elderly persons: The share of persons aged 65+ with an income below the risk-of-poverty thre shold, which is set at 60% of the national
median income. Income must be understood as equivalised disposable income (sum from all sources, adjusted for household size an d composition). It should be 
noted that the risk-of-poverty indicator is computed using an income definition which does not yet include imputed rent of owne r-occupiers. Comparisons between 
genders are based on the assumption of equal sharing of resources within households.EU25: Eurostat estimation. MT, PT: provisional value.
 
Table 6a: 
Employment rates of women aged 25-49, depending on whether they have children 
(under 12) - 2007
77,9
65,5
0102030405060708090
SI LT PT NL CY FI LV BE FR AT BG EE RO LU DE PL UK EU 27 ES IE SK EL CZ IT HU MTwithout children with children
Source  : Eurostat, European Labour Force Survey, annual averages.
Notes : No data avaialble for DK and SE. 
 (12 years or younger) - 2007 
 
EN 76   EN Table 6 b : Time series of employme nt of women without and with children 2000 and 2007: 
Employment rates of women, aged 25-49, without children under 12
72,377,9
-101030507090110
MT IT EL ES RO PT PL BE EU 27 LU CY HU BG IE FR SK DE UK DK NL SI LV AT LT FI EE CZ2000 (1)
2007 (1)
Source:  Eurostat, Labour Force Survey.
(1) Exceptions for reference year 2000: DK: 2002. For FI: 2003. For reference year 2007: DK: 2006.
For 2000: Unreliable or uncertain data for EE, FR, SI.
       SE: data not available .  
without children aged 12 or younger 
 
EN 77   EN Table 6c : 
Cross-country correlation between female  employment rates and fertility rates 
Female employment rate and fertility
UKSEFI
SKSIROPT
PLATNL
MT
HULU
LTLVCY
ITFR
ES
GRIE
EE
DEDK
CZBGBE
EUR2 = 0,2794
1,21,31,41,51,61,71,81,92
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Employment rateTotal fertility rate
 
Source : Commission's own calculation, Eurostat data 
Table 6d 
Total fertility rate - 2006 (1)
2,01,91,9 1,8 1,8 1,8
1,71,71,61,51,4 1,4 1,4 1,4 1,4 1,4 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,21,4
0,00,51,01,52,02,5
FR IE SE FI UK DK NL LU EE CY MT AT EL ES BG LV PT HU CZ DE IT LT RO SI PL SKpercent
Source : Eurostat.
(1) EU 27 without BE, BE: not available. For IT: 2005.EU 27 (1) average
 
 
EN 78   EN Table 7a 
Table 7b:  
Maternal employment rates by number of children aged 14 or younger, 2007 
Maternal employment rates, aged 25-49, by number of children under 14, 2007
71,2
64,8
48,1
0102030405060708090100
SI LT NL FI CY PT BE LV FR AT PL RO LU EE UK EU
27DE IE ES BG EL SK CZ IT HU MTpercent1 child 2 children 3+ children
Source : Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS).
BG, EE, MT, SI for 3+ children: unreliable or uncertain data due to low sample size. 
Source : Eurostat Employment rates of men aged 25-49, depending on whether they have children 
(under 12) - 2007
84,491,7
0102030405060708090100
EL LU CY CZ NL SI EE MT AT FI IT ES PT IE FR BE EU 27 DE UK LV SK PL LT HU BG ROWithout children With children
Source  : Eurostat, European Labour Force Survey, annual averages.
Notes : No data for DK and SE. Employment rates of men aged 25-49, depending on whether  they have children 
(aged 12 or younger) - 2007 
Maternal employment rates, aged 25-49, by  number of children aged 14 or younger 
Source  : Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS)  
BG, EE, MT, SI for 3+ children: unreliable or uncertain data due to low sample size.  DK, SE: Data not available 
 
EN 79   EN Table 8 
Part-time employment in the EU, by gender and age (% of total employment), 2007
25,6
18,833,8
15,7
4,729,2
19,2
8,033,852,1
46,860,9
18,2
7,731,2
010203040506070
Total Men Womenpercent25-24 years old
25-49 years old
50-64 years old
65 years+
All ages
Source : Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS).
 
Table 9 
Sex distribution of self-employed persons - 2007
32,567,5
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
PT AT LU LV LT NL DE HU PL BG FI BE EU
27FR ES EE CY IT EL SE RO DK UK SI CZ SK MT IEWomen Men
Source:  Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS).
EE, MT: unreliable or uncertain value.
 
EN 80   EN Table 10 
Employment impact of parenthood for women (aged 20-49)
12,412,6
-1001020304050
DK RO BE CY LU IT EL LT ES NL PL FR EU27 MT IE FI AT LV DE BG UK EE SK HU CZ2000 (1) 2007
Source:  Eurostat, Labour Force Survey.
(1) Exceptions for reference year 2000: For BG, PL: 2001. For DK, LT: 2002. For FI: 2003.difference in percentage points in employment rates without the presence of any children and with presence of a child aged 0-6
SI PT
 
Table 11:  Children 0-2 (= under 3) covered by formal childcare (less and more 
than 30 hours) – 2006.  
Children 0-2 (=under 3) covered by formal ch ildcare (less and more than 30 hours) - 2006
1214
01020304050607080
DK NL SE BE ES UK PT FR LU SI EU
25IT FI CY IE DE EE LV EL MT HU SK AT LT CZ PLpercent>30 1 to 29
Source : Eurostat, EU-SILC.
 
Table 12:
 SE: Data not available. 
 
EN 81   EN Proportion of children up to 3 years cared for by formal arrangements, up to 30 hours / 30 hours or more 
per usual week 
01020304050607080
DK NL SE BE ES PT UK FR LU SI FI IT EU-
25CY EE DE IE LV EL HU MT SK LT AT PL CZ30 hours and more less than 30 hours
Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC 2006, Provisional data 
 
EN 82   EN Table 13: Actual versus preferred mo del of labour participation, in %  
Man full-time/ Man full-time/ Man full-time/ Other
woman full time woman part-time woman not employed
BE
   Actual 46 19 27 7
   Preferred 55 29 13 3   Actual-preferred -9 -9 14 4
DE
   Actual 16 23 52 9
   Preferred 32 43 6 19   Actual-preferred -16 -20 47 -11
IE
   Actual 31 19 37 14
   Preferred 31 42 8 19   Actual-preferred 0 -24 29 -5
GR
   Actual 42 8 36 14
   Preferred 66 11 9 14
   Actual-preferred -23 -3 27 -1
ES
   Actual 26 6 57 11
   Preferred 60 12 20 9
   Actual-preferred -34 -5 37 2
FR
   Actual 39 14 38 8
   Preferred 52 22 14 12
   Actual-preferred -14 -8 24 -3
IT
   Actual 35 12 43 10
   Preferred 50 28 11 11
   Actual-preferred -16 -16 33 -1
LU
   Actual 25 27 49 0
   Preferred 28 30 12 30
   Actual-preferred -2 -3 37 -30
NL
   Actual 5 55 34 7
   Preferred 6 70 11 14   Actual-preferred -1 -15 23 -7
AT
   Actual 19 28 48 5
   Preferred 36 40 4 21   Actual-preferred -17 -12 44 -16
PT
   Actual 75 5 19 2
   Preferred 84 8 4 4   Actual-preferred -10 -3 15 -1
FI
   Actual 49 6 33 12
   Preferred 80 9 10 1   Actual-preferred -31 -2 23 11
SE
   Actual 51 13 25 11
   Preferred 67 22 7 4
   Actual-preferred -16 -9 18 6
UK
   Actual 25 32 33 10
   Preferred 21 42 13 24
   Actual-preferred 4 -10 20 -13
 
Note: A negative difference between actual and preferred participation indicates that the actual 
participation is below what the couple would pr efer while a positive difference indicates that the 
actual participation is higher than what the couple would prefer.  
Source : Jaumotte (2003)
 
EN 83   EN ANNEX V: Table on gross costs and be nefits from improved leave schemes  
Level Costs Benefits 
Society  
(socioeco-nomic 
level) 
 • production loss at aggregate level (short-term 
effect on labour supply - although some substitution of leavers) 
• inflexibility of schemes - i.e. adjustment costs 
• increased gender inequality if mainly women 
take up new leave provisions 
• tax distortion • increased female labour market participation 
and utilisation of human capital over the life course 
• enhanced gender equality in family patterns  
• higher fertility rate  
• improved child health 
• improved female economic independence  
• more flexible female participation - i.e. 
allowing for easier transitions into and out of 
employment 
Government 
budget  
 
 • short-term lower tax income due to production 
loss 
• increased compensation payments from 
leave schemes 
• increased administrative costs • long term higher tax income due to increased 
female labour market participation 
• savings on unemployment or social security 
benefits from substitution of leavers 
• saved expenses for child care 
• lower costs for special needs education, and 
child life improved 
Employer  
 
 • production loss at aggregate level (short-term 
effect on labour supply - although some substitution of leavers) 
• increased administrative costs  
• training costs: substitution staff and returning 
leavers 
• increased employer compensation payments 
to leave schemes  • productivity increases due to improvements in 
health, morale, and loyalty of employees  
• increased female labour market participation 
and thus increased labour supply 
• lower recruitment costs - as a result of 
increased attraction of work place and the 
chance to test substitution staff  
Employee  
 
 • loss of income during leave  
• loss of income after returning to work due to 
loss of human capital  
• loss of pension rights  
• loss of career options • improved parent health (lower stress levels)  
• more family quality time  
• increased financial independence of women 
• enhanced participation of fathers in care 
responsibilities 
• longer periods of breast-feeding 
• lower child-care costs 
• increased income from increasing and 
maintaining women's option to be on the 
labour market 
Source: ECORYS study
 
EN 84   EN ANNEX VI: Study on the costs and benefits of options to improve provisions for the 
reconciliation of work, private and family life  
Executive Summary 
Cost Benefit Analysis that contributes to  DG EMPL's Extended Impacts Assessment 
Reconciliation of work, private and family life is identified as one of the six priority areas for 
action in the European Commission's roadma p for equality between women and men 2006-
2010 (COM(2006) 92 final). A need for a better wo rk-life balance is stressed in order to 
encourage gender equality, economic growth, prosperity and competitiveness - hereunder via improving female labour market participation an d via adjusting to changing family forms and 
the demographic pressure from an aging popul ation. DG EMPL in the European Commission 
is in this context carrying out an Extende d Impact Assessment of a proposal for two 
Directives of the European Parliament and of  the Council amending two Council Directives in 
order to promote better rec onciliation of private, fa mily and working life.  
This study contributes to this Extended Impact  Assessment with the application of a widely 
accepted Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) approach to analysing the impacts of a number of 
scenarios where new leave scheme provisions are introduced to co nform with different 
standards set at EU level. This  study focuses on the following five  types of leave schemes: (1) 
maternity leave (maternity protection); (2) pate rnity leave; (3) parent al leave; (4) adoption 
leave; and (5) filial leave. 
Analysis and conclusion that build upon ca se studies for selected EU Member States 
The costs and benefits of im proved leave schemes for the employees, the employers, the 
government budgets, and the society as a whole will differ between EU Member States. The impacts will depend on several f actors such as the actual cha nges to the provisions of leave 
schemes needed to reach minimum EU standard s, the take-up rates of the improved leave 
schemes that again will depend on drivers a nd barriers within the EU Member States 
encouraging or discouraging entitled employees  to make use of the improved options, and 
employers' or others' attitudes to letting them do  so. Within the scope of this study, eight EU 
Member States have been selected for case studies: Belgium, Den-ma rk, Estonia, Spain, 
France, Hungary, Poland, and the UK.  
The study emphasises that costs in a welfare- political CBA are often better known than the 
benefits, such as increased production arising because of in-creased female labour market 
participation and thus employment, production and income. Hence, there can be a tendency 
that more costs are quantified than benefits - and so there could be a bias towards a negative 
result. The study introduces as simple scoring sy stem where it is assessed when improvements 
to the different leave schemes gi ve rise to high, medium or low impacts on benefits such as 
gender equality (at work and at home), chil d development, health and fertility.  
Impact of minimum EU provi sions for maternity leave 
The present study concludes that all EU Member States provide for maternity leave, and that 
these provisions do not differ much. Hence, ma ternity leave provisions are from the outset 
possibly the best candidate for a concerted EU action - in the sense that the requirements to 
changes will not be that uneven. 
 
EN 85   EN Figure 1 shows that quite a number  of countries have maternity le ave provisions that are at or 
above the 18 weeks primarily considered by the European Commission. Only Spain, Belgium 
and France will need to extend the period. Furthermore, compensation levels are in general already fairly high; but Hungary  and the UK - the latte r being an outlier - will have to raise 
compensation levels. 
Figure 1 Maternity leave - existing situation 
Denmark
France
Hungary
UKBelgiumEstonia Spain Poland
020406080100120
12 17 22 27 32 37 42
Offered paid leave (weeks)Average compensation (% of salary)
 
Hence no changes are needed in Poland and Estonia, and so no impacts are re-ported in Table 
1. The table shows that the EU option in genera l is not very costly. The socioeconomic costs 
range from 0.006% of GDP in Hungary to 0.05% in Belgium. The relativ ely low salaries in 
Hungary imply that the required rise in the compensation level is not overwhelming, while 
Belgium both needs to improve the period and the pay level. To cover these costs via in-
creased production by more women participating on the labour market, there is a need for an 
increase in their participa tion rate of between 0.03 per centages points (pp) and 0.20 pp. 
Table 0.1 Impacts of improved maternity leave provisions to 18 weeks with 100% 
compensation 
Impact Belgium Denmark Spain France Hungary UK 
 
EN 86   EN Costs(1) in Euro/actual user       
- women 2,565 514 833 1,448 134 967 
- men 0 0 43 0 0 0 
Total costs in mill Euro 2,287 290 1,493 9,196 101 5,962 
Share of costs in GDP 0.05% 0.01% 0.01% 0.03% 0.006% 0.02%
Break-even increase in 
female labour market 
participation 0.20 pp 0.04 pp 0.05 pp 0.21 pp 0.03 pp 0.08 
pp 
Total extra costs in mill 
Euro       
+ 1 week of leave 650 460 747 3,243 5 457 
- 1 week of leave -651  -746 -3,243 -5 -457 
Source: COWI/Idea calculations. 
Note: (1) Costs are calculated as net present values. 
Impact of minimum EU provi sions for paternity leave 
Figure 2 Paternity leave - existing situation 
DenmarkSpain
FranceHungary Poland
UKBelgiumEstonia
020406080100120
00 , 511 , 522 , 533 , 544 , 5
Offered paid leave (weeks)Average compensation (% of salary)
 
Figure 2 shows that the lengths of  the paternity leaves in almo st all countries amount to two 
weeks, but the levels of compensation differ much. Most countries provide 10 days - as 
suggested by the EU option - or more of pate rnity leave. However, Hungary only provides 1 
 
EN 87   EN week for fathers. Poland is a special case with  provision for 4 weeks, but with a take-up rate 
of null. 
Impact of minimum EU provisions for parental leave 
Figure 3 shows the existing pare ntal leave scheme provisions in all eight countries. The 
countries can be divided into two groups with respect to the length of the leave period. The 
duration of parental leave is quite disperse d, ranging from 2.5 to 3 years (30-36 months) in 
five countries to 6 months in Belgium and UK.  This reflects partly the breadwinner model of 
these two countries but also othe r factors. In Denmark there is  a dual-earner model and there-
fore there is a need to compensate mothers and fathers with a higher average compensation 
rate than in the othe r countries. The former East Europ ean countries have  now gone through 
an economic transition and are moving into a social transition. These countries, e.g. Hungary and Poland, are characterised by a model fo cusing on job-security as opposed to the 
flexicurity model of the Scandinavian countri es. Thus, in Poland and Hungary the parental 
leave is of a very long duration but with a rela tively low compensation level (less than 40% of 
average salary compensation).  
Figure 3 Parental lea ve - existing situation 
DenmarkEstonia
SpainFranceHungary
Poland
UKBelgium
020406080100120
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Offered leave (month)Average compensation (% of salary)Scenario 7x Scenario 7
 
The above figure shows that minimum provisi ons of 12 months with  66.6% compensation 
(Scenario 7) will have more widely implic ations than minimum pr ovisions of 6 months 
(Scenario 7x). However, at present the Euro pean Commission seems to pursue the latter 
option - which will not required any changes in Denmark and Estonia, and so Table 4 focuses 
on doing so. It that the EU option in general is not ve ry costly. The socioe conomic costs range 
from 0% of GDP in the UK to 0.07% in France. To cover these costs via increased production 
by more women participating on the labour market , there is a need for an increase in their 
participation rate of between 0 pp and 0.39 pp. 
 
EN 88   EN Furthermore, the table shows that introducing one  month more parental leave compared with 
6 months - i.e. an increase from 6 to 7 m onths with 66.6% compensation of previous pay - 
will lead to relatively minor increases in socioe conomic costs, that is for the Member States 
that do not already fulfil such leave scheme pr ovisions. In fact there is only a need for an 
increase in the female labour market partic ipation rate of between  0.01 and 0.05 percentage 
points in order to increase production so that it outbalances these costs. Taking into account 
that parental leave is a central reconciliation factor as it facili tates gender equality - both at 
work and at home - and increased parental hea lth, the required increase in female labour 
market participation rates seems realistic to achieve. 
Table 4 Impacts of improved parental leave provisions 
 - to 6 months with 66.6% compensation (Scenario 7x) 
Impact Belgium Spain France Hungary Poland UK 
Costs(1) in Euro/user       
- women 172 5,343 5,482 193 748 155 
- men 180 0 0 0 2,967 78 
Total costs in mill Euro 40 7,353 17,579 129 2,408 151 
Share of costs in GDP 0.001% 0.04% 0.07% 0.007% 0.04% 0.000%
Break-even increase in 
female labour market participation 0.00 pp 0.24 pp 0.39 pp 0.04 pp 0.14 pp 0.00 pp 
Total extra costs in mill Euro       
+ 4 weeks of leave 130 1,131 174 20 370 182 
- 4 weeks of leave -118 -1,131 -556 -20 -371 -182 
Additional share of costs in GDP from  
+ 4 weeks of leave 0.003% 0.006% 0.001% 0.001% 0.006% 0.0006
% 
Additional Increase in 
female labour market 
participation rate from + 4 
weeks of leave 0.01 pp 0.04 pp 0.01 pp 0.01 pp 0.05 pp  
• Source: COWI/Idea calculations. 
Note: (1) Costs are calculated as net present values.  
Impact of minimum EU pr ovisions for adoption leave 
In most of the countries covered by the study, the provisions for adoption are equal to those 
for biological parents, and so in general there seems not to be a case for a specific position on 
this leave scheme. Furthermore, the number of pa rents who adopt is relati vely low, and so the 
costs involved are fairly insignificant.  
 
EN 89   EN Impact of minimum EU provisions for filial leave 
The investigation of the filial leave arrangements during the case studies reveal that they 
differ much between EU Member States. Furtherm ore, they are most not provided as single, 
specific arrangement, but are integr ated into the labour market or  social security systems in 
different ways. Hence, it is considered to be impossible to define  a concerted EU action. 
Furthermore, it is not feasible to specify scen arios - because of insufficient availability of 
data, and an indeterminable targ et group and thus take-up rate.