Maternity leave - taking stock

"In the event of the end of the world, I would prefer to be in Switzerland. Everything happens a little later there." It remains to be seen whether this statement can actually be attributed to Albert Einstein. But it is certainly true. This is exemplified by how half-heartedly and traditionally the Swiss organise paid childcare after the birth of a child.

Since 1 July 2005, Switzerland has had a maternity allowance, which was introduced by means of an amendment to the Income Compensation Act (EOG). In the referendum of 26 September 2004, 55.4% of voters were in favour of this amendment(link). This was after the 1999 bill for maternity insurance had been rejected. The lesson learnt from this was that only a modest insurance scheme would have majority support. Even then, the benefits agreed in Switzerland were far behind those in Europe (see table). Furthermore, the constitutional mandate to establish such an insurance scheme had already existed since 1945.

In the referendum on 27 September 2020, the proposal for paid paternity leave (since the introduction of marriage for all: leave for the other parent) was accepted with a similar lack of enthusiasm, with 60.3 percent of votes in favour, although the idea failed to gain a majority in central and eastern Switzerland (except Graubünden)(link). Here, too, the vote was stacked low in terms of the bill's majority. Since 1 January 2021, the other parent can take two weeks' paid leave within six months of the birth of their child.

However, the two allowances differ not only in terms of their duration. The entitlement to maternity compensation ends on the 98th day after it begins and ends early if the mother resumes gainful employment (Art. 16d EOG). The compensation must be drawn in one go and immediately after the birth (Art. 16c EOG). On the other hand, the other parent can take their days off within six months, i.e. also individually. The entitlement does not lapse if the parent takes up work in the meantime. The case of a Bernese National Councillor shows that such a regulation is not (or no longer) appropriate: due to her participation in council meetings, her entitlement to maternity pay ended prematurely (BGE 148 V 253 and 150 V 474). It is true that the EOG has since been amended for this specific constellation and a special provision for female parliamentarians has been "patched up" in the EOG (cf. Art. 16d para. 3 EOG). However, the question arises quite fundamentally: why should compensated maternity leave end when a woman works for a day and attends a team meeting?

The Swiss regulation binds the mother to the child (and the home); individual work-related activities generally lead to the immediate end of entitlement. Meanwhile, the other parent (usually the father, despite marriage for all) remains much more involved in working life and can dispose of his (limited) "holiday days" as freely as possible. The state thus expresses its preference regarding childcare and employment and implicitly dictates to the Swiss how they should organise their family circumstances. This division continues to have an effect after the end of maternity leave and dictates the division of care work and paid work. The fact that the term "Daddy's Day" exists in Swiss parlance is evidence of this. Equal rights - including the right of the other parent to spend time with the child - are different. Furthermore, the inflexible handling of the division of days and the reference framework are no longer appropriate in the modern labour market. The other parent's leave, which allows freely selectable leave within a specified framework period, points in the right direction.

But now something is happening. Alliance F is campaigning for the introduction of "parental leave" and thus for a "new generation work for equality". The popular initiative will be launched on 2 April 2025 and calls for 18 weeks of family leave for both parents. A quarter of the time should be able to be taken overlapping, as this is the only way to effectively change role models according to the latest research. The initiative also provides for 100% wage compensation for the lowest incomes. This is convincing across the board.