The paper examines the content, pay package, and uptake of shared parental leave within 66 UK universities. The study aimed to consider whether the nature of the policy and the pay impacted the effectiveness of shared parental leave. Data for the study was obtained by analysing the shared parental leave policies of 66 universities in the UK whose policies were publicly accessible through the university websites. Freedom of Information requests was made to 125 universities listed on The UniGuide 2020 to obtain data on the take-up of shared parental leave in UK universities. Out of the 125 universities, 80 responded to the freedom of information with data on shared parental leave take-up from 2016-2021. Findings demonstrate a mixed picture of the level of details universities tend to include in their policy document. While some universities provided detailed information with examples to support staff, others provided as little as a line directing staff to the government website on shared parental leave policy. While most universities enhance maternity and paternity leave, not all universities extended the pay generosity to shared parental leave. This is seen as a disincentive to parents to take shared parental leave given that shared parental leave is not an addition to maternity leave for the mother. The findings supports the stereotypical gendered norms in which most workplaces are modelled. There was no identifiable trend within a particular group of universities regarding the length of the policy document or material included in the policy. However, there was an identifiable trend regarding shared parental leave take-up. The top 10 universities with the highest take up of shared parental leave were mostly Russell Group universities which could also be described as research-active institutions. This study concludes that gendered inequality in the workplace and motherhood penalty are why most universities are not proactive in supporting shared parental leave policy.
| Published in | International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 6, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17 |
| Page(s) | 46-53 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Shared Parental Leave, Higher Education Institutions, Family Friendly Rights
| [1] | Epifanio M., & Troeger V., (2020) “Bargaining over maternity pay: Evidence from UK universities” Journal of Public Policy, 40 (3), 349-374. |
| [2] | Wilkinson K., Tomlinson J., & Gardiner J. (2018) “The perceived fairness of work–life balance policies: A UK case study of solo-living managers and professionals without children” Human Resource Management Journal, 28 (2), 325–338. |
| [3] | Dex S., Smith C., & Winter S. (2001) “Effects of family-friendly policies on business performance” Cambridge: The Judge Institute of Management Studies. |
| [4] | Ahmad A. (2007) “Family-friendly employment policy practices in the Malaysian government and selected private organizations” Journal of Global Business Management, 3 (1), 128–135. |
| [5] | Johnson A. (1995) “The business case for work–family programmes” Journal of Accountancy, 180 (2), 53–58. |
| [6] | Goff S., Mount M., & Jamison R. (1990) “Employer supported childcare, work–family conflict and absenteeism: A field study” Personnel Psychology, 43, 793–809. |
| [7] | Jones W., & McKenna J. (2002) “Women and work–home conflict: A dual paradigm approach” Health Education, 102 (5), 1–15. |
| [8] | Bae K., & Yang G. (2017) “The effects of family-friendly policies on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A panel study conducted on South Korea’s public institutions” Public Personnel Management, 46 (1), 25–40. |
| [9] | Sayer L. (2005) “Gender, time and inequality” Social Forces, 84, 285-303. |
| [10] | Connolly S., and Gregory M., (2008) “Moving down: Women’s part-time work and occupational change in Britain 1991-2001” The Economic Journal, 118, 52-76. |
| [11] | Javornik J. and Oliver E. (2015) “Legal battles loom on shared parental leave from fathers not getting equal benefits” The Conversation (Available at: http://theconversation.com/legal-battles-loom-on-shared-parental-leave-from-fathersnot-getting-equal-benefits-51623, accessed: 30 October 2022). |
| [12] | Birkett H. and Forbes S. (2019) “Where’s dad? Exploring the low take-up of inclusive parenting policies in the UK” Policy Studies, 40, 205-224. |
| [13] | Atkinson J. (2017) “Shared Parental Leave in the UK: can it Advance Gender Equality by Changing Fathers Into co-Parents?” International Journal of Law in Context, 13, 356–368. |
| [14] | Twamley K. and Schober P. (2019) “Shared Parental Leave: Exploring variations in attitudes, eligibility, knowledge and take up intentions of expectant mothers in London” Journal of Social Policy, 48 (2), 387-407. |
| [15] | Ndzi E. (2017) “Shared parental leave: awareness is key” International Journal of Law and Management, 59 (6), 1331-1336. |
| [16] | Brandth B. and Kvande E. (2019) “Workplace support of fathers’ parental leave use in Norway” Community, Work & Family, 22, 43-57. |
| [17] | Haas L., & Hwang C. P. (2009) “Is fatherhood becoming more visible at work? Trends in corporate support for fathers taking parental leave in Sweden” Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice about Men as Fathers, 7 (3), 303–321. |
| [18] | Goldin C. (2006) “The quiet revolution that transformed Women’s employment, education, and family” Am Econ Rev, 96 (2), 1–21. |
| [19] | Brighouse H. and Wright E. O. (2008) “Strong Gender Egalitarianism” Polit Soc, 36 (3), 360–372. |
| [20] | Haas L., Allard K. & Hwang P. (2002) “The impact of organizational culture on men’s use of parental leave in Sweden” Community, Work & Family, 5 (3), 319-342. |
| [21] | Haas L. and Rostgaard T. (2011) “Fathers’ right to paid parental leave in the Nordic countries: consequences for the gendered division of care” Community Work Fam, 14 (2), 177–195. |
| [22] | O’Brien M. (2009) “Fathers, parental leave policies, and infant quality of life: international perspectives and policy impact” Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci, 624 (1), 190–213. |
| [23] | Petts R. J., Knoester C. and Waldfogel J. (2020) “Fathers’ paternity leave-taking and Children’s perceptions of father-child relationships in the United States” Sex Roles, 82 (3), 173–188. |
| [24] | Kaufman G. & Petts R. (2022) “Gendered parental leave policies among Fortune 500 companies” Community, Work & Family, 25 (5), 603-623. Beauregard T. A. and Henry L. C. (2009) “Making the link between work-life balance practices and organizational performance” Hum Resour Manag Rev, 19 (1), 9–22. |
| [25] | Leslie L. M., Manchester C. F., Park T. Y., Mehng S. I. (2012) “Flexible work practices: a source of career premiums or penalties?” Acad Manag J, 55 (6), 1407–1428. |
| [26] | Brandth B. & Kvande E. (2016) “Fathers and flexible parental leave” Work Employ Soc, 30 (2), 275–290. |
| [27] | Del Rey E., Racionero M. Silva J. I. (2017) “On the effect of parental leave duration on unemployment and wages” Econ. Lett., 158, 14-17. |
| [28] | Ulker A. & Guven C (2011) “Determinants of Maternity Leave Duration in Australia: Evidence from the HILDA Survey,” The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, 87 (278), 399-413. |
| [29] | Vargas-Prada S., García A. M., Ronda E., Estarlich M., Ballester F., Benavides F. G. (2018) “Influence of paid maternity leave on return to work after childbirth” Med Lav. 109 (4), 243-252. |
| [30] | Employment Relations Act 1999, Sch. 4 (amending Employment Rights Act 1996). |
| [31] | Paternity and Adoption Leave Regulations 2002 No. 2788. |
| [32] | Shared Parental Leave Regulations 2014 No. 3050. |
| [33] | Additional Paternity Leave Regulations 2010 No. 1055, Reg. 5 (2). |
| [34] | Additional Paternity Leave Regulations 2010 No. 1055, Reg. 5 (1). |
| [35] | Gheyoh Ndzi E. (2021) “The Devastating Impact of Gender Discrimination on Shared Parental Leave in the UK” International Journal of Law and Society, 4 (4), 254-261. |
| [36] | Bygren M. Duvander A. (2006) “Parents’ workplace situation and fathers’ parental leave use” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 68, 363-372. |
| [37] | Evertsson M., Duvander A. (2010) ”Parental leave: Possibility or trap? Does family leave length affect Swedish women's labour market opportunities?” European Sociological Review, 27, 1-16. |
| [38] | Park S. M. (1996) “Research, Teaching, and Service: Why Shouldn’t Women’s Work Count?” The Journal of Higher Education, 67 (1), 46–84. |
| [39] | Monroe K., Ozyurt S., Wrigley T. and Alexandra A. (2008) “Gender Equality in Academia: Bad News from the Trenches, and Some Possible Solutions” Perspective on Politics, 6 (2), 215-233. |
| [40] | Del Rey E., Racionero M. and Silva J. I. (2021) Labour market effects of reducing the gender gap in parental leave entitlements, Labour Economics, 71, 1-12. |
APA Style
Ernestine Gheyoh Ndzi. (2023). An Analysis of Shared Parental Leave Policies in UK Universities. International Journal of Law and Society, 6(1), 46-53. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17
ACS Style
Ernestine Gheyoh Ndzi. An Analysis of Shared Parental Leave Policies in UK Universities. Int. J. Law Soc. 2023, 6(1), 46-53. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17
AMA Style
Ernestine Gheyoh Ndzi. An Analysis of Shared Parental Leave Policies in UK Universities. Int J Law Soc. 2023;6(1):46-53. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17,
author = {Ernestine Gheyoh Ndzi},
title = {An Analysis of Shared Parental Leave Policies in UK Universities},
journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
volume = {6},
number = {1},
pages = {46-53},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20230601.17},
abstract = {The paper examines the content, pay package, and uptake of shared parental leave within 66 UK universities. The study aimed to consider whether the nature of the policy and the pay impacted the effectiveness of shared parental leave. Data for the study was obtained by analysing the shared parental leave policies of 66 universities in the UK whose policies were publicly accessible through the university websites. Freedom of Information requests was made to 125 universities listed on The UniGuide 2020 to obtain data on the take-up of shared parental leave in UK universities. Out of the 125 universities, 80 responded to the freedom of information with data on shared parental leave take-up from 2016-2021. Findings demonstrate a mixed picture of the level of details universities tend to include in their policy document. While some universities provided detailed information with examples to support staff, others provided as little as a line directing staff to the government website on shared parental leave policy. While most universities enhance maternity and paternity leave, not all universities extended the pay generosity to shared parental leave. This is seen as a disincentive to parents to take shared parental leave given that shared parental leave is not an addition to maternity leave for the mother. The findings supports the stereotypical gendered norms in which most workplaces are modelled. There was no identifiable trend within a particular group of universities regarding the length of the policy document or material included in the policy. However, there was an identifiable trend regarding shared parental leave take-up. The top 10 universities with the highest take up of shared parental leave were mostly Russell Group universities which could also be described as research-active institutions. This study concludes that gendered inequality in the workplace and motherhood penalty are why most universities are not proactive in supporting shared parental leave policy.},
year = {2023}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - An Analysis of Shared Parental Leave Policies in UK Universities AU - Ernestine Gheyoh Ndzi Y1 - 2023/01/13 PY - 2023 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17 DO - 10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17 T2 - International Journal of Law and Society JF - International Journal of Law and Society JO - International Journal of Law and Society SP - 46 EP - 53 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2640-1908 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230601.17 AB - The paper examines the content, pay package, and uptake of shared parental leave within 66 UK universities. The study aimed to consider whether the nature of the policy and the pay impacted the effectiveness of shared parental leave. Data for the study was obtained by analysing the shared parental leave policies of 66 universities in the UK whose policies were publicly accessible through the university websites. Freedom of Information requests was made to 125 universities listed on The UniGuide 2020 to obtain data on the take-up of shared parental leave in UK universities. Out of the 125 universities, 80 responded to the freedom of information with data on shared parental leave take-up from 2016-2021. Findings demonstrate a mixed picture of the level of details universities tend to include in their policy document. While some universities provided detailed information with examples to support staff, others provided as little as a line directing staff to the government website on shared parental leave policy. While most universities enhance maternity and paternity leave, not all universities extended the pay generosity to shared parental leave. This is seen as a disincentive to parents to take shared parental leave given that shared parental leave is not an addition to maternity leave for the mother. The findings supports the stereotypical gendered norms in which most workplaces are modelled. There was no identifiable trend within a particular group of universities regarding the length of the policy document or material included in the policy. However, there was an identifiable trend regarding shared parental leave take-up. The top 10 universities with the highest take up of shared parental leave were mostly Russell Group universities which could also be described as research-active institutions. This study concludes that gendered inequality in the workplace and motherhood penalty are why most universities are not proactive in supporting shared parental leave policy. VL - 6 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: