Comparing the effect of paid maternity leave for two cases of California and New Jersey and its implication to low-income families

국문 초록 (Abstract)

미국에서는 연방정부차원에서 유급출산휴가가 제공되지 않고 일부의 주만이 자체적으로 유급출산휴가를 도입하고 있다. 이러한 상황에서 저소득여성은 공적부조를 유급출산휴가로 사용하는 것으로 알려져 있다. 본 연구에서는 실제로 유급출산휴가가 저소득층 여성의 경제적 지원을 통해 공적부조인 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families(TANF) 이용을 줄일 수 있는 지를 살펴보고 이를 통해 한국 사회에서 저소득 및 취약계층을 위한 출산휴가를 논의한다. 이를 위해 2000년부터 2014년 미국 인구조사(Current Population Survey) 자료를 사용하여 이중차이분석으로 유급출산휴가의 효과를 연구하였다. 특히 본 연구에서는 유급출산휴가가 도입된 주 중 비교적 관대한 자격요건을 시행하고 있는 캘리포니아와 상대적으로 엄격한 자격요건을 택하고 있는 뉴저지의 사례를 바탕으로 유급출산휴가의 효과를 비교연구하였다. 연구결과 두 사례 모두 저소득 여성의 TANF 이용은 감소시키지만, 관대한 자격요건을 갖춘 캘리포니아에서 더욱 감소가 두드러졌다. 이를 통해 유급출산휴가가 저소득층의 경제적 지원이 되고 있음을 확인하였으며, 저소득여성에게 더욱더 적극적인 보호 정책이 필요함을 강조하였다. 한국은 고용보험을 통해 유급출산휴가가 제공되고 있으나 자영업자, 파트타임 혹은 불안정노동자들이 고용보험에 배제됨에 따라 유급출산휴가의 사각지대가 존재하고 있다. 특히 취약계층을 중심으로 사각지대가 발생하고 있어 저소득과 취약계층을 포함하는 유급출산휴가의 확대가 필요함을 강조하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Despite the fact that the critical role of paid maternity leave on mothers’ employment outcome has been documented, research to date has paid insufficient attention regarding whether paid maternity l eave r educes w elfare u se f or l ow- income f amilies in t he U S. U sing t he C urrent Population Survey (CPS) March Supplement 2001-14 data, the US nationally representative dataset, with the Difference-in-Difference (DD) technique, this article compares the effect of paid maternity leave for two states with differing eligibility rules among the five states that provide paid maternity leave. The finding shows that paid maternity leave does decrease welfare take-up among low-income mothers with regard to both generous and restrictive eligibility rules, but suggest that generous eligibility rule has a more profound effect in decreasing TANF use. This article suggests policy implications regarding the effects of paid maternity leave on low-income families specifically, indicating that subsequent paid family leave policies should be designed to target more vulnerable mothers. It further suggests to expand the coverage of paid maternity leave in unemployment insurance to outsiders and precarious workers by highlighting the importance of the role of paid maternity leave on vulnerable population.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. Literature Review Ⅲ. Method Ⅳ. Results Ⅴ. Discussion References

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Mandel, H., "Winners and Losers: The Consequences of Welfare State Policies for Gender Wage Inequality" 28 (28): 241-262, 2010

2 United States Census Bureau, "Who’s Minding the Kids? Child care arrangements: 2011 - Detailed Tables" United States Census Bureau

3 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2008" The Urban Institute 2009

4 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2007" The Urban Institute 2008

5 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2006" The Urban Institute 2006

6 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2005" The Urban Institute 2006

7 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2003" The Urban Institute 2005

8 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2002" The Urban Institute 2004

9 Rowe, G., "Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of 2009" The Urban Institute 2010

10 Peterson, J., "Welfare reform and inequality : The TANF and UI programs" 34 (34): 517-526, 2000

11 Hill, H., "Welfare as maternity leave? Exemptions from welfare work requirements and maternal employment" 86 (86): 37-67, 2012

12 Huber, E., "Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF policies as of July 2014" Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services 2015

13 Kassabian, D., "Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF policies as of July 2012" Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services 2013

14 Kassabian, D., "Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF policies as of July 2011" Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services 2012

15 Kassabian, D., "Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF policies as of July 2010" The Urban Institute 2011

16 Baum, C., "The effects of paid family leave in California on labor market outcomes" 35 (35): 333-356, 2016

17 Han, W. J., "The effects of early maternal employment on later cognitive and behavioral outcomes" 63 (63): 336-354, 2001

18 Rossin-Slater, M., "The effects of California’s paid family leave program on mothers’ leave-taking and subsequent labor market outcomes" 32 (32): 224-245, 2013

19 Falk, G., "Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Eligibility and Benefit Amounts in State TANF Cash Assistance Programs" Congressional Research Service 2014

20 Kim, S., "Study on paid maternity leave and child care leave" Korean Institute for health and social affair 2017

21 Houser, L., "Policy matter: Public policy, paid leave for new parents, and economic security for U.S. workers"

22 Burgess, J., "Pathways from casual employment to economic security : the Australian experience" 88 (88): 161-178, 2008

23 Han, W. J., "Parental leave policies and parents’ employment and leave-taking" 28 (28): 29-54, 2009

24 Stoddard-Dare, P., "Paid sick leave status in relation to government sponsored welfare utilization" 88 (88): 608-615, 2018

25 Hansen, L., "Paid family leave programs in California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island" Office of Legisl ative Research

26 Dube, A., "Paid family leave in California: An analysis of costs and benefits"

27 OECD Social Policy Division, Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs, "PF2.4: Parental leave replacement rates, OECD family database"

28 Rodgers, H., "No race in any direction : State welfare and income regimes" 36 (36): 525-543, 2008

29 Angrist, J., "Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion" Princeton University Press 2009

30 Berger, L., "Maternity leave, early maternal employment and child health and development in the US" 115 (115): 29-47, 2005

31 Berger, L., "Maternity leave and the employment of new mothers in the United States" 17 (17): 331-349, 2004

32 Baker, M., "Maternal employment, breastfeeding, and health : Evidence from maternity leave mandates" 27 (27): 871-887, 2008

33 Hill, J., "Maternal employment and child development : A fresh look using newer methods" 41 (41): 833-850, 2005

34 Appelbaum, E., "Leaves that pay: Employer and worker experien ces with paid family leave in California"

35 Silver, B., "Launching the Rhode Island Temporary Caregiver Insurance Program (TCI): Employee experiences one year later" University of Rhode Island 2016

36 Ybarra, M., "Implications of paid family leave for welfare participants" 37 (37): 375-387, 2013

37 Cancian, M., "From multiple program participation to disconnection : Changing trajectories of TANF and SNAP beneficiaries in Wisconsin" 42 : 91-102, 2014

38 Waldfogel, J., "Family and medical leave: Evidence from the 2000 surveys" Monthly Labor Review

39 Klerman, J., "Family and Medical Leave in 2012: Technical Report" Abt Associates Inc 2012

40 Gornick, J., "Families that work: Policies for reconciling parenthood and employment" Russell Sage Foundation 2003

41 Dustmann, C., "Expansions in maternity leave coverage and children’s long-term outcomes" 4 (4): 190-224, 2012

42 Economic Opportunity Institute, "Evaluating family and medical leave insurance for Washington State"

43 Stanczyk, A., "Does paid family leave improve household economic security following a birth? Evidence from California" 93 (93): 262-304, 2019

44 Skyes, J., "Dignity and Dreams: What the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) means to low-income families" 80 (80): 243-267, 2015

45 Clemans-Cope, L., "Access to and use of paid sick leave among low-income families with children" 122 (122): 480-486, 2008

46 Carneiro, P., "A flying start? Long term consequences of time investments in infants in their first year of life. IZA Discussion Papers from the Institute for the Study of Labor"