Maternity Benefit Bill will bring much respite for working mothers

The Rajya Sabha passed the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Bill on August 11, which will aim to increase maternity leave for working women in India from 12 (three months) to 26 weeks (more than six months).

For India, it is a big leap as a nation to bring in this amendment. Statistically, we will join an elite club of the top three nations, with Canada and Norway offering such paid benefits as a rule to new moms.

Globally, a check on how nations treat their new mothers throws some interesting highlights.

For example, USA is in the strange company of Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, Liberia and Lesotho extending no financial support, which translates into unpaid leave for working women post giving birth.  

In Europe, Bulgaria and Greece extend far better benefits related to paid maternity, with a lot of flexibility.

Also read: What the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Bill means for mothers

Joining this group are Slovakia, Estonia and Hungary that even offer a flexible paternal pay package with various compensation tiers. These Eastern Bloc nations, despite being way poorer, have not shied away from focussing on maternity benefits as a right compared to their Western European counterparts. 

With the Brexit storm prevailing, UK's women employees also fear losing out on some of the maternity benefits. Yes, there are fallouts beyond the financial and political gains and losses.

Back home in India, after Rajya Sabha discussed the Bill, there have been comments on paternal leaves too, an area which most European nations have not overlooked.

There are variable models of sharing of leaves, and partial to fully-paid wages, where parents can jointly choose and distribute these benefits amongst themselves. The new law would bring in respite to millions of working would-be mothers whose constant dilemma is between choosing their job or taking care of the newborn. It will be a big change and would improve the gender balance at our workplaces.

However, there is a need for pertinent parallel campaigns that should now supplement this major change.

First comes in the issue of breastfeeding, where WHO recommends compulsory breast milk to be fed to the newborn for up to six months, to be followed till the child is two years old.

Also read: When will breastfeeding in public become acceptable?

A major argument that supports the extension of the period of paid leaves is to address malnutrition. This brings us to the other side of the debate. There is a huge population of young women working in the unorganised sector with hardly any rights. Can a war on malnutrition and promoting breast milk be won with no focus on this sector? 

Second, major companies have more evolving HR practises and policies which are not always limited to following government rules. In the past they have brought in major changes, including work-from-home policies, flexi hours for extended period of time post-childbirth, and so on. For such firms, the amendment would hardly create any bother.

The Bill also has a provision that companies with over 50 employees will need to establish a crèche, either individually or with other companies.

However, a sustained campaign is required so that setting up of a crèche, apart from paid maternity, doesn't become a deterrent in recruiting women in the first place.

Also, smaller companies, typically, don’t enjoy the financial headroom of ushering in changes which incur costs. Hence, a sustained information flow and "good corporate citizen" responsibility sharing is what is required to enable them bring in the necessary change.  

Parliament has done a brilliant job, but the government should focus on the arguments that were made for bringing in this change and bring in the collateral reforms to enable it.