誰是時間權利的富爸媽？：育嬰假「社會投資」了誰？

Parental Leave Rich and Poor: Who Benefits from Parental Leave Policy

10.6164/JNDS.202112_21(1).0004

劉侑學(You-Syue Liu)；王舒芸(Shu-Yung Brenda Wang)

社會投資 ； 有酬育嬰假 ； 性別平等 ； 馬太效應 ； Social Investment ； Paid Parental Leave ； Gender Equity ； Matthew Effect

國家發展研究

21卷1期（2021 / 12 / 01）

131 - 184

繁體中文

本研究以社會投資的理念分析臺灣育嬰假的政策效果。有兩個主要提問：首先，以就業政策為基底的育嬰假政策，在制度上排除了誰？其次，現行的育嬰假政策的實際使用（take-up rate）是否消弭了性別化和階層化？研究結果顯示：雖然制度設計上有形式平等──不分性別的雙親皆有六個月、六成薪所得替代、個人不可轉讓的假期權利，以肯認家長（特別是女性）的經濟貢獻與保障就業權利，但因忽視職場文化的性別差異（男女薪資和就業機會差距）、不處理家内照顧責任的分工（不積極促進男性投入照顧），以及疏忽非典型就業興起而缺乏適足保障的交織結果，導致兼容性別平等的育嬰假制度，在實踐上不僅存在巨大的性別落差，同時成為保障中高社經地位、大公司、有經濟資本的家長的喘息服務，發生社會投資非預期的「馬太效應」，距離社會投資主張社會包容、性別平等的初衷仍有一段差距。

This article analyzes the gap between the eligibility and actual usage of the parental-leave policies in Taiwan during past decade (2009-2019) based on the concept of social investment. From this perspective, this research has identified the parents that are excluded from the current entitlement. The results show that though, according to policy design, all employed parents with children under age 3 are entitled to six months of parental leave and 60% of the salary as non-transferable rights regardless of gender. However, due to the ignorance of gender differences in the workplace culture, failure to deal with the gender division of care responsibilities, negligence on the rise of a typical employment, and a lack of adequate protection, therefore, the actual usage of the parental leave system not only has a huge gender gap, but also benefits those parents who are working in large companies, with stable working history, and have middle to high social and economic status. It has an unexpected ＂Matthew effect＂ from social investment perspective, thereby, departing from the original intention of social investment to promote social inclusion and gender equality.

1. 王舒芸(2014)。門裡門外誰照顧、平價普及路迢迢?臺灣嬰兒照顧政策之體制內涵分析。臺灣社會研究季刊，96，49-93。
   連結：
2. 吳姿慧(2016)。我國育嬰留職停薪制度申請要件及程序之檢討兼論育嬰之本質及責任。臺北大學法學論叢，98，85-135。
   連結：
3. 李庭欣,王舒芸(2013)。「善爸」甘休?「育爸」不能?與照顧若即若離的育嬰假爸爸。臺大社會工作學刊，28，93-135。
   連結：
4. 李健鴻(2007)。臺灣勞動市場的「彈性」與「安全/國際比較分析。國家與社會，2，215-259。
   連結：
5. 林信廷,王舒芸(2015)。公私協力托嬰中心的成就與限制:兒童照顧政策理的檢視。臺灣社會福利學刊，12(2)，15-55。
   連結：
6. 洪惠芬(2015)。新世代臺灣母親的處境與挑戰:就業母親在照顧與工作之間的文化矛盾。臺灣社會福利學刊，13(1)，87-149。
   連結：
7. 葉崇揚,古允文(2017)。從生產性福利體制到社會投資福利國家:臺灣與韓國的比較。社會政策與社會工作學刊，21(1)，97-147。
   連結：
8. Auth, D.,Martinek H.(2017).Social Investment or Gender Equality? Aims, Instrument, and Outcomes of Parental Leave Regulations in Germany and Sweden.Gender and Family in European Economic Policy: Developments in the New Millennium,New York:
9. Baird, M,O’Brien, M.(2015).Dynamics of Parental Leave in Anglophone Countries: The Paradox of State Expansion in Liberal Welfare Regimes.Community, Work & Family,18(2),198-217.
10. Bonoli, G.(2006).New Social Risks and Politics of Post-industrial Social Policies.The Politics of Post-industrial Welfare States,New York:
11. Bonoli, G.,Cantillon, B.,Van Lancker, W.(2017).Social Investment and the Matthew Effect.The Uses of Social Investment,Oxford:
12. Bonoli, G.,Liechti, F.(2018).Good Intentions and Matthew Effects: Access Biases in Participation in Active Labour Market Policies.Journal of European Public Policy,25(6),894-911.
13. Brighthouse, H.,Wright, E. O.(2008).Strong Gender Egalitarianism.Politics & Society,36,360-372.
14. Cantillon, B.,Van Lancker, W.(2013).Three Shortcomings of the Social Investment Perspective.Social Policy and Society,12(4),553-564.
15. Chieregato, E.(2020).A Work-Life Balance For All? Assessing the Inclusiveness of EU Directive 2019/1158.International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations,36(1),59-80.
16. Choi, Y. J.,Huber E,Kim W. S,Kwon H. Y.,Shi, S.-J.(2020).Social Investment in the Knowledge-based Economy: New Politics and Policies.Policy and Society,39(2),147-170.
17. Dobrotić, I.,Blum, S.(2019).A Social Right?: Access to Leave and its Relation to Parents’ Labour Market Position.Parental Leave and Beyond: Recent International Developments, Current Issues and Future Directions,Bristol:
18. Dobrotić, I.,Blum, S.(2020).Inclusiveness of Parental-Leave Benefits in Twenty-One European Countries: Measuring Social and Gender Inequalities in Leave Eligibility.Social Politics,27(3),588-614.
19. Duvander, A.,Halldén, K.,Koslowski, A.,Lindquist, G.S.(2020).Stockholm Research Reports in DemographyStockholm Research Reports in Demography,未出版
20. Duvander, A.,Viklund, I.(2020).How Long is a Parental Leave and for Whom? An Analysis of Methodological and Policy Dimensions of Leave Length and Division in Sweden.International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy,40(5/6),479-494.
21. Ellison, G.,Barker, A.,Kulasuriya, T.(2009).Work and Care: A Study of Modern Parents.Manchester:Equality and Human Rights Commission.
22. Esping-Andersen, G.(2002).Why We Need a New Welfare State.Oxford:Oxford University.
23. Esping-Andersen, G.(2009).The Incomplete Revolution: Adapting to Women’s New Roles.Cambridge:Polity.
24. 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.
25. Fleckenstein, T.,Lee, S. C.(2020).Roads and Barriers towards Social Investments: Comparing Labour Market and Family Policy Reforms in Europe and East Asia.Policy and Society,39(2),266-283.
26. Flora, P.,Alber, J.(1981).Modernization, Democratization, and the Development of Welfare States in Western Europe.The Development of Welfare States in Europe and America,New Brunswick:
27. Flora, Peter(ed.)(1986).Growth to Limits: The Western European Welfare States Since World War II.Berlin:W. de Gruyter Press.
28. Fraser, N.(1997).Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition.New York:Routledge.
29. Fredman, S.(2014).Reversing Roles: Bringing Men into the Frame.International Journal of Law in Context,10(4),442-459.
30. Fudge, J.,Owens, R.(2006).Precarious Work, Women, and the New Economy: The Challenge to Legal Norms.Oxford:Hart Publishing.
31. Giddens, A.(1998).The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy.Cambridge:The Polity Press.
32. Haas, L.,Hwang, C. P.(2019).Workplace Support for European Fathers’ Use of State Policies Promoting Shared Childcare.Community, Work and Family,22(1),1-22.
33. Hemerijck, A.(2018).Social Investment as a Policy Paradigm.Journal of European Public Policy,25(6),810-827.
34. Hull, J.(2013).Potential Barriers to Aboriginal Teenaged Mothers' Access to Maternal and Parental Benefits.The International Indigenous Policy Journal,4(1),1-18.
35. Jenson, J.(2009).Lost in Translation: The Social Investment Perspective and Gender Equality.Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society,16(4),446-483.
36. Karu, M.,Tremblay, D.(2018).Fathers on Parental Leave: An Analysis of Rights and Take-up in 29 Countries.Community, Work & Family,21(3),344-362.
37. Kaufman, G.,Lyonette, G.,Crompton, R.(2010).Post-Birth employment leave among fathers in Britain and the United States.Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice About Men as Fathers,8(3),321-340.
38. Koslowski, A.,Kadar-Satat, G.(2019).Fathers at Work: Explaining the Gaps between Entitlement to Leave Policies and Uptake.Community, Work & Family,22(2),129-145.
39. Kvande, E.,Brandth, B.(2019).Designing Parental Leave for Fathers – Promoting Gender Equality in Working Life.International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy,40(5/6),465-477.
40. Leitner, S.(2003).Varieties of Familialism: The Caring Function of the Family in Comparative Perspective.European Societies,5(4),353-375.
41. Lewis, J.(2006).Introduction: Children in the Context of Changing Families and Welfare States.Children, Changing Families, and Welfare States,Cheltenham:
42. Lister, R.(2006).An Agenda for Children: Investing in the Future or Promoting Well-being in the Present?.Children, Changing Families, and Welfare States,Cheltenham:
43. Ma, L. I.,Andersson, G.,Duvander, A.,Evertsson, M.(2020).Fathers’ Uptake of Parental Leave: Forerunners and Laggards in Sweden, 1993-2010.Journal of Social Policy,49(2),361-381.
44. Margolis, R.,Hou, F.,Haan, M,Holm, A.(2019).The Use and Sharing of Parental Benefits in Canada: Two Policy Changes.Journal of Marriage and Family,81(2),450-467.
45. Mathieu, S.,Doucet, A.,Mckay, L.(2020).Parental Leave and IntraRegime Differences in a Liberal Country: the Case of Four Canadian Provinces.Canadian Journal of Sociology,45(2),170-194.
46. McKay, L.,Mathieu, S.,Doucet, A.(2016).Parental-leave Rich and Parental-leave Poor: Inequality in Canadian Labour Market based Leave Policies.Journal of Industrial Relations,58(4),543-562.
47. Midtbøen, A. H.,Teigen, M.(2014).Social Investment in Gender Equality? Changing Perspectives on Work and Welfare in Norway.NORA: Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research,22(4),267-282.
48. Morel, N.,Palier, B.,Palme, J.(2012).Beyond the Welfare State as We Knew it?.Towards a Social Investment State? Ideas, Policies and Challenges,Bristol:
49. Morgan, K. J.(2012).Promoting Social Investment through Work- Family Policies: Which Nations Do It and Why?.Towards a Social Investment State? Ideas, Policies and Challenges,Bristol:
50. Moss, P. (2015). “International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2015.” http://www.leavenetwork.org/lp_and_r_reports/. Retrieval Date: 2021/03/18.
51. Moss, P.,Duvander, A.,Koslowski, A.(2020).Parental Leave and Beyond, Recent Developments, Current Issues, Future Directions.Bristol:Policy Press.
52. Moss, P,Deven, F.(2015).Leave Policies in Challenging Times: Reviewing the Decade 2004-2014.Community, Work & Family,18(2),137-144.
53. Pavolini, E.,Van Lancker, W.(2018).The Matthew Effect in Childcare Use: A Matter of Policies or Prefer ences?.Journal of European Public Policy,25(6),878-893.
54. Saraceno, C.(2015).A Critical Look to the Social Investment Approach from a Gender Perspective.Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society,22(2),257-269.
55. Tronto, J. C.(2013).Caring Democracy: Markets, Equality, and Justice.New York:New York University Press.
56. Tsai, P. -Y.(2012).The Transformation of Leave Policies for Work-Family Balance in Taiwan.Asian Women,28(2),27-54.
57. Votinius, J.(2020).Collective Bargaining for Working Parents in Sweden and Its Interaction with the Statutory Benefit System.International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations,36(3),367-386.
58. 內政部戶政司(2021a)。<出生數及粗出生率(按登記及發生)>。
59. 內政部戶政司(2021b)。<出生按身分(按登記及發生)>。
60. 內政部戶政司(2021c)。(全國人口資料庫統計地圖)。https://gis. ris.gov.tw/dashboard.html?key=C02。2021/03/18檢索。
61. 尤美女(2002)。兩性工作平等法修法之漫漫長路。婦女新知通訊，233，11-13。
62. 行政院主計總處(2020)。《109年人力運用調查報告》。臺北:行政院主計總處。
63. 行政院主計總處(2010)。《99年人力運用調查報告》。臺北:行政院主計總處。
64. 林佳和(2004)。勞動基準法二十年過去、現在與未來的十項觀察。律師雜誌，298，49-65。
65. 馬財專(2007)。回首來時路:臺灣育嬰留職津貼的初探。社區發展季刊，11，428-446。
66. 婦女新知基金會(2021)。(照顧時間貧窮荒，職場家庭兩頭燒請國會支持短期可行改革，為人民發聲、讓經濟永續!)。https://www.awakening.org.tw/news/5640。2021/11/21檢索。
67. 婦女新知基金會(2002)。十二年來的蓽路藍縷兩性工作平等法終於三讀通過。婦女新知通訊，234，1-11。
68. 張晉芬(2002)。晚來的喜悅與更深的期待歷經11年奮戰「兩性工作平等法」終於通過。婦女新知通訊，234，13-14。
69. 陳昭如(2017)。從義務到權利:論母性保護制度的轉向與重構。追尋社會國:社會主義之理論與制度實踐，臺北:
70. 勞動部(2020)。,臺北:勞動部。
71. 勞動部(2017)。,臺北:勞動部。
72. 劉梅君(2002)。兩性工作平等法中「育嬰津貼」的定位及立法意義淺析。萬國法律，125，2-9。