For the first missing children. Parental insurance is to ensure that all children should be able to get a secure childhood, while the parents both should be able to afford to take care of their children and be able to have a working life. The latter is of particular importance for women, who often give up their careers to take care of the children.
Much has changed but we still live in an equal society. Women take seven out of ten föräldradagar.
Families with higher incomes, and occupations that require higher education are more equally, according to the social security office. Fathers with higher incomes to take out more parental leave than fathers with low incomes. It means that debattörernas argument, to reduce the number of parental leave days in order to finance the increase in the ceiling of the insurance, so the men can take off more days, did not hold.
the Debaters want to introduce a qualifying day in the care of a sick child. But to stop the felutbetalningar by introducing an unpaid sick leave is the wrong way to go.
Kids will not stop getting sick for a qualifying day introduced. What will happen is that the parents can’t afford to be at home with them. Have the debaters thought about the socio-economic effect of this? Or thought about the working conditions for ecec staff?
. The answer can not be a measure that punishes parents and children.
gender inequality socket of the parental insurance has negative consequences for women’s employment and earnings over a lifetime. In order to achieve gender equality need parental insurance reform so that the socket becomes more equal. Therefore, we need to fold more days to each parent and in the long term, introducing an individualized parental insurance. To earmark days has been effective in the past. The conservatives response has been that they did not want to control over, their choice, but now they seem instead like to control families by punishing them.
on Wednesday will the Conservatives stop the government’s proposal to reserve 90 days in the parental insurance for each parent, even on a basic level. Despite the fact that the proposal could contribute to a more equal parenting.
Why else would they want to undermine parental instead to support our proposal to earmark more föräldradagar when it demonstrably had a good effect on gender equality?
the Proposals presented by the Conservatives will not have a positive effect for equality. This would give negative impact for children, families and society as a whole.