23(38)
which may be the reason for the more obvious influence. To have more
time with your child at the expense of work is a more valid claim than
earning a bonus (or losing less income).
Our interpretation of the absence of an effect of the gender equality bonus
is that the bonus has not reached parents and that the system is
complicated to understand. It is less straightforward than the reserved
months, and it was also given much less attention in the media and in
public debate. Thus transparency of policy is largely lacking. The lag in tax
credit is also likely to work as a disincentive to usage. In addition there are
other factors influencing the leave division between the mother and the
father. These factors may be so strong that a bonus at the economic level
of the present one is too marginal to have any influence.
All three reforms have been politically accepted by being introduced as part
of packages, a possible reason why the effects of the reforms are in some
cases limited. By comparing the use of leave of fathers of children born in
1995, 2002, and 2008 we see that the effects of the reforms have largely
endured for the first and second reserved months and the trend of fathers
using more leave has not stopped. It is too early to talk about enduring
effects of the gender equality bonus but in all three cases the reforms have
to be seen in the context of a general trend of increasing gender-equal
division of leave. Even if the reforms, at least the two first, have had a
positive impact on this trend, they are not the sole reasons for the trend.
It is also possible that a reform encouraging gender equality in parental
leave may have most effect the first time it is introduced, but that it is hard
to reach the same effect when it is repeated, or when even longer leave is
encouraged. In addition, even if all the reforms aim at gender-neutral
parenthood, the bonus does so by encouragement whereas the reserved
months reduce leave days if they are not used more equally. The bonus is
also complemented by the option of a homecare allowance (also gender-
neutral but not so its implication and use). It seems that when the goal of
gender equality has to compete with goals of free choice, only some
parents seize the chance to be more gender-equal.
