Despite progress in gender equality, the pay gap continues to be a major challenge. Policymakers are yet to understand the nuances and intricate mechanics of why women’s earnings take a hit after they become mothers, argues Almudena Sevilla

Sevilla Sanz, Almudena Sevilla

English

LSE Research Online

Almudena Sevilla March 20th, 2024The persisting pay gap and the motherhood penalty0 comments | 8 sharesEstimated reading time: 6 minutesDespite progress in gender equality, the pay gap continues to be a majorchallenge. Policymakers are yet to understand the nuances and intricatemechanics of why women’s earnings take a hit after they become mothers,argues Almudena Sevilla.Signi cant strides have been made towards gender equality, but the substantialchallenges that remain are critical. There are still persistent earnings disparitiesbetween men and women, with the pay gap ranging from 20% to 80% across theworld. Failing to achieve gender equality is not just a justice issue, it also has asigni cant opportunity cost in terms of economic growth. The policy aim shouldbe to reach a stage where gender does not in uence individuals’ decision-making processes, including about work. One of the major paradigm-shiftswhen it comes to thinking about the challenges of future policymaking aroundgender equality is understanding the complex mechanics behind themotherhood penalty.Work hours seem to be part of the explanation forthe widening earnings gaps a er householdformation and childbirth.Rethinking the mechanisms behind themotherhood penaltyEconomists agree about the deep interaction between family life and labourmarket decisions. We now know that if women’s occupations followed the maledistribution a third of the difference in earnings between men and women woulddisappear. The other two-thirds of the gender-based difference in earningscomes from factors within each occupation. Women’s inability to combine workwith family seems to account for the lion’s share of the pay gap, partly becauseof women’s greater relative demands at home. Data from decades of labourmarket and time use research con rms this effect, prompting policies likeparental leave and childcare subsidies to address the issue. Yet, after years ofhaving these policies in place, the delivery of gender equality remains elusive.There are two major obstacles with the existing approach that limit the designof effective policy making: First, the policy and research focus on childbirth asthe starting point for the widening gender gap in the labour market needs to bereassessed. Second, the lack of understanding by policy makers about themechanisms underlying the dynamics of the so-called child penalty need to befurther understood.Work hours seem to be part of the explanation for the widening earnings gapsafter household formation and childbirth. Yet women start reducing work hoursupon forming a household, and not necessarily upon giving birth to a child. It’simportant to note that the establishment of a household, in addition tochildbirth, plays a role in the gender disparities seen in household duties andlabour market inequalities. Evidence from several countries shows that theformation of a couple leads to an increase in housework between  ve and a halfhours per week for women, whereas the difference in total housework betweenmarried men and single men is not statistically signi cant and amounts to lessthan a quarter of an hour a week. This holds for a wide variety of countries, evenfor couples that remain childless.Grasping the nuances of household-relateddemands is crucial for shaping e ective policiesaimed at counteracting talent depletion,especially when mothers adjust work hours a erchildbirth.Additionally, whereas the earnings penalty for mothers reduces as their childrenage and mothers work longer hours, particularly for the less educated, aquestion remains about why initial levels of employment and work hours are notrecovered. Loss of human capital is only part of the story. An alternative answercomes from the exploration of 24-hours diary surveys. As has been widelydocumented, housework and childcare demands fall on mothers signi cantlymore than fathers regardless of children ages. Less well-known is the fact thathousework and childcare time demands remain high even when children enterschool and can be constraining for women who spend as many as 7 hours withchildren above 6 years old. Whereas childcare time seems to ease up during theteenage years, there is a reason to believe that time captured by diary surveys isa lower bound of the actual constraints mothers with teenage children facewhen considering going back to work or working more hours. The unpredictablenature of children’s needs, especially as they mature and their lives becomemore complex, requires parents (particularly mothers) to be mentally andemotionally available. This expectation on mothers, whether self-imposed orexternal, can create a sense of responsibility and guilt that compels manymothers to maintain a constant readiness to respond to their children’s needsand prevents them from either returning to work on increasing the number ofhours they work. Being emotionally available and able to provide on-call on-demand support may also explain why grandmothers, like mothers, experiencea drop in earnings and work hours upon the arrival of a grandchild, despiteoverall low levels of childcare time.Table 1: Hours per day devoted to activities(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)VARIABLES Housework Primarychildcare     In care ofchildrenTime withchildren ObservationsMothers Mean Mean Mean MeanAge youngest child0-53.20 2.52 6.34 9.56 24,473Age youngest child6-123.18 1.23 5.15 7.02 20,369Age youngest child13-172.70 0.38 0.23 2.56 12,650FathersAge youngest child0-51.81 1.30 4.23 6.31 17,509Age youngest child6-121.77 0.63 3.68 4.92 14,704Age youngest child13-171.54 0.18 0.11 1.75 10,374Notes: The sample consists of household heads who have at least one childunder the age of 18 living in their homes. The data is derived from the 2003-2024 American Time Use Survey (ATUS). All the time measurements for theseactivities are reported in hours per day.Policy implicationsGrasping the nuances of household-related demands is crucial for shapingeffective policies aimed at counteracting talent depletion, especially whenmothers adjust work hours after childbirth and exhibit prolonged absences fromthe workforce as children age. It is vital for policies to extend beyond child-centric concerns, encompassing the overarching dynamics of householdcreation and its rami cations on gender equity. Traditional time diaries fall shortin encapsulating the emotional readiness associated with child-rearing,signifying a notable void in the extant literature. Addressing this data shortfallpresents a valuable opportunity for social science research to steer theprioritization of certain policy strategies to promote equitable domesticresponsibility distribution, including fostering the development of technologiesand work cultures that encourage employers to adapt to more  exible workarrangements, and enhancing parental leave provisions for both parents.All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not theposition of LSE British Politics and Policy, nor of the London School ofEconomics and Political Science.Image credit: Odua Images on ShutterstockAbout the authorPosted In: Gender and Equality | LSE Comment | Women's History MonthRead NextAlmudena Sevilla is a Professor of Economic and Social Policy in theDepartment of Social Policy at LSE and is currently the Chair of the RoyalEconomic Society UK Women in Economics Network.Almudena Sevilla

The persisting pay gap and the motherhood penalty

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/122836/1/The_persisting_pay_gap_and_the_motherhood_penalty_British_Politics_and_Policy_at_LSE.pdf

The persisting pay gap and the motherhood penalty

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online