I personally want some paternal leave even with its costs, but I'd prefer that negotiation to stay between me and my employer. I don't want some bottom threshold set by a third party.
But for society as a whole this makes financial sense. In Nordic countries we have the worlds highest female labour participation rate. That is a lot of extra tax dollars.
It also means higher birth rate which benefits the economy. Look at asian countries with birth rates around 1.2 which where slow at adopting these kinds of systems. Nordic countries are more like 1.8.
Over time such a low birth rate will be a huge financial burden for a country. Any taxes you saved from not having paternal leave will be lost in taxes to pay for caring for a huge elderly population.
So does every other aspect of caring for people (police, fire, education).
>but I'd prefer that negotiation to stay between me and my employer
Hey that works great if you are one of those people that is invaluable to your company, or can easily negotiate and move into a better job. Do you know how that would go for 99.9% of people?
"Hey boss, I'm pregnant, isn't that great! Can I have 12 months paid off so I can take care of my family?"
"Erm, how about 3 days?"
"Ok I see how this goes, fine how about 2 weeks?"
"No forget it, you're fired. I'll just hire someone who isn't having a baby to replace you. Good luck!"
The government mandated exempt employees? Just curious.
Not sure what exempt employees are (my own ignorance).
Why should it come out of you salary? Why can't it be fully paid?