I grew in Montreal and while I moved to Ont in 1982, I kept up to date on Quebec politics for years.
The Quebec threw money at couples to have more children in the 80's and beyond, which was a marked change from Quebec having the largest families in Canada 2 generations earlier.
Reality check? Throwing money at having children had little impact. Quebec, like everywhere in NA saw a huge change in the need for two income families and the career penalty for dropping out to raise kids. Housing of all types has been a major profit taking opportunity open to anyone, ensuring housing costs dominate over having children.
The discussion of parental leave is built on the root of the cost of living needing 2 parents to even pay the bills and the mortgage. The pay structure for the "bottom rung" of the workforce is getting worse and worse in the light of the growing informal economy.
The costs to those already working to pay for a good program will be unsustainable for people in that world. Therefore the parental leave problem is the tip of the iceberg. @Neil Thomson, your comments are right on the money.
All great comments. At this point parental leave is kind of a minor program that takes the edge off the damage. The amount of benefits is pretty pathetic.
It’s also not helpful if a woman wants to have several children in succession. She has to go back each time and work 600 hours to get more eligibility. It doesn’t matter if she contributed for 10 years up to that point or if her husband has contributed faithfully to the program for many years. The program should allow past earnings or a spouse’s earnings to be considered for eligibility.
I grew in Montreal and while I moved to Ont in 1982, I kept up to date on Quebec politics for years.
The Quebec threw money at couples to have more children in the 80's and beyond, which was a marked change from Quebec having the largest families in Canada 2 generations earlier.
Reality check? Throwing money at having children had little impact. Quebec, like everywhere in NA saw a huge change in the need for two income families and the career penalty for dropping out to raise kids. Housing of all types has been a major profit taking opportunity open to anyone, ensuring housing costs dominate over having children.
The discussion of parental leave is built on the root of the cost of living needing 2 parents to even pay the bills and the mortgage. The pay structure for the "bottom rung" of the workforce is getting worse and worse in the light of the growing informal economy.
The costs to those already working to pay for a good program will be unsustainable for people in that world. Therefore the parental leave problem is the tip of the iceberg. @Neil Thomson, your comments are right on the money.
All great comments. At this point parental leave is kind of a minor program that takes the edge off the damage. The amount of benefits is pretty pathetic.
It’s also not helpful if a woman wants to have several children in succession. She has to go back each time and work 600 hours to get more eligibility. It doesn’t matter if she contributed for 10 years up to that point or if her husband has contributed faithfully to the program for many years. The program should allow past earnings or a spouse’s earnings to be considered for eligibility.