The dilemma of 6 months maternity leave in MCH Bill
Written by Maria Ermilinda Hayon | Read in Indonesian
The Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI) recently passed the Maternal and Child Welfare Bill (RUU KIA) as a DPR initiative bill. The MCH Bill is intended to protect women's rights and fulfil the basic rights of children.
Interestingly, of the 44 articles in the MCH Bill, Article 4 Paragraph (2) letter a, which regulates the rights of working mothers, received more attention than others. Why?
The article stipulates that every working mother is entitled to maternity leave of at least 6 months. However, the Job Creation Law regulates a 3-month maternity leave.
This article is also very important to be explored more deeply because we know now that there are many women, mothers, who also work and play a role in supporting their household income.
Statistics Indonesia (BPS) data showed that in 2021 alone, as many as 39.52% or 51.79 million people aged 15 years and over who work are women. This figure increased by 1.09 million from that in the previous year.
Most women work as sales personnel, followed by agricultural workers, production workers, professionals, service business personnel, government officials, leadership staff and other positions at all industrial sectors.
With this condition, it came as no surprise that the MCH Bill, especially for women in the world of work, is put under the limelight and ultimately garnered pros and cons.
On average, employers ask for the MCH Bill to be reconsidered because they deemed it burdensome. On the other hand, workers—women workers in particular—generally support the 6 months maternity leave policy, although there are several important notes that should be reviewed.
So, what are the pros and cons of the 6-month maternity leave policy in the MCH Bill?
The positive sides of 6 months leave
The MCH Bill, especially the 6-month maternity leave policy, has a good purpose to fulfil the rights of working women and the rights of children. Some of the positive sides of the policy are:
1. Increasing the success rate of exclusive breastfeeding
The 6 months maternity leave policy is claimed to be able to increase the success rate of exclusive breastfeeding and optimise the health status of mothers and babies. Good health status of both mothers and babies will have a very positive impact on family resilience.
2. Supporting stunting reduction
The optimal health status of mothers and babies will increase the success rate of exclusive breastfeeding. Therefore, the 6-month maternity leave policy in the MCH Bill can help tackle stunting in Indonesia.
Indonesia has the fifth highest stunting rate in the world. At least one in four Indonesian children is stunted. In addition, the maternal mortality rate is still high. Around 300 mothers died for every 100,000 live births.
For this reason, the House expected that the 6-month maternity leave policy could support various aspects to ensure that children have optimal growth and development, are free from stunting and can grow to become excellent human resources.
3. Strengthening mother-child relationship
The increasing amount of time to prepare for labour and care for the baby after delivery is expected to strengthen the relationship between working mothers and their children.
There is a guarantee that mothers will have time to build a deeper connection with their children without having to be burdened by a short period of leave.
4. Mentally healthy and productive after leave
A study titled "The Impact of Paid Maternity Leave on the Mental and Physical Health of Mothers and Children" issued by the National Library of Medicine found that sufficient maternity leave can have positive impacts on the mother's mental health. Among them is curbing postpartum depression.
The study also stated that the physical and mental health of mothers who underwent a good leave period could be better maintained than those who did not have optimal leave.
Another good effect is that after the leave period ends, the mother will also be more ready and productive to return to work because she is physically and mentally more sound.
The negative sides of 6 months leave
Despite the positive sides of the policy, there are still some things that need to be criticised. Some things are feared to happen, and others need clarification and adjustment.
1. Three months salary not paid in full
Article 5 Paragraph 2 of the MCH Bill reads: Every mother who exercises the rights as referred to in Article 4 Paragraph (2) letter a gets 100% (one hundred percent) rights for the first 3 (three) months and 75% (seventy five percent) for the next 3 (three) months.
This article causes a polemic among working mothers, because the wages of workers or labourers are still very low. The salary increase did not even reach 1%. If an additional 3 months of leave is given but the salary is not paid in full, other positive goals would be affected.
For example, good nutrition for mothers and babies is supported by a proper and healthy diet. They also have to do prenatal check-ups and preparation for delivery. To fulfil special needs in this special period, more funds are needed. Wages not paid in full during maternity leave could pose a problem.
Chairperson of the Federation of United Indonesian Trade Union (FSBPI) Dian Septi Trisnanti said the regulations in this article prompted mothers to take only three months of leave in order to get a full salary.
"It's not that I disagree with the 6-month leave; I totally agree with it. But make the wages full. Don't let this be just a gimmick; six months of leave but some are not fully paid, it’s vain. I’m sure they will definitely choose a 3-month leave. Why? Because it's like menstrual leave. When it is compensated or exchanged for money, female workers will prefer to exchange it for money instead of the 2-day leave,” Dian told TFR.
2. Inequality of parenting burden between mothers and fathers
The MCH Bill specifically regulates paternity leave. This type of leave is not regulated in the Manpower Law. Of course, the 40-day paternal leave policy in the MCH Bill should be appreciated.
Unfortunately, paternity leave is not accompanied by an equal division of roles between husbands and wives in caring for and taking care of the children. There are still articles that emphasise the sole responsibility of caring for the mother.
This can be seen in Article 10 Paragraph (1) which specifically and in detail regulates the domestic obligations of mothers. Of the 9 items of article description, none of them emphasises the role or obligations of the father.
“This sharpens the paradigm that raising children is only the mother's task, when in fact, it (childcare, ed.) should be the responsibility of both the husband and the wife, the father and the mother. Also, the mother's obligations do not need to be regulated in the bill, because it's like institutionalising a mother's obligations. It’s just like the Marriage Law, which places mothers as the ones who manage the household and husbands as the ones who work outside. It strengthens the paradigm that we have been trying to counter with a gender perspective,” Dian explained.
3. Fear of lower absorption of female workers
As we all know, the MCH bill is considered burdensome for business owners. That is because, like it or not, they have to find a way so that they don't lose money when they have to pay the wages of women workers who take maternity leave.
The objections of business owners could affect female workers or prospective female workers. One of them is the possibility of impeding women's right to work.
It is feared that female workers' absorption will decline because companies do not want to pay maternity leave benefits. The position of women as secondary workers makes this vulnerability more visible.
This is why several articles of the MCH Bill need to be reviewed; to ensure that employers comply with and follow the regulations, such as preventing job opportunities restriction during recruitment and ensuring that taking maternity leave does not have a negative impact on career development opportunities.
Those are some of the positive and negative sides or the pros and cons of the MCH Bill. What do you think?
