Evaluation of the Employment Insurance Maternity and Parental Benefits

On this page

Alternate formats

Large print, braille, MP3 (audio), e-text and DAISY formats are available on demand by ordering online or calling 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232). If you use a teletypewriter (TTY), call 1-800-926-9105.

List of figures

List of tables

List of acronyms and abbreviations

CEIC
Canada Employment Insurance Commission
EI
Employment Insurance
EICS
Employment Insurance Coverage Survey
ESDC
Employment and Social Development Canada
MAR
Monitoring and Assessment Report
QPIP
Quebec Parental Insurance Plan
UI
Unemployment Insurance
WWC
Working while on Claim

Summary of key findings and recommendations

This evaluation assesses the Employment Insurance (EI) maternity and parental benefits for employed workers in terms of access, usage, effects, and program delivery from January 2006 to December 2019. As a result, specific measures associated with the COVID-19 pandemic are out of scope for this evaluation. The evaluation also focuses on providing early results associated with the changes introduced in Budget 2017 and Budget 2018, namely:

The evaluation provides results on female and male parents of newborn or newly adopted children within Canada (excluding Quebec). Since 2006, pursuant to the Canada-Québec Final Agreement on the Québec Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP), new parents in Québec have been receiving benefits under QPIP instead of EI. QPIP can be accessed at lower insurable earnings and offers more generous benefits, but at a cost of higher premiums. Evidence on QPIP is presented, where publicly available, to provide additional context around benefits available to new parents across Canada.

The evaluation findings and recommendations are based on the analysis of multiple lines of quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Key findings

There are 8 key findings from the evaluation:

  1. Finding 1: From 2006 to 2019, close to 72% of female parents and 81% of male parents were covered by the EI program. Of them, about 90% were eligible for maternity and parental benefits. These rates were lower than those observed under the Québec Parental Insurance Plan, which has a lower entrance requirement
  2. Finding 2: The participation rate of male parents was relatively low over the study period (below 13%). However, early results indicate that the recent changes to parental benefits significantly increased the rate. The rate increased from 13.6% in 2016 to 18.1% in 2019. This rate was significantly lower than the 1 observed for male parents under the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan, which has more generous benefits
  3. Finding 3: The vast majority (85%) of new parental benefit claimants opted for standard parental benefits. Those who opted for extended parental benefits were more likely to be high-income earners, have higher family income, in couples, working in large organizations, and receiving a top-up
  4. Finding 4: Following recent policy changes to parental benefits, the sharing of parental benefits increased from 14.5% in 2017 to 19.9% in 2019. However, key informants still believe that employers’ perceptions on parental leave tend to differ by gender. This is due to a cultural stigma within the workplace attached to men taking leave
  5. Finding 5: More female claimants than male claimants served the waiting period in 2019 (159,000 and 25,000 respectively). This is because female claimants typically access maternity benefits first. As a result, a greater number of female than male claimants (14,100 compared to 1,800) had their first few weeks of benefits clawed back. This was due to earnings during the waiting period
  6. Finding 6: Claimants who have lost their job before the birth/adoption of their child were less likely to access their full parental benefit entitlements. This is due to the 50-week maximum rule when regular and special benefits are combined. On average, each year of the studied period, 3,300 female claimants were impacted by the 50-week rule. This was compared to less than 500 male claimants. This is due to the combination of regular, maternity and/or parental benefits
  7. Finding 7: Longer maternity and parental benefits duration increased the likelihood for female claimants to work for the same employer after their parental leave, while the likelihood decreased for their partners. However, for all claimants, the likelihood of having higher future employment income decreased the longer they claimed benefits
  8. Finding 8: Overall, the delivery (application process) of EI maternity and parental benefits was deemed effective. There was limited awareness of potential impacts on businesses of the recent changes

Recommendations

Based on these findings, provides the following 2 recommendations to the Department:

  1. Explore approaches to improve eligibility and access for parents to maternity and parental benefits, in particular spouses and partners
  2. Explore approaches to enhance flexibility for claimants who need to combine maternity and parental benefits with regular benefits

Introduction

The Employment Insurance (EI) program currently provides 6 types of special benefits designed to support workers experiencing a job separation for:

This evaluation report specifically focuses on the EI maternity and parental benefits.

History

Maternity benefits were introduced to the Unemployment Insurance (UI) Act in 1971. At this point, biological mothers were eligible to receive 15 weeks of benefits at a replacement rate of 67% of their average weekly earnings. In 1980, the replacement rate, which was the same for all other UI benefits, was lowered to 60% and then lowered again to 57% in 1993 and then to 55% in 1995. Furthermore, in 1984, amendments to the UI Actintroduced benefits for adoptive parents. In 1990, 10 weeks of parental benefits for biological and adoptive parents were introduced and replaced the benefits for adoptive parents.Footnote 1

As of December 31, 2000, 4 major changes were introduced to EI maternity and parental benefits, which were:

Effective March 3, 2002, the maximum number of combined weeks of special benefits increased from 50 to 65 weeks and the benefit period was extended accordingly, under certain circumstances.

Since January 2006, Quebec is responsible for providing maternity, paternity, parental and adoption benefits to residents of Quebec through the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP –for more details see the section on Comparison with QPIP).

Since 2010, self-employed workers can access EI special benefits (including maternity and parental benefits) on a voluntary basis by opting into the program.

Additional changes have been implemented to the EI program between 2005 and 2017 that had consequential effects to EI maternity and/or parental benefits such as:

The EI waiting period has been reduced from 2 weeks to 1 week as of January 1, 2017.

Program description

Budget 2017 and Budget 2018: Major changes to the benefits

Earlier access to maternity benefits (implemented as of December 2017)

Increase flexibility to allow pregnant workers to consider their personal, health, and workplace circumstances when choosing when to begin their claim by:

More choice for parents (implemented as of December 2017)

Help working parents, including adoptive parents, manage work and family responsibilities by allowing them to choose the option of EI parental benefits that best meets their family’s needs. Following the birth or placement for the purpose of adoption:

Working while on claim–maternity (implemented as of August 2018)

Facilitate continued attachment to the workforce and provide greater flexibility to persons receiving maternity benefits to manage their return to work and keep more EI benefits by:

Parental sharing benefits (implemented as of March 2019)

Foster greater gender equality in the home and in the workplace by encouraging parents to share the joy and responsibility of raising their children more equally by:

Following changes introduced in Budget 2017, provincial labour legislation was amended to ensure job protection for extended parental leave. These amendments came into effect in:

Maternity and parental benefits in 2019Footnote 3

To qualify, workers need to have accumulated at least 600 hours of insurable employment during the 52-week period before the start date of their claim or since their last EI claim, whichever is shorter (qualifying period).

Maternity benefits

In 2019, EI maternity benefits were payable for a maximum of 15 weeks at a 55% of average insurable weekly earnings (up to $562). Maternity benefits could be paid as early as 12 weeks prior to the expected date of birth and as late as 17 weeks after the child’s actual birth date. In fiscal year 2018 to 2019, 170,010 new claims for EI maternity benefits were established in Canada resulting in over $1.2 billion paid in benefits (EI MAR, 2019).

Parental benefits

In 2019, parental benefits were provided to eligible parents, including adoptive and same-sex parents, to care for their newborn or newly adopted child. Parents can opt for:

Parents can share and use benefits at the same time or different times. While parents can change how they share the weeks of benefits at any point during their claim, the decision on which parental benefits option they want (standard or extended) must be made when they apply for benefits. Once parental benefits have been paid out to any eligible parent, they cannot change their option. The choice of the first parent who completes the application is binding on the other parent. When parental benefits are shared by parents, only the first parent to claim benefits will need to serve the waiting period.

In fiscal year 2018 to 2019, there were over 168,000 claims made for standard benefits and 32,000 claims for extended benefits, for a total payment of $2.7 billion in parental benefits (EI MAR, 2019).

Combining benefits

EI claimants may combine maternity and parental benefits with other types of EI benefits as part of a single claim provided they meet the qualifying and entitlement conditions for each type. In 2019, the maximum number of weeks payable within the claim was 50 weeks if EI regular benefits were paid during the claim. When only special benefits are combined, a claimant may receive up 104 weeks under defined conditions.

Comparison with QPIP

Since January 1 2006, QPIP provides parents residing in Quebec with maternity, parental, paternity, or adoption benefits. Both employees and self-employed individuals are eligible to QPIP benefits. These benefits replace maternity and parental benefits provided by the EI program and, as such, EI premiums in Quebec are lower to reflect the savings to the EI Operating Account. QPIP premiums are set by the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan’s Conseil de gestion de l’assurance parentale. Furthermore, provisions to the EI regulations that allow for premium reduction require, among other things, that:

Table 1 below shows that QPIP meets these 2 criteria, as the entrance requirement is lower and the level of benefits are more generous. However, workers in Quebec pay higher premiums. Under QPIP, a recipient has to opt for the base plan (1st row in the QPIP column in Table 1) or the special plan (2nd row in the QPIP column in Table 1).

Table 1: Comparison of the EI program and QPIP in 2019 for paid employees
Provision EI Program Quebec Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP)
Waiting period (no benefit) 1 week None
Eligibility 600 insurable hours (on average roughly $15,438*) $2,000 in insurable earnings
Maximum insurable earnings $53,100 $76,500
Maternity benefits (maximum weekly benefits) 15 weeks at 55% ($562) 18 weeks at 70% ($1,030) or
15 weeks at 75% ($1,104 – special plan)
Parental benefits (maximum weekly benefits)** 35 weeks at 55% ($562) or
61 weeks at 33% ($337)
7 weeks at 70% ($1,030) + 25 weeks at 55% ($809) or
25 weeks at 75% ($1,104 – special plan)
Extra weeks for sharing parental benefits (maximum weekly benefits) 5 weeks at 55% ($562) or
8 weeks at 33% ($337)
Not available
Paternity benefits (maximum weekly benefits) Not available 5 weeks at 70% ($1,030) or
3 weeks at 75% ($1,104 – special plan)
Maximum total benefits paid to mothers $28,100 over 50 weeks or
$28,987 over 76 weeks
$45,975 over 50 weeks or
$44,160 over 40 weeks (special plan)
Maximum total benefits paid to spouses/partners $19,670 over 35 weeks or
$20,557 over 61 weeks
$32,585 over 37 weeks or
$30,910 over 28 weeks (special plan)
Premiums on insurable earnings for maternity and parental benefits Not available (-$0.370) for every $100 up to $53,100 for EI, but
+$0.526 for every $100 up to $76,500 for QPIP

Evaluation approach

This evaluation is conducted with the intent to assess EI maternity and parental benefits and inform on the preliminary effects of the Budget 2017 and Budget 2018 changes.

The evaluation covers the period from January 2006 to December 2019. For the purpose of the analysis, the period is divided into 3 segments:

This evaluation report is based on the findings from 3 technical studies using administrative data, an analysis of the Employment Insurance Coverage Survey (EICS) conducted by Statistics Canada for ESDC, and key informants interviews.

Concurrent with the evaluation, EI consultations on future longer-term EI improvements are taking place. While the consultation and the evaluation are separate processes, the results and findings will be complementary, and both will help inform policy work on EI modernization.

Refer to Annex C for a full list of the data sources.

Evaluation questions

For the purpose of this evaluation report, 5 evaluation questions were identified.

Access

  1.  To what extent did workers have access to maternity and parental benefits since 2006?

Usage

  1. What is the labour and socio-economic profile of maternity and parental claimants? What is the maternity and parental benefits usage pattern?

Effects

  1. What are the initial and/or on-going effects of the recent changes to maternity and parental benefits on businesses (such as SMEs, other private and public organizations)?
  2. What are the effects of maternity and parental leave and benefits on employment outcomes (such as return to work, job characteristics, annual earnings)?

Program delivery

  1. Do workers and employers understand the most recent changes and their implications?

To the extent possible, given the data and methodological limitations, the evaluation leverages information from the lines of evidence to incorporate a gender-based analysis plus lens.

Limitations

As the evaluation covers the period from January 2006 to December 2019, specific measures associated with the COVID-19 pandemic are out of scope for this evaluation.

The evaluation focuses on employees and thereby excludes self-employed individuals who registered to and received maternity and/or parental benefits.

Generally, parents residing in Quebec receive maternity and parental benefits through QPIP. However, there are a small number of Quebec residents who received maternity and parental benefits through the EI program. These individuals are excluded from the evaluation.

Key findings

Finding #1

Finding: From 2006 to 2019, close to 72% of female parents and 81% of male parents were covered by the EI program. Of them, about 90% were eligible for maternity and parental benefits. These rates were lower than those observed under the Québec Parental Insurance Plan, which has a lower entrance requirement.

From 2006 to 2019, there was an average of about 290,000 newborns and about 485,000 parents per year residing in Canada (outside Québec).

Over this period, the share of new parents who paid EI premiums (those covered) remained stable (Figure 1) for both female and male parents, 81.0% for male parents and 71.6% for female parents on average.

Compared to coverage under the EI program, the coverage of female parents under QPIP was 15 percentage points higher based on the 2019 EICS, similar to previous years (2016 to 2018). To note, EICS does not examine coverage for male parents.

Figure 1: Coverage rates for female and male parents, 2006 to 2019
Figure 1: Coverage rates for female and male parents, 2006 to 2019
Text description of Figure 1
Year Share of Female parents with EI Premiums Share of Male parents with EI Premiums
2006 72.0% 81.8%
2007 72.5% 81.6%
2008 72.7% 81.6%
2009 72.2% 81.0%
2010 70.8% 80.2%
2011 70.7% 80.7%
2012 70.9% 80.9%
2013 71.0% 81.1%
2014 71.0% 81.2%
2015 71.3% 81.4%
2016 71.3% 81.1%
2017 71.3% 80.4%
2018 71.8% 80.7%
2019 72.5% 80.8%

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Eligibility rate

Over the study period, close to 94% of female parents who paid EI premiums had a job separation during the reference periodFootnote 1 compared to only 53% for male parents.

The eligibility rate is defined as the share of parents who have accumulated enough insurable hours to qualify for EI maternity and/or parental benefits (at least 600 hours) out of all parents who are covered by the EI program (those who paid EI premiums).

On average, from 2006 to 2019, of those who had a job separation and paid EI premiums, about 92% of female parents and 86% of male parents had accumulated at least 600 hours in their qualifying period.

Similarly, the EICS analysis reveals that the eligibility rate of female parents under EI (around 87%) was lower by almost 10 percentage points than under QPIP.

EI Administrative Data Compared to Statistics Canada EI Coverage Survey (EICS)

When comparing eligibility rates using EI administrative data and EICS, the EICS eligibility rate is lower by around 5 percentage points. The difference can be explained by various factors. The eligibility rate determined by the administrative data used Records of Employment, which are sometimes missing in the database as an ESDC (2018) study showed.

On the other hand, the EICS eligibility rate is based on a sample of around 1,000 observations per year (4 years were combined for the analysis). Overall, both sources complement each other and provide results within the same range.

Entrance Requirements

Parents working in EI economic regions with the highest unemployment rate would benefit the most from a reduction in the entrance requirement.

The number of insurable hours required to qualify for EI maternity or parental benefits is flat at 600 insurable hours across all the EI economic regions. This contrasts with the EI regular benefits variable entrance requirement varying between 420 and 700 insurable hours depending on the unemployment rate in the EI economic region where they reside.

Over the study period, lowering the entrance requirement to 420 hours, for example, for maternity and parental benefits (instead of 600 hours) would increase, on average, the eligibility rate of female parents by 1.8 percentage point and by 4.0 percentage points for male parents. Overall, any change to reduce the entrance requirement for maternity and parental benefits would mostly benefit workers in EI regions with the highest unemployment rate (for example, Northern regions).

Many experts and representatives of parents and workers associations identified the reduction of the number of hours required to qualify, among other aspects that would need to be reviewed, to ensure greater access and eligibility. Some of them also mentioned that maternity and parental benefits should not be subject to any qualifying requirements and thereby be recognized as a basic right.

Finding #2

Finding: The participation rate of male parents was relatively low over the study period (below 13%). However, early results indicate that the recent changes to parental benefits significantly increased the rate. The rate increased from 13.6% in 2016 to 18.1% in 2019. This rate was significantly lower than the 1 observed for male parents under the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan, which has more generous benefits.

Participation rate

Over the study period, the participation rate (those who received at least $1 of benefits out of those covered) of female parents receiving EI maternity and/or parental benefits, was 83.7%, on average (around 171,000 claimants) and only 12.8% for male parents (29,100 claimants).

Figure 2 shows that the number of new claims from females remained relatively stable while the number of new claims from males steadily increased from 2007 to 2018, before significantly increasing in 2019 (34.1% increase) when an additional 5 weeks of parental benefits (standard) or 8 weeks of parents benefits (extended) became available to parents sharing benefits. Similarly, based on the EI Monitoring and Assessment report, the increase in male participation was 41.0% in 2019-2020

Figure 2: Number of new claims with parental benefits by gender, 2007 to 2019. For accessibility reasons, the figure has been simplified. Consult the PDF version for the full figure.

Figure 2 a): Number of new claims with parental benefits by gender, 2007 to 2019 - Panel A: Female Claimants
Figure 2 a): Number of new claims with parental benefits by gender, 2007 to 2019 - Panel A: Female Claimants
Text description of Figure 2 a)
Year Panel A: Female Claimants
2006 165,323
2007 173,823
2008 172,139
2009 167,449
2010 167,581
2011 167,684
2012 169,692
2013 174,497
2014 170,554
2015 172,190
2016 173,634
2017 171,592
2018 170,712
2019 165,323

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Figure 2 b): Number of new claims with parental benefits by gender, 2007 to 2019 – Panel B: Male Claimants
Figure 2 b): Number of new claims with parental benefits by gender, 2007 to 2019 – Panel B: Male Claimants
Text description of Figure 2 b)
Year Panel B: Male Claimants
2006 24,896
2007 26,411
2008 26,593
2009 26,936
2010 27,185
2011 27,452
2012 26,601
2013 27,561
2014 27,712
2015 29,148
2016 30,981
2017 33,089
2018 44,364
2019 24,896

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Based on the 2019 EICS, the share of spouses who received or intended to receive parental benefits was 20.5% under the EI program compared to 85.6% under the QPIP program. When asked reasons for why spouses were not claiming parental benefits, 16.7% of female claimants whose spouse had not claimed EI parental benefits said that it was more financially advantageous for them to collect all of the parental weeks than if their spouse did (this compares to 11.0% for those under QPIP).

A few key informants identified the low replacement rate and the inability for some workers to accumulate enough hours as a deterrent to participation, particularly with the growth in precarious work and the expansion of the ‘gig’ economy.

Regression discontinuity design

A regression discontinuity design (RDD) model was conducted to test the hypothesis that there was a statistically significant increase in the volume of claims of parental benefits by men during the week of December 3, 2017 when the choice between standard or extended parental benefits became available. Examining the claims around this cut-off shows that there was no statistically significant change in men’s take-up rate of parental benefits around this time.

Since the effects of the change are not observed immediately after its implementation, a scatter plot (Figure 3) presents the average weekly take-up rate over two 20-week periods. A 20-week period before and a 20-week period after the policy change took effect.

Figure 3: Scatter plot of the average weekly number of new claims for parental benefits by men, February 2017 to September 2018, option between standard or extended parental benefits became available
Figure 3: Scatter plot of the average weekly number of new claims for parental benefits by men, February 2017 to September 2018, option between standard or extended parental benefits became available
Text description of Figure 3
Number of weeks before and after option of extended benefits Number of new claims for parental
-40 424
-39 480
-38 509
-37 522
-36 513
-35 466
-34 605
-33 558
-32 525
-31 486
-30 652
-29 591
-28 500
-27 465
-26 530
-25 608
-24 579
-23 521
-22 618
-21 794
-20 785
-19 676
-18 604
-17 663
-16 652
-15 621
-14 549
-13 576
-12 750
-11 700
-10 662
-9 570
-8 618
-7 587
-6 543
-5 650
-4 610
-3 702
-2 637
-1 591
0 – Option of extended benefits 544
1 604
2 554
3 523
4 515
5 591
6 811
7 733
8 577
9 536
10 642
11 610
12 519
13 532
14 588
15 570
16 553
17 463
18 547
19 613
20 572
21 553
22 621
23 660
24 554
25 543
26 604
27 721
28 742
29 608
30 667
31 838
32 871
33 702
34 666
35 644
36 635
37 700
38 643
39 614
40 725

The same method was used to assess the change in the volume of parental claims observed following the policy change of providing parents with additional weeks of benefits when they share benefits that came into effect on March 17, 2019. An RDD model tested the hypothesis that there was a statistically significant increase in take-up of parental benefits by males immediately after providing additional weeks of benefits to parents sharing the parental benefits. While there was no significant change in take-up at the policy change, the new policy was found to have had a gradual effect on men’s take-up rate of parental benefits.

Finding #3

Finding: The vast majority (85%) of new parental benefit claimants opted for standard parental benefits. Those who opted for extended parental benefits were more likely to be high-income earners, have higher family income, in couples, working in large organizations, and receiving a top-up.

Extended benefits

Over the study period, an average of about 199,700 new parental benefit claims were established per year. On average, around 0.8% of female parental claims were from adoptive female claimants and 1.5% of male parental claims were from adoptive male claimants.

Figure 4 presents the share of parental benefit claimants broken down by 3 age groups. Unlike females, males aged 35 and overrepresented the largest share of parental claimants, with an average share of 43.6% over the study period. Among male parents, the proportion of young parents under 30 years of age declined steadily over the study period. A similar decline is also observed in the proportion of young female parents under 30 years of age.

Figure 4: Proportion of parental benefit claimants by age groups, 2007 to 2019. For accessibility reasons, the figure has been simplified. Consult the PDF version for the full figure.

Figure 4 a): Proportion of parental benefit claimants by age groups, 2007 to 2019 - Panel A: Female Claimants
Figure 4 a): Proportion of parental benefit claimants by age groups, 2007 to 2019 - Panel A: Female Claimants
Text description of Figure 4 a)
Year Panel A: Female claimants under 30 Panel A: Female claimants 30 to 34 Panel A: Female claimants 35 and over
2007 45.4% 34.9% 19.7%
2008 45.7% 34.5% 19.8%
2009 45.1% 34.8% 20.1%
2010 43.6% 35.7% 20.6%
2011 42.9% 36.2% 20.9%
2012 41.9% 36.8% 21.2%
2013 40.3% 38.0% 21.7%
2014 39.6% 38.7% 21.7%
2015 38.7% 39.2% 22.1%
2016 37.4% 39.6% 23.0%
2017 36.4% 40.0% 23.7%
2018 35.5% 40.0% 24.5%
2019 34.4% 40.2% 25.4%

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Figure 4 b): Proportion of parental benefit claimants by age groups, 2007 to 2019 - Panel B: Male Claimants
Figure 4 b): Proportion of parental benefit claimants by age groups, 2007 to 2019 - Panel B: Male Claimants
Text description of Figure 4 b)
Year Panel B: Male claimants under 30 Panel B: Male claimants 30 to 34 Panel B: Male claimants 35 and over
2007 24.9% 33.6% 41.5%
2008 24.5% 33.2% 42.3%
2009 25.1% 33.1% 41.8%
2010 24.4% 33.2% 42.4%
2011 24.4% 33.0% 42.6%
2012 22.5% 33.8% 43.6%
2013 21.8% 34.4% 43.9%
2014 21.3% 35.0% 43.8%
2015 20.7% 35.0% 44.3%
2016 20.6% 35.2% 44.3%
2017 20.2% 34.7% 45.1%
2018 19.4% 35.2% 45.3%
2019 18.8% 36.4% 44.9%

Standard versus extended parental benefits

From 2018 to 2019, an average of 30,500 new claims a year were for extended parental benefits (14.5%) while an average of 179,300 were for standard benefits (85.5%). Most representatives of employer and industry associations interviewed for this evaluation viewed this change as positive because it provides employees with choice and flexibility, while providing employers with some predictability regarding staffing requirements.

Analysis found that parents working for large firms were more like to opt for extended parental benefits compared to parents working in small or medium firms. Examining education level revealed that female claimants with a high school diploma or less were more likely to opt for extended benefits relative to females with higher levels of educational attainment, when controlling for various characteristics. However, male claimants who have completed university, college or an apprenticeship were more likely to opt for extended benefits.

Married parents were also more likely to choose extended benefits than divorced, separated, widowed, or single parents. This may point to challenges for single earner families to opt for lower benefits (33% replacement rate instead of 55%) in the absence of supplementary benefit plans or a partners’ income.

As Table 2 shows, female claimants opting for extended parental benefits had a similar employment income as those opting for standard parental benefits. However, the spousal income ($67,858) of those who opted for the extended benefits was close to 12% higher than those opting for standard benefits ($60,849). As a result, family income in 2 earner households was also higher for those opting for extended benefits.

Similarly, for male claimants, their employment and their spousal income were higher for those taking extended benefits than those opting for standard benefits.

There was a widespread impression among experts and representatives of parents and workers associations that the extended parental option was only an option ‘in principle’, because many claimants, particularly those with low and modest income, cannot afford to take extended leave at 33% replacement rate.

Table 2: Average prior year employment income for maternity and parental claimants, 2019. For accessibility reasons, the table has been simplified. Consult the PDF version for the full table

Table 2 a): Average prior year employment income for maternity and parental claimants, 2019 – Maternity claimants

Claimants Females Males Total
Maternity claimants $46,061 N/A $46,061

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Table 2 b): Average prior year employment income for maternity and parental claimants, 2019 - Biological parental claimants

Claimants Females Males Total
Biological Parental Claimants - Standard option $45,950 $65,881 $50,099
Biological Parental Claimants - Extended option $45,401 $78,246 $51,468

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Table 2 c): Average prior year employment income for maternity and parental claimants, 2019 - Adoptive parental claimants

Claimants Females Males Total
Adoptive Parental Claimants - Standard option $57,275 $68,556 $60,680
Adoptive Parental Claimants - Extended option $61,175 $76,935 $66,292

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Table 2 d): Average prior year employment income for maternity and parental claimants, 2019 - Claimant’s spousal income

Claimants spousal income Females Males Total
Claimants spousal income - Standard option $60,849 $29,588 $53,713
Claimants spousal income - Extended option $67,858 $43,466 $62,915

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Table 2 e): Average prior year employment income for maternity and parental claimants, 2019 - Family income - 2 earner household

Family income - 2 earner household Females Males Total
Family income - 2 earner household - Standard option $118,201 $104,787 $115,345
Family income - 2 earner household -Extended option $124,353 $126,271 $124,753

Source: EI Administrative Data and CRA Tax Files.

Employers can offer supplemental payments to top-up maternity and parental benefits received by their employees. The top-up amounts are not considered as earnings and are not deducted from EI benefits and therefore increase the income of claimants while receiving maternity and parental benefits. The plans vary across employers in terms of their duration and top-up amount.

The share of claimants who had a top-up plan decreased from close to 16% in 2007 to about 10% in 2019, with most of the decrease occurring between 2007 and 2009. Approximately 10.6% of female claimants and 9.4% of male claimants worked for an employer offering a supplemental plan.

Regression results show that claimants with a top-up plan were more likely to be older, to work in a large firm, and to have earned higher employment income in the year before their claim relative to claimants who did not have access to a plan.

Benefit duration

There was little variation in the benefit duration over the studied period until the recent changes.

Over the study period, about 92.1% of female claimants used the full 15 weeks of maternity benefits. On average, female claimants received 14.7 weeks.

The average duration of standard parental claims established by females was stable between 2007 and 2019 (just over 30 weeks), while the average duration of extended parental benefits was around 55 weeks since their introduction in December 2017. In comparison, the average duration of standard parental claims established by males was also relatively stable between 2007 and 2018 at around 16.5 weeks, followed by a decline of more than 2 weeks following the introduction of extra weeks for those sharing benefits in 2019. The average duration of extended benefits claimed by males declined from 29 weeks in December 2017 to 18 weeks in 2019.

Figure 5: Average duration of standard and extended parental benefit weeks, 2007 to 2019
Figure 5: Average duration of standard and extended parental benefit weeks, 2007 to 2019
Text description of Figure 5
Year Females standard Females extended Males standard Males extended
2007 31.9 N/A 17.0 N/A
2008 32.1 N/A 17.2 N/A
2009 32.1 N/A 17.3 N/A
2010 32.1 N/A 16.9 N/A
2011 32.2 N/A 17.2 N/A
2012 32.4 N/A 17.3 N/A
2013 32.4 N/A 16.3 N/A
2014 32.5 N/A 16.4 N/A
2015 32.5 N/A 16.6 N/A
2016 32.5 N/A 16.4 N/A
2017 32.6 58.7 16.5 29.4
2018 32.5 55.7 15.9 22.8
2019 32.6 56.1 14.0 18.4

The decline in the average number of weeks received by males between 2018 and 2019 was in part due to the increase in number of men claiming parental benefits for a short period. For instance, 25.0% of males received 5 or fewer weeks of standard benefits in 2018 compared to 37.8% in 2019 (37.5% of males received 8 weeks or fewer of extended benefits in 2018 compared to 43.2% in 2019).

Table 3: Proportion of females and males taking the full parental benefit duration entitlement, 2007 to 2019

Year Females - Standard Females - Extended Males - Standard Males - Extended
2007 to 2017 72.3% N/A 17.4% N/A
2018 76.4% 65.2% 16.8% 13.8%
2019 78.4% 67.6% 14.5% 6.6%

Finding #4

Finding: Following recent policy changes to parental benefits, the sharing of parental benefits increased from 14.5% in 2017 to 19.9% in 2019. However, key informants still believe that employers’ perceptions on parental leave tend to differ by gender. This is due to a cultural stigma within the workplace attached to men taking leave.

Over the study period, up to 83% of claimants were in families who could have opted for sharing their parental benefits (claimants neither single nor widowed). For the purposes of this evaluation, claimants who were married or in a common law relationship were used to estimate the number parents who could opt for sharing their parental benefits. As Figure 6 shows, the proportion of claimants from two-parent families sharing parental benefits increased significantly from 2007 to 2017 (before the policy change) by about 30%. Following both policy changes in 2017 and 2019, sharing increased by about 37%.

Figure 6: Proportion of claimants from 2 parent families who shared parental benefits, 2007 to 2019
Figure 6: Proportion of claimants from 2 parent families who shared parental benefits, 2007 to 2019
Text description of Figure 6
Year Proportion of claimants from two-parent families who shared parental benefits
2007 11.0%
2008 12.6%
2009 12.6%
2010 13.5%
2011 13.8%
2012 13.7%
2013 13.6%
2014 13.7%
2015 13.9%
2016 14.2%
2017 14.5%
2018 16.1%
2019 19.9%

Claimants who were younger, had less children, had a university level of education, higher employment income, and higher spousal income were more likely to share parental benefits. In addition, claimants who opted for the extended benefits were more likely to share than those who opted for the standard benefits. Claimants with top-up plans were slightly less likely to share parental benefits, particularly since the implementation of both policy changes.

There was unanimous support among key informants for providing additional weeks of parental benefits to eligible parents who are sharing the benefit. However, it was noted that uptake has been low and that there are insufficient financial incentives to taking the additional weeks.

Sharing Benefits

The overall increase in the duration of parental benefits after the introduction of extended benefits, at the family level, was driven by female claimants receiving more weeks.

As illustrated in Figure 7, families with parents who shared benefits received slightly more weeks than those who did not. From a claimant’s perspective, female and male claimants who shared benefits received a lesser number of weeks than male and female claimants who did not. This suggests that by sharing caring responsibilities, each parent can take less time away from work.

Figure 7: Average duration of parental benefit weeks for claimants from 2 parent families, 2007 to 2019
Figure 7: Average duration of parental benefit weeks for claimants from 2 parent families, 2007 to 2019
Text description of Figure 7
Sharing/Not sharing Females Males Family
Not sharing – Standard 33.3 19.8 32.0
Sharing – Standard 24.2 11.3 34.2
Not sharing – Extended 57.7 29.9 55.8
Sharing – Extended 47.0 14.3 60.6

Regression results show that when controlling for various factors, the average number of weeks received by female claimants and the family as a whole has significantly increased following the introduction of extended benefits. However, the average duration of parental benefit weeks by males who shared parental benefits did not significantly change.

Evidence from key informants interviews supports data analyses as most representatives of employees and workers’ associations interviewed reported, based on what they have heard from their members, that employers’ perceptions of parental leave do tend to differ by gender. Specifically, it was noted that there still tends to be a cultural stigma attached to men taking leave/extended leave. That said, it was also observed that many men may wish to take extended leave but feel unable to do so because they cannot risk the loss of income. They often have the higher wage and therefore the family income is more adversely affected if they take leave.

Some key informants suggested that reactions to taking longer leave may vary by sector and depend on the level of support of firms and/or managers. Examples shared by key informants included firms with policies that de-incentivize taking longer leave (such as stock-based compensation that gets prorated, and sectors like construction in which parental responsibilities may be incompatible with work requirements).

Finding #5

Finding: More female claimants than male claimants served the waiting period in 2019 (159,000 and 25,000 respectively). This is because female claimants typically access maternity benefits first. As a result, a greater number of female than male claimants (14,100 compared to 1,800) had their first few weeks of benefits clawed back. This was due to earnings during the waiting period.

The waiting period is a period during which no EI benefits are paid. As of January 1, 2017, the waiting period has been reduced for all EI benefits from 2 weeks to 1 week.

When parental benefits are shared by parents, only 1 parent needs to serve a waiting period. Typically, when parental benefits are shared by both parents, only the first parent claiming the EI benefits serves it. Therefore, since the maternity claim is taken before the parental claim, female claimants usually serve the waiting period more often than males.

As a result of being considerably more likely to serve the waiting period, female claimants are negatively impacted in 2 ways. The first, is that female claimants faced an income gap (a period with no employment income or EI benefits) in a much larger number and in proportion than male claimants.

Second, female claimants who report earnings during their waiting period are more likely to have their benefits clawed back in the first weeks of benefit payments relative to male claimants.

In any given year over the evaluation period, approximately 14,100 female claimants (8.0% of maternity female claimants) received partial benefit payments due to earnings during the waiting period compared to only 1,800 male claimants per year (6.3% of parental male claimants)

Overall, since they are more likely to serve the waiting period, female claimants received less EI benefits early on in their claim when compared to men

Working while on Claim (WWC)

While maternity benefits were clawed back dollar-for-dollar up to August 11, 2018, parental claimants were allowed to earn up to $50 or 25% of their weekly benefit rate without reduction of their benefits before August 7, 2016.

Between August 7, 2016 and August 11, 2018, parental claimants had the option to:

  • keep 50 cents of EI benefits for every dollar earned in income, up to a maximum of 90% of previous average weekly earnings, or
  • keep $75 or 40% of the benefit rate, whichever is greater, without any deduction from benefits. Above these thresholds, earnings were deducted dollar-for-dollar from the parental benefits

Since August 12, 2018, maternity and parental claimants are able to keep 50 cents of EI benefits for every dollar earned, up to 90% of weekly insurable earnings.

On average, from 2007 to 2019, 5.7% of maternity claimants, 7.2% of female parental claimants, and 16.9% of male parental claimants worked while on claim (including those working during the waiting period). The share of female parental claimants who worked while on claim decreased over the study period from 8.8% in 2007 to 4.4% in 2019, while the share of males who worked declined from 17.5% in 2007 to 11.8% in 2019. Furthermore, the share of maternity claimants working while on claim dropped by almost 50% between the end of 2016 and the beginning of 2017, when the waiting period was reduced from 2 weeks to 1 week.

Finding #6

Finding: Claimants who have lost their job before the birth/adoption of their child were less likely to access their full parental benefit entitlements. This is due to the 50-week maximum rule when regular and special benefits are combined. On average, each year of the studied period, 3,300 female claimants were impacted by the 50-week rule. This was compared to less than 500 male claimants. This is due to the combination of regular, maternity and/or parental benefits.

The EI program allows for claimants to receive different benefit types within 1 claim so long as they meet the qualifying and entitlement conditions of each benefit. For example, they can combine benefits such as sickness and maternity benefits.

Female workers may choose to apply for sickness benefits before maternity benefits if they are unable to work for medical reasons associated with pregnancy. Although pregnancy and childbirth are not considered illnesses, complications with respect to either may be. When no regular benefits are paid, different special benefits can be combined up to a maximum of 102 weeks, including 15 weeks of sickness benefits.

Maternity and/or parental benefit claimants who combine their claim with regular benefits (and are laid off from their job before the birth or after) are allowed to receive a maximum of 50 weeks of combined benefits paid at 55% within their claim (extended parental benefits are converted into standard weeks).

Combining with sickness

Following the 2017 change, female parents can access maternity benefits earlier.

Prior to December 3, 2017, the earliest the maternity claimant could start benefits was 8 weeks prior to the expected due date and as late as 17 weeks after the date of birth or due date (whichever one is later). Since then, maternity benefits can be taken as early as 12 weeks before the claimants’ expected due date. The objective of that change was to increase flexibility to allow pregnant workers to consider their health when choosing when to begin their claim.

The majority of maternity claimants between 2007 and 2019 started their claim either before the date of birth or the week of the birth (69.9%). On average, claimants who started with maternity benefits received their first week of benefits 3.5 weeks before the birth of their child.

Figure 8: Share of maternity claimants taking sickness benefits as the first benefit, 2007 to 2019
Figure 8: Share of maternity claimants taking sickness benefits as the first benefit, 2007 to 2019
Text description of Figure 8
Year Share
2007 13.6%
2008 13.9%
2009 13.9%
2010 14.6%
2011 14.9%
2012 14.7%
2013 14.9%
2014 15.0%
2015 15.1%
2016 15.7%
2017 16.9%
2018 16.4%
2019 16.5%

Source: ESDC (2021). Technical Report 2

Figure 9: Average number of weeks prior to birth of the child for claims that start with Maternity Benefits, 2007 to 2019
Figure 9: Average number of weeks prior to birth of the child for claims that start with Maternity Benefits, 2007 to 2019
Text description of Figure 9
Year Average number of weeks
2007 3.6
2008 3.6
2009 3.5
2010 3.4
2011 3.4
2012 3.4
2013 3.4
2014 3.3
2015 3.3
2016 3.3
2017 3.3
2018 3.7
2019 3.5

Source: ESDC (2021). Technical Report 2

Combining regular with maternity and/or parental benefits

Overall, around 4.6% of claimants combined maternity and/or parental benefits with EI regular benefits – 67.3% were women and 32.7% were men. Over the study period, there was a decline in the share of men and women combining maternity and/or parental benefits with EI regular benefits. While women experienced a slow and steady decline, men experienced more fluctuation, with observed increases in 2008, 2015, and 2019, likely reflecting the general volatility in the employment market (like financial crisis, commodity crisis).

Compared to those who did not combine maternity and/or parental benefits with EI regular benefits, female claimants who did it were more likely to be single (twice as likely – 33% compared to 17% for those who did not combine), have low employment income (under $20,000 – 42.9% compared to 25.8%), be younger (under 30 years of age – 51.5% compared to 39.9%) and have a lower level of education (high school or less – 30% compared to 23%).

Because female claimants are significantly more likely than male claimants to take longer duration of maternity and parental benefits (see Figure 5), female claimants who did combine regular benefits with maternity and parental benefits are more likely to reach the 50-week maximum when they combined the 3 benefits.

Over the study period, all female claimants who started with regular benefits (about 6,300 annually) claimed, on average, 15.3 weeks of regular benefits, followed by 13.6 weeks, on average, of maternity benefits (Table 4).

Table 4: Average duration of benefit weeks for female claimants, 2007 to 2019

Combined or not combined with EI regular benefits EI Regular weeks Maternity weeks Standard Parental weeks Total weeks claimed -Standard* % reaching 50 weeks
Did not combine with EI regular 0 14.7 32.9 58.9 71.9%
Combined with EI regular 15.3 13.6 17.2 46.1 51.7%

* Include any other benefits with the claim.

Of the female claimants who combined maternity and parental benefits with regular benefits and claimed the full 50 weeks, 82.1% had an employment income below $40,000 in the year prior to the claim and 99.4% did not have access to a top-up plan. This shows that most female claimants that were prevented to fully claim the parental weeks were part of the workers from the lowest and modest income groups. Similar results were observed for male claimants who combined parental benefits with regular benefits and claimed the full 50 weeks.

Furthermore, of female claimants who combined with regular benefits and used the full 50 weeks, and had also unclaimed parental benefit weeks due to the 50-week rule:

Females who only claimed maternity and standard parental benefits and were laid off during their maternity or parental leave would have been, on average, entitled to 1.1 weeks of regular benefits to reach the 50-week limit (50 weeks minus 48.9 weeks) at the end of their maternity and parental claims, preventing them from having income support while looking for a job.Footnote 5

Male claimants who started with regular benefits claimed, on average, 14.5 weeks of regular benefits (Table 5). These male claimants combined, on average, 17.0 weeks of standard parental benefits, a number of standard parental weeks slightly higher to the number of weeks for those who did not combine (16.3 weeks). As a result, most male claimants who combined benefits were not limited by the 50-week limit rule. In fact, only 14.4% of male claimants who combined with regular benefits received 50 weeks of benefits (compared to 51.7% for female claimants as noted previously).

Of these 14.4% of male claimants, less than 20% of them had a spouse or partner that could have claimed their unused parental weeks and less than 8% had a spouse or partner who did so.

Table 5: Average duration of benefit weeks for male claimants, 2007 to 2019

Combined or not combined with EI regular benefits EI Regular weeks Maternity weeks Standard Parental weeks Total weeks claimed -Standard* % reaching 50 weeks
Did not combine with EI regular 0 N/A 16.3 16.4 17.5%**
Combined with EI regular 14.5 N/A 17.0 31.9 14.4%

* Include any other benefits with the claim.

** A maximum 35 weeks for males that did not combine with regular benefits.

Finding # 7

Finding: Longer maternity and parental benefits duration increased the likelihood for female claimants to work for the same employer after their parental leave, while the likelihood decreased for their partners. However, for all claimants, the likelihood of having higher future employment income decreased the longer they claimed benefits.

Overall, 2 years after the birth of a child, 79.7% of female parents and 93.2% of partners were working.

Looking at female and male parents who worked prior to and after the birth (Figure 10), the prevalence of working for the same employer declined with the number of years following the birth of the child, whether they claimed EI benefits or not.

Figure 10: Prevalence rate of all female parents and partners working for the same employer— 2006 to 2017. For accessibility reasons, the figure has been simplified. Consult the PDF version for the full figure.

Figure 10 a): Prevalence rate of all female parents and partners working for the same employer— 2006 to 2017 – Female parents
Figure 10 a): Prevalence rate of all female parents and partners working for the same employer— 2006 to 2017 – Female parents
Text description of Figure 10 a)
Year Female parents -Who did not claim Female Parents - Who claimed
t+1 86.1% 92.2%
t+2 74.7% 82.8%
t+3 66.3% 75.7%
t+4 60.0% 70.0%
Figure 10 b): Prevalence rate of all female parents and partners working for the same employer— 2006 to 2017 – Partners
Figure 10 b): Prevalence rate of all female parents and partners working for the same employer— 2006 to 2017 – Partners
Text description of Figure 10 b)
Year Partners - Who did not claim Partners - Who claimed
t+1 89.6% 92.5%
t+2 76.8% 82.1%
t+3 68.2% 75.2%
t+4 61.7% 70.2%

Methodology

The sample of claimants and non-claimants had significantly different employment incomes. In order to obtain comparable groups of claimants and non-claimants and therefore properly measure the effects of maternity and parental leave and benefits on employment outcomes, the sample of both groups was limited to those with a minimum level of employment income, high enough to limit the sample, to the extent possible, to those who worked full-time.

The minimum employment income was established at 25% below the average annual industrial earnings across Canada adjusted for inflation (for example, $36,670 per year in 2017 constant dollars). Using the average hourly industrial earnings paid to employees ($24.26 per hour), it was estimated to be roughly equivalent on average to 30 hours per week over a year.

Employment outcomes

As shown in Figure 10, there were no large differences found in the prevalence rate of returning to the same employer between parents who claimed maternity and parental benefits and the comparable group of non-claiming parents.

The analysis further reveals that longer duration of maternity and parental benefits for female parents resulted in a greater likelihood of working for the same employer (up to 6.3 percentage points for those who took 50 weeks), compared to those who used fewer weeks of benefits (between 1 and 15 weeks).

The likelihood of working for the same employer 2 years after the birth varied across industries and employer size:

Future income

Using the same sample (refer to methodology box), over the study period, the likelihood of an increase in employment income 4 years after the birth of a child for female parents and their partners compared to employment income prior to the birth of the child increased by up to 15 and 20 percentage points potentially reflecting salary progression of parents as well as the economic growth in Canada.

The statistical model shows that female claimants were slightly less likely by 1 to 3 percentage points to have an increase in employment income 4 years after the birth of their child than comparable groups of non-claimants.

The effect on male parents was greater. Male parents who claimed parental benefits were less likely by 8 to 10 percentage points to have an increase in employment income 4 years after the birth of the child than a comparable group of non-claimants.

Female Claimants

Female parents who claimed maternity and parental benefits for the full 50 weeks were less likely to have an increase in their employment income 4 years after the birth of a child by 16.8 percentage points than those who claimed these benefits for less than 16 weeks (duration of the maternity benefits).

Male Claimants

Male parents who claimed parental benefits for the full 35 weeks were less likely to have an increase in their employment income 4 years after the birth of a child by 20.3 percentage points than those who claimed these benefits for 8 weeks and less.  

Finding # 8

Finding: Overall, the delivery (application process) of EI maternity and parental benefits was deemed effective. There was limited awareness of potential impacts on businesses of the recent changes.

Representatives of employers and industry associations frequently viewed the EI maternity and parental benefits as important because they help support the well-being of employees on leave, and in so-doing help maintain their attachment to the firm (contributing to employee retention). A few also suggested that the benefits support spending power of consumers. On the other hand they identified maintaining work/business continuity and costs as the challenges associated with such benefits.

Most representatives of employer and industry associations either could not answer knowledgeably or felt that there was little (if any) effect of allowing a choice between standard and extended parental benefits.

Regarding the effect of providing additional weeks of parental benefits to be shared among parents, many representatives of employer associations either could not answer or suggested that this probably resulted in more male parents taking leave and increased marginal costs to businesses.

For their part, experts could not comment knowledgeably on this beyond suggesting that the effect likely varies by circumstances and that small firms probably have more difficulty replacing workers for an extended period.

Representatives of employer and industry associations said they could not comment knowledgeably on the extent to which allowing early access to maternity benefits has had an effect on business operations in their sector. Neither could experts comment on this issue.

Awareness

When asked about the extent to which their members are familiar with the recent changes to EI maternity and parental benefits, many representatives of parents and workers associations and representatives of employer and industry associations prefaced their responses by noting that they could not answer with any degree of certainty because they did not have access to members’ views, or because of the size and diversity of their membership.

The awareness of Budget 2017 and 2018 changes varied.

Most key informants considered the EI program as effective in terms of ease of access, in particular the application process. They noted that it is easy and straightforward, and information is easily accessible. In addition, the application process has been easier since the advent of online application and digitalization.

When asked about proposed changes to facilitate the application process and delivery, there was limited critical feedback such as improve process time to minimise gaps in income payment and simplify language in communications.

Conclusion and recommendations

The EI program provides income support to parents to support recovery from pregnancy and childbirth and care for a newborn or newly adopted child or children, with close to 200,000 claimants accessing benefits each year.

Overall, the evaluation provides early evidence that recent changes do appear to have increased participation and usage of EI parental benefits and that parents are taking advantage of recently introduced flexibilities. Still, access and participation to EI maternity and parental benefits are lower than under the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan, which is more generous than the EI program (in terms of access and level of benefits) but at a cost of higher premiums. In addition, the evaluation finds that program rules such as serving the waiting period and the capping of benefits to 50 weeks when a layoff occurs impact a greater number and a greater proportion of female maternity and parental claimants than male parental claimants.

Although the evaluation found that EI maternity and parental benefits played an important role for new parents, evidence points to opportunities for improvement to enhance eligibility and access. Based on these findings, the Evaluation Directorate identifies 2 recommendations for the Department:

Management response / Action plan

The Department would like to thank the Evaluation Directorate for its work on the program evaluation of the Employment Insurance (EI) maternity and parental benefits, which included extensive quantitative analysis complemented by interviews with representatives of employers and workers’ associations as well as academics. Preliminary analysis shared over the evaluation process helped inform policy analysis and EI modernization work.

Recommendation #1

Recommendation: Explore approaches to improve eligibility and access for parents to maternity and parental benefits, in particular spouses and partners.

Management agrees with Recommendation 1.

EI maternity and parental benefits are key supports to parents welcoming a new child into their home, providing temporary income support to eligible workers who are away from work because they are pregnant, have recently given birth, or are caring for their newborn or newly adopted child.

Since the inception of EI maternity and parental benefits, the needs of parents and families, as well as consideration for employers and the overall economy, has guided changes to EI benefits. In response to the 2016 consultations on inclusive and flexible EI maternity, parental, and caregiving benefits, changes were made to allow parents and expecting parents to better take into account their personal, family, and workplace circumstances.

Among these changes were earlier access to maternity benefits and a choice of a standard or extended parental benefit option. Since March 2019, additional weeks of parental benefits are available to eligible parents who share the benefits. The measure is intended to promote greater gender equality in the home and the workplace and to encourage all parents, especially fathers, to take leave when welcoming a new child. These early evaluation results have shown that these measures are already having a positive impact on the use of parental benefits by men. Additional years of data will show the full impact of these measures.

Academics and stakeholders have called on the government to make EI maternity and parental benefits easier to access and more generous. In 2021, a review of EI program by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills, and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities (HUMA) included a number of recommendations, including measures that would improve EI access, generosity, and the combining of benefits. Feedback from the 2021-2022 national consultations on the modernization of the EI program, including written submissions and stakeholder roundtables on life events in the first phase of these consultations, echoed the HUMA recommendations.

The Department will take into account the findings of this evaluation, as well as input received through the consultations on the modernization of the EI program and the HUMA recommendations, as it explores how eligibility and access to maternity and parental benefits can be improved. As qualifying requirements are the same for all special benefits, analysis would take other special benefits (e.g. caregiving) into consideration.

Actions planned

  • 1.1 Analyze more broadly access and eligibility for all special benefits. Leverage this information, along with input received during the consultations on the modernization of the EI program, to inform the plan to build a stronger and more inclusive and accessible EI program.

Anticipated completion date: Summer 2023

Recommendation #2

Recommendation: Explore approaches to enhance flexibility for claimants who need to combine maternity and parental benefits with regular benefits.

Management agrees with recommendation 2.

The EI Program provides Canadians workers with economic safety through regular benefits when they lose their job for reasons outside their control and they are available for and actively seeking employment. Workers who need to take time away from work due to sickness, maternity, caring for a newborn or newly adopted child, or providing care or support to a critically ill or gravely ill family member can also receive temporary income support to help them balance their work and family responsibilities.

Claimants can combine different types of benefits within a claim if they qualify for each, but different rules apply depending on whether they combine different types of special benefits or regular and special benefits. The rules may lead to some claimants being unable to access some or all weeks of benefits if they experience different events in close succession.

The Department will take into account the findings of this evaluation, as well as input received through the consultations on the modernization of the EI program in 2021-2022, as it explores approaches to enhance flexibility for claimants who need to combine maternity, parental, or any other special benefits with regular benefits.

Actions planned

  • 2.1 Extend the analysis of trends on the combination of EI regular benefits and maternity and parental benefits to all special benefits. Leverage this information along with input received during the consultations on the modernization of the EI program to inform the plan to build a stronger and more inclusive EI program.

Anticipated completion date: Summer 2023

Annexes

Annex A: Bibliography

Internal sources (not published, available upon request)

External sources

Annex B: Summary of the 2005 Summative Evaluation of EI Parental Benefits

A comprehensive evaluation of the Parental Benefits was published in 2005: Summative Evaluation of EI Parental Benefits and showed that:

The evaluation assessed the legislation changes to the provisions of the EI Act regarding Parental Benefits that came into effect on December 31, 2000, which 1) reduced the insurable hours to be eligible for maternity and parental benefits from 700 hours to 600 hours; 2) increased the duration of parental benefits from 10 weeks to 35 weeks; 3) waived the waiting period for the second parent; and 4) allowed working while on a parental benefits claim.

This evaluation found that:

Annex C: Sources

The Status Vector (SV) File

The SV file is derived from the main file used by Service Canada to deliver and administer the program. It contains information on the timing, duration and types of benefits paid during a claim. The SV file is used to identify parents of newborns who received at least $1 of EI maternity and/or parental benefits prior to or following the birth of the child.

Record of Employment (ROE)

The ROE file contains all reported interruptions of earnings/work. The file includes information related to the first and last day worked, hours of insurable employment, insurable earnings, and industry of employment. The file is used to identify the timing of the last job separation of parents of newborns as well as the number of hours. The insurable hours from the ROEs are used to establish the eligibility of parents who had a job separation around the birth of their child.

Canada Child Benefit File

The CCB is a tax-free monthly payment made to 1 eligible parent who has children in their care under the age of 18 years. The CCB file contains information on the month and year of birth of the child for each CCB recipient. This file is used to identify parent(s) of newborns between January 2006 and December 2018. The file also contains information related to parents who received the Universal Canada Child Benefit and the Canada Child Tax Benefit.

CRA T1 Records

T1 records are filed by Canadian taxpayers every year. T1 records contain information on an individual’s incomes and deductions, as well as their gender, age, and marital status. For the evaluation, T1 records are used to identify parents’ characteristics and incomes in the year prior to the birth of the child and during the year of birth.

CRA T4 Records

Employers annually provide T4 records to employees for tax purposes. T4s contain information on the employer an individual has worked for and the amount of employment income they earned during the tax year. For the purpose of this evaluation, the number of T4 records of a firm is used to calculate the number of employees working for that firm.

Employment Insurance Coverage Survey (EICS)

The EICS provides an overview of who does or does not have access to EI regular benefits as well as to maternity and parental benefits. The survey is annually administered across all provinces using a sub-sample of respondents of the Labour Force Survey (LFS).

Key Informant Interviews

A total of 24 key informant interviews were conducted with representatives of the following groups: academic experts; employees and parent/worker associations; and employers and employer/industry associations. The interviews were conducted between October 2021 and January 2022.

Page details

Date modified: