1 Since the end of the 20th century, men’s involvement in the domestic sphere has entered the political agenda, carried forward by European legislation (Boyer and Céroux, 2010). Public action in this area has focused mainly on promoting paternity leave (Dermott and Miller, 2015), whose duration has recently been extended in many European Union member countries. In France, an 11-day period of paternity leave was first brought into law in 2002 (Box 1), extending the 3-day leave for new fathers introduced after the Second World War. The reform of July 2021 increased the total duration of paternity leave to 4 weeks, with an obligatory absence from work for the first week after the birth.
2 From its introduction until its reform, paternity leave take-up rapidly became the norm in both cultural and statistical terms (Chauffaut and David, 2003; De Ridder et al., 2004; Bauer and Penet, 2005). The format of this leave— short and well paid—was attractive, and take-up rates were high (Moss and Deven, 2015). In 2003 (Bauer and Penet, 2005), as in 2013 (Legendre and Lhommeau, 2016), around 7 in 10 eligible fathers took paternity leave, of whom practically all took the full 11 days.
3 Given this favourable context, it is not so much the fathers who take their leave but rather those who do not that raises questions. Are these fathers especially reluctant to devote time to their family? Are they advocates of a ‘traditional’ paternal role? How can this non-take-up be explained? What does it tell us about the capacity of public policies to encourage men to engage in parenting and domestic tasks? Combining quantitative and qualitative methods, this article paints a portrait of the fathers who used none of their 11-day paternity leave entitlement and examines the mechanisms underlying this non-take-up, thus establishing a basis for future assessment of any changes brought about by the reform.
I. Literature review and theoretical framework
1. Non-take-up of leave: a transgression of ‘good’ fathering norms?
4 The introduction of paternity leave was guided by three principles that have helped to convey an image of non-take-up as a transgression of contemporary ‘good’ fathering norms. The first objective of this measure was to promote gender equality in France through ‘balanced participation of men and women in work and family life’ (Ministère de l’emploi et de la solidarité, 2001, p. 3) in a context where women still assumed most parenting and domestic tasks (Pailhé et al., 2021), especially after having children (Régnier-Loilier, 2009).
5 The second objective was to foster the creation of a father–child bond through the father’s presence in the first days of an infant’s life. In the 1970s and 1980s, a paternal investment ‘deficit’, in both financial and emotional terms, was identified in political discourse as a source of risk for children (Delumeau and Roche, 2000; Martial, 2013). Births became the object of considerable institutional attention (Dermott and Miller, 2015; Berton et al., 2017), encouraged by research in developmental psychology that had begun to identify the key role of fathers in infant development (Palm, 2014).
6 Thirdly, paternity leave was seen as a measure that benefited the fathers themselves. It was argued that men were unfairly treated by a system of law and justice that limited their opportunities to spend time with their family, after a separation especially (Martial, 2013). Championed by Ségolène Royal, among others, the introduction of paternity leave was thus seen to offer an escape from ‘traditional practices that penalize men and women alike’ (Grosjean, 2001, n.p.).
Box 1. Paternity leave (2002–2021)
Most fathers receive full pay during their paternity leave. For salaried workers, the cost is covered by the social security system (up to a daily allowance ceiling of €84.90 in 2021 in the private sector). To be eligible for leave payments, salaried workers must have been registered with the social security system for at least 10 months and have worked at least 150 hours in the previous 3 months or have paid contributions on a salary equivalent to at least 1,015 times the hourly minimum wage over the previous 6 months (at least €10,404 gross in 2021).
Job seekers are eligible if they receive unemployment benefit or have done so over the last 12 months. The amount payable is calculated in the same way as for salaried workers.
Self-employed workers must prove that they have been active for at least 10 months (contributions to a specific social security regime or to the general regime from 2020). They are entitled to a fixed daily amount (€56.35 in 2021). Farmers, likewise, must have been affiliated with the farmers’ social security regime for at least 10 months and must be replaced during their absence (they receive an allowance to cover the corresponding costs).
Following the increase in paternity leave to 25 calendar days, the conditions of eligibility and remuneration remain unchanged.
7 Via this triple institutional objective (gender equality, interests of the child, and rights of the father), public policy reflects and disseminates a norm of the father’s presence at birth (Chauffaut and David, 2003; De Ridder et al., 2004), and an ‘involved father’ is expected to take paternity leave to bond with his infant by participating in childcare tasks (Ferrand, 2001; Berton et al., 2017). Today, such expectations contribute to the definition of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ [1] (Connell, 1995), provided, however, that they do not run counter to a competing norm, that of the male breadwinner.
2. The weight of commitment to paid work
8 In both the past and present, men’s identity remains closely linked to their occupation (Pochic, 2000; Merla, 2007; Doucet, 2012; Chatot, 2017), and pressure to earn money to support the household increases with fatherhood (Brachet and Salles, 2011). The masculine model of the ‘ideal employee’ (Williams, 2001), totally devoted to his work and not held back by family constraints (Acker, 2009), has not yet disappeared. Hence, the main factors of paternity leave non-take-up identified in the literature are those associated with commitment to paid work.
9 A first set of studies focuses on the workplace constraints faced by fathers: a heavy workload, fear of their employer’s reaction if they ask for leave (notably among men facing economic insecurity), and concern about a potential loss of income (especially when salaries are high) (Chauffaut and David, 2003; Boyer and Céroux, 2010). In France, several studies have found that paternity leave take-up is less frequent among the highest and lowest income groups, among fathers working in the private sector, among those with long working hours, and those on an insecure employment contract (Bauer and Penet, 2005; Legendre and Lhommeau, 2016; Pailhé et al., 2018). Findings have been similar in other European countries, such as Finland (Eerola et al., 2019), where fathers from the wealthiest households less frequently take leave, or in Sweden (Bygren and Duvander, 2006), Germany (Geisler and Kreyenfeld, 2019), and Spain (Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet, 2021), where leave take-up rates are lower in the private sector than in the public sector.
10 A second set of hypotheses concerns gender norms. For example, French fathers less often take leave if their partner is a homemaker (Bauer and Penet, 2005; Legendre and Lhommeau, 2016), suggesting a possible adherence to the model of gender specialization within the couple. Leave take-up is lower among the least educated fathers in France (Pailhé et al. 2018) and elsewhere in Europe (Lappegard, 2008; Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet, 2021), while educational level is positively correlated with shared egalitarian ideals (Grunow et al., 2018).
11 In all cases, non-take-up is generally associated with a ‘traditional’ model of fatherhood in which paid employment takes priority over family life.
3. Towards a plural definition of non-take-up
12 The sociology of public action sheds additional light on the determinants of paternity leave non-take-up. Under this theoretical approach, non-take-up cannot be viewed as a rational and informed choice made after weighing the different options based on a correct set of information (Warin, 2017). The Observatoire des non-recours aux droits et services (Observatory of Non-Take-Up of Rights and Services) distinguished several types of non-take-up, including (Revil and Warin, 2019, p. 399):
- non-awareness, ‘when potential recipients are not aware of their eligibility’;
- non-orientation, ‘when potential recipients … are not notified or supported to access the granting or renewal of a right’;
- non-demand, ‘potential recipients are aware of their eligibility for leave but do not request it’.
14 Thus, paternity leave non-take-up does not necessarily reflect a lack of interest in public policy but may be the result of multiple informational and administrative obstacles at various stages in the leave-claiming process.
15 This approach is especially useful for shedding light on the high non-take-up rates observed in diverse institutional contexts among fathers in ‘atypical’ employment (self-employed or short-term contracts) and immigrant fathers (Mussino et al., 2018; Eerola et al., 2019; Geisler and Kreyenfeld, 2019; Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet, 2021). Limited knowledge of public policy among these fathers and the administrative hurdles they may face are potential explanations for non-take-up that deserve to be explored further, alongside the more widely studied hypotheses linked to precarious employment, long working hours, or gender norms. Qualitative surveys conducted in France after the introduction of 11-day leave do mention in passing that certain self-employed or unemployed fathers thought they were not entitled to this leave (Chauffaut and David, 2003; De Ridder et al., 2004). Far from considering these situations as isolated anomalies, this article will investigate them to shed light on the full diversity of reasons for paternity leave non-take-up.
4. A mixed-methods approach to grasp the mechanisms of non-take-up
16 This plural definition of non-take-up invites us to adopt a user-oriented approach to public action (Revillard, 2018). By looking at the question from the fathers’ viewpoint, we can better apprehend their understanding of family policies and the rationales behind their take-up or non-take-up of paternity leave. Until now, fathers who do not take leave have rarely been asked about their situation, or only briefly so. [2] By examining quantitative survey results in light of the accounts given by interviewed fathers, this article explores the mechanisms underlying the diverse types of paternity leave non-take-up in France. It illustrates the way qualitative methods, seldom used in public policy assessment (Revillard, 2018; Pin and Barone, 2021), can identify processes barely visible in quantitative surveys.
17 Quantitative and qualitative methods were triangulated (Fielding, 2012) to corroborate results on this article’s research question—non-take-up of paternity leave—from different angles. This took the form of data cross-analysis, using either interview material to interpret quantitative results (for greater ‘depth’) or, conversely, statistical data to test hypotheses suggested by the interviews (for greater ‘generalization’) (Aguilera and Chevalier, 2021).
II. A mixed-methods approach
1. Quantitative component
18 This article is based on both quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative component uses data from the third wave of the Génération 2010 survey conducted in 2017 by CEREQ and the second edition of the 2013 DREES survey on care arrangements for young children (Mode de garde et d’accueil du jeune enfant [MDG]). As in many European countries (Moss et al., 2019), administrative data on paternity leave take-up in France are scarce, so the present study had to rely on available self-reported data. [3] The Génération 2010 survey is the more detailed of the two, providing information on fathers’ occupational characteristics at the time of the birth via a monthly diary of their activity. It covers a specific population, however, that of men who became fathers within 7 years of completing their initial education in 2010, and the sample size is small (N = 995). It is assumed that the obstacles to paternity leave take-up encountered by these fathers are comparable to those affecting the population as a whole. The MDG survey is representative of all fathers with a child aged 6 or under and living with him in 2013 (N = 5,333). [4] However, it only records the parents’ characteristics on the date when the questionnaire was administered. Moreover, the information is given either by the father himself or by his partner (whose answer may be imprecise). While each source has its limitations, their convergence in terms of the direction, size, and significance of the observed effects adds weight to the results obtained.
19 For both surveys, the scope is that of fathers entitled to a daily paternity leave allowance for the birth of the last observed child. Eligibility was estimated indirectly from the two statistical surveys (and as accurately as possible, given the relative complexity of the entitlement rules; see Box 1). Based on the work diaries of the Génération 2010 survey, this study included fathers on permanent and fixed-term contracts, those receiving unemployment benefits in the month of the birth, fathers on temporary contracts who had received a salary equivalent to at least 1,015 times the hourly minimum wage over the 6 months preceding the birth (amount updated from 2010 to 2017), and self-employed fathers who were active in the 10 months preceding the birth. For the MDG survey, eligibility was estimated based on questions asked specifically for this purpose and which identified fathers who were working or receiving unemployment benefit at the time of the birth.
20 The determinants of non-take-up were explored via logistic regressions on fathers in employment. Unlike the descriptive statistics (Table 1), these models (Table 2) exclude unemployed fathers as most independent variables concern their job characteristics. The exclusion of this small share of fathers does not affect the results and avoids strong multicollinearity. The dependent variable is paternity leave non-take-up after the birth of the last observed child (value = 1) as opposed to the partial or total use of the 11 days (95% of fathers who take paternity leave claim all 11 days; Legendre and Lhommeau, 2016). The wording of the questions about non-take-up is very similar in both surveys. [5] The sequencing of the questions on 3-day ‘employer’ leave and 11-day paternity leave in the MDG survey, the specific mention of ‘statutory paternity leave’ in the Génération 2010 survey, and the recording of the number of days taken all suggest that the respondents correctly identified the public policy referred to in the questions.
21 The analysis is based on three models. Using MDG data, Model 1 explores the differences between occupational categories, controlling for household income (per quintile), father’s weekly number of hours of paid work, father’s age, and the child’s birth order. To analyse the effects of occupational characteristics in more detail, Model 2 replaces the father’s occupational category by his work contract, his educational level, and a comparison of the two parents’ educational levels. Model 3 reproduces Model 2 with data from Génération 2010 to confirm the results across the two sources. The variables of the two surveys are directly comparable, excepting the monthly net income quintiles which, in Génération 2010, are based on the father’s salaried or non-salaried income and, in the MDG survey, on all household income (including family allowances) per consumption unit. Model 3 also adds company size and length of service (indicators not given in MDG) but does not include the number of hours worked (not given in Génération 2010).
22 Although women often modify their working time more substantially than men during a child’s early years (Pailhé and Solaz, 2010), neither survey includes information on the mother’s labour market situation at time of birth, so these variables are absent from the models. To make up for this absence, Models 2 and 3 include a comparison of the parents’ educational levels to measure potential couples’ bargaining over paternal leave take-up.
2. Qualitative component
23 The qualitative component is based on a corpus of 83 semi-structured interviews with 32 fathers whose last child was born between September 2019 and June 2021. [6] These fathers were interviewed 3 times: during the last trimester of pregnancy (prenatal interview), during the 3 months after the birth for 30 of them (post-birth interview), and after the first birthday for 27 (interview after first birthday). Seven respondents took no days of paternity leave and are qualified as non-takers. Two were in an ambiguous situation, in that they formally reported using the 11 days consecutively but in fact unlawfully fragmented them.
24 To maximize the diversity of profiles, fathers were recruited via a range of channels: the medical sector (waiting rooms of maternity units in the Paris region), social media (Facebook groups on pregnancy), and through interpersonal relations. The participants lived in metropolitan France, mostly in urban or peri-urban areas (25 out of 32), of whom 20 in the Paris region. Eight of the interviewed fathers were manual or clerical workers, six were in intermediate occupations, 13 were in higher-level occupations, and five were self-employed (see Appendix Table A.1). To explain some of the qualitative results, particular attention was paid to the fathers not on permanent contracts at the time of the birth (self-employed, on temporary contracts, or unemployed), who accounted for one-third of the total (11 out of 32).
25 To avoid discouraging non-takers from taking part, paternity leave was not mentioned when the survey was presented to potential participants. A more general expression was used to describe its purpose: ‘how fathers organize their life at work and at home after a birth’. Despite these precautions, agreeing to be interviewed meant feeling sufficiently at ease and interested in discussing parenting questions. The fathers least involved with their child may therefore have been reluctant to take part (all participants were living with the mother). Likewise, the interview guide was designed to encourage the fathers themselves to bring up the question of paternity leave during the interview through general questions such as ‘what do you plan to do when the baby is born?’. Via this strategy, the aim was to approach leave take-up as part of the set of possible arrangements for balancing work and family life after a birth. Further questions then focused specifically on paternity leave and on the process of deciding to take it or not (discussions with partner, colleagues, family, and medical professionals; information searches; etc.).
26 The interviews were conducted face-to-face, then by videoconference or telephone during the COVID-19 pandemic, and lasted 100 minutes on average, with slight variations according to the mode of communication and the interview wave.
III. A minority of non-takers among fathers in stable salaried employment
1. Paternity leave: a validation of the ‘modern father’
27 By far, the most discriminating factor of paternity leave non-take-up is not being in stable salaried employment (Table 1). The following section focuses on the population of fathers who have permanent contracts or are tenured civil servants. Only 1 or 2 in 10 took none of the 11 days to which they were entitled; their take-up rate is therefore very high. [7] The interviews confirm that taking the full 11 days is a norm of ‘good’ contemporary fatherhood (Chauffaut and David, 2003; De Ridder et al., 2004), conveying the image of an ‘involved father’ who bonds closely with his children (Ferrand, 2001). Florian, an IT engineer, explained why it would be impossible for him not to take the 11 days after his daughter’s birth:
Leaving your kid to go off to work, leaving the mother to look after the kid…that’s…for me that’s no! [laughter] Obviously, there are tasks that have to be shared. […] And for bonding, I think it’s important to create a bond. It’s at the beginning that you have to create a bond. […] Bonding, it means that the child sees me as her father, as a reference person, as someone who is present. (Florian, age 33, master’s degree, IT engineer, permanent contract; partner: business manager, permanent contract; first child born in February 2020; prenatal interview)
29 By suggesting that taking paternity leave is a self-evident choice, Florian distances himself from fathers who do not take it (‘for me that’s no!’). He sees them as ‘absent’ or as fathers who ‘leave their kid’. While gender equality is not the central motive for all interviewed fathers, references to ‘bonding’ with the child are recurrent, mirroring contemporary political, media, and medical discourse.
30 In this sense, paternity leave is a sort of badge of honour of the ‘involved father’. Leave take-up provides proof of fathers’ involvement, limited in time but highly symbolic.
2. Leave use conditional on breadwinning role
31 Non-demand for paternity leave is linked primarily to a fear that 11 days of absence might compromise the role of fathers as the family breadwinner. This concern is rarely expressed by fathers who are civil servants or on permanent contracts.
32 Non-take-up is higher, for example, among recently recruited fathers even though eligibility for salaried workers is not linked to length of service (Table 2). Even after controlling for the type of contract and other observable characteristics, the likelihood of non-take-up is higher for fathers who have been in their job for less than a year than for those with more than 2 years in their current position (OR = 3.18). The qualitative interviews show that fathers on probationary periods or who have moved to a new job may be reluctant to use their entitlement for fear of compromising their integration. Henri, an executive in the banking sector, recounts his thoughts before announcing his absence to his new team:
You’re always worried…but actually, we give ourselves the wrong image of paternity leave because it’s really short! Maternity leave is different because it’s longer. But paternity leave is very short, so it’s like a week’s holiday! [laughter] So, yes, we always have this sort of preconceived idea. […] But in fact…I’ve never had any negative feedback. (Henri, age 25, master’s degree, banking sector executive, permanent contract; partner: banking sector executive, permanent contract; first child born in September 2020; prenatal interview)
| Mode de Garde (2013) | Génération 2010 (2017) | |||
| n | % | n | % | |
| Father’s labour market situation | ||||
| Private-sector employee on permanent contract or civil servant | 3,958 | 20 | 757 | 13 |
| Employee on fixed-term or temporary contract | 479 | 42 | 108 | 35 |
| Self-employed | 662 | 66 | 91 | 68 |
| Job seeker receiving unemployment benefits | 234 | 83 | 39 | 79 |
| Father’s educational level | ||||
| Below upper secondary | 1,950 | 35 | 104 | 28 |
| Upper secondary | 1,125 | 27 | 152 | 31 |
| 2 years tertiary | 808 | 23 | 126 | 22 |
| 3+ years tertiary | 1,392 | 28 | 613 | 19 |
| Father’s education vs. mother’s education | ||||
| Mother more educated | 1,702 | 29 | 242 | 20 |
| Father more educated | 904 | 26 | 148 | 26 |
| Equivalent levels | 2,530 | 31 | 595 | 24 |
| Father’s occupational category | ||||
| Self-employed (farmer, artisan, trader, or business owner) | 569 | 69 | 32 | 69 |
| Higher-level occupation | 1,089 | 24 | 470 | 17 |
| Intermediate occupation | 1,153 | 21 | 227 | 23 |
| Clerical/sales worker | 617 | 24 | 78 | 13 |
| Manual worker | 1,838 | 28 | 149 | 21 |
| Quintile of net monthly income per CU (Mode de garde) / of father (Génération) | ||||
| 1st | 1,062 | 50 | 182 | 42 |
| 2nd | 1,066 | 29 | 194 | 17 |
| 3rd | 1,059 | 22 | 200 | 19 |
| 4th | 1,080 | 21 | 183 | 8 |
| 5th | 1,066 | 29 | 188 | 21 |
| Length of service in current position (years) | ||||
| Under 1 | 175 | 46 | ||
| 1–2 | 569 | 19 | ||
| 2 or more | 251 | 16 | ||
| Company size (no. employees) | ||||
| Under 10 | 140 | 25 | ||
| 10–49 | 172 | 21 | ||
| 50–199 | 162 | 16 | ||
| 200+ | 329 | 12 | ||
| Sector | ||||
| Private | 834 | 32 | 276 | 20 |
| Public | 4,496 | 17 | 657 | 21 |
| Mode de Garde (2013) | Génération 2010 (2017) | |||
| n | % | n | % | |
| Weekly working hours | ||||
| Under 40 | 3,080 | 24 | ||
| 40+ | 1,907 | 37 | ||
| Irregular (more than 3-hour difference week-on-week) | 346 | 46 | ||
| Age | ||||
| Under 30 | 761 | 27 | 316 | 30 |
| 30–34 | 1,475 | 24 | 476 | 19 |
| 35–40 | 1,802 | 28 | 198 | 27 |
| Over 40 | 1,295 | 40 | 5 | 41 |
| Child’s birth order | ||||
| 1 | 1,774 | 28 | 590 | 24 |
| 2 or higher | 3,559 | 31 | 405 | 23 |
| Overall | 5,333 | 30 | 995 | 24 |
| Note: For the MDG survey, the variables concern the situation at the time of the survey. If the father was no longer working at the time of the survey, the characteristics of his most recent job are recorded. For the Génération 2010 survey, the variables concern the situation at the time of the birth. The data are weighted. Interpretation: According to the MDG survey (2013), 20% of fathers who were civil servants or on permanent contracts took none of the 11 days of paternity leave after the birth of their most recent child. Coverage: Fathers of a child aged under 6 (MDG) and men who became fathers within 7 years of completing education (Génération 2010) who were entitled to paternity leave. Sources: MDG survey 2013 (DREES) and Génération 2010 at 7 years (CEREQ). | ||||
34 While Henri gives an idea of the concerns felt by certain fathers, comparison with maternity leave allows him to see his minor deviance from workplace expectations and any ensuing risk of discrimination from a different perspective. Fathers’ concerns thus appear to be lessened by the fact that their female colleagues are away from work for much longer after a birth. Among most of interviewed employees on permanent contracts (18 out of 22), their 11 days of leave were not remarked upon and did not disrupt workplace activities, but the extension of leave to 4 weeks, if used consecutively, might be viewed less favourably.
35 Disapproval is rare and appears to concern sectors with strong employee-availability expectations. Fathers with longer working hours are less likely to take leave; after controlling for observed characteristics, working more than 40 hours per week increases the likelihood of non-take-up compared to fathers who work fewer than 40 hours (OR = 1.46). Moreover, according to the MDG 2013 survey, fathers working in the public sector are less likely to forgo the 11-days leave than those in the private sector (OR = 0.68), as the public sector is generally more amenable to work schedule adjustments that favour work–life balance (Lefèvre et al., 2009). This result is not corroborated by the Génération 2010 data but is consistent with the international literature mentioned earlier.
| Mode de Garde (2013) | Génération 2010 (2017) | ||
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
| OR | OR | OR | |
| Father’s labour market situation | |||
| Private-sector employee on permanent contract or civil servant | Ref. | Ref. | |
| Employee on fixed-term or temporary contract | 2.80*** | 1.80* | |
| Self-employed | 5.81*** | 13.97*** | |
| Father’s educational level | |||
| Below upper secondary | 1.11 | 1.74 | |
| Upper secondary | 1.04 | 1.60 | |
| 2 years tertiary | 0.90 | 1.62 | |
| 3+ years tertiary | Ref. | Ref. | |
| Father’s education vs. mother’s education | |||
| Mother more educated | 0.84* | 0.47*** | |
| Father more educated | 0.91 | 0.98 | |
| Equivalent levels | Ref. | Ref. | |
| Father’s occupational category | |||
| Self-employed (farmer, artisan, trader, or business owner) | 5.15*** | ||
| Higher-level occupation | Ref. | ||
| Intermediate occupation | 0.91 | ||
| Clerical/sales worker | 0.82 | ||
| Manual worker | 0.98 | ||
| Quintile of net monthly income per CU (Mode de garde) / of father (Génération) | |||
| 1st | 3.58*** | 2.84*** | 2.36** |
| 2nd | 1.75*** | 1.50*** | 1.46 |
| 3rd | 1.1 | 1.05 | 2.28** |
| 4th | Ref. | Ref. | Ref. |
| 5th | 1.47*** | 1.41*** | 4.10*** |
| Weekly working hours | |||
| Under 40 | Ref. | Ref. | |
| 40+ | 1.46*** | 1.41*** | |
| Irregular (more than 3-hour difference week-on-week) | 1.85*** | 1.70*** | |
| Sector | |||
| Private | Ref. | Ref. | |
| Public | 0.68*** | 1.56 | |
| Length of service in current position (years) | |||
| Under 1 | 3.18*** | ||
| 1–2 | 1.01 | ||
| 2 or more | Ref. | ||
| Mode de Garde (2013) | Génération 2010 (2017) | ||
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
| OR | OR | OR | |
| Company size (no. employees) | |||
| Under 10 | 0.57 | ||
| 10–49 | Ref. | ||
| 50–199 | 0.69 | ||
| 200 or more | 0.54* | ||
| Father’s age | |||
| Under 30 | 0.94 | 0.87 | 2.12** |
| 30–34 | Ref. | Ref. | Ref. |
| 35–40 | 1.21** | 1.28** | 1.24 |
| Over 40 | 1.76*** | 1.9*** | 1.53 |
| Constant | 0.12*** | 0.10*** | 0.04*** |
| Pseudo R² | 0.117 | 0.139 | 0.224 |
| Observations | 5,112 | 5,112 | 956 |
| Note: These models also include birth order. The data are weighted. The unweighted models give very similar results and are available from the author on request. For Models 1 and 2, the variables concern the situation at the time of the survey. If the father was no longer working at the time of the survey, the characteristics of his most recent job are recorded. For Model 3, the variables concern the situation at the time of the birth. Interpretation: Self-employed fathers are more likely to have not taken paternity leave at the birth of their most recent child than fathers in higher-level occupations (OR = 5.15). The difference is significant at the 1% level. Statistical significance: * significant at 10%; ** at 5%; *** at 1%. Coverage: Fathers of a child aged under 6 (Models 1 and 2) and men who became fathers within 7 years of completing education (Model 3) who were entitled to paternity leave. Sources: MDG survey 2013 (DREES) and Génération 2010 at 7 years (CEREQ). | |||
36 These findings indicate that paternity leave non-take-up is linked to workplace expectations. The case of Ludovic is emblematic (Box 2).
37 Ludovic’s situation exemplifies the clash between the gendered organization of working time and the ‘invisible’ family duties that women are automatically designated to assume (Acker, 2006). The employer’s refusal to help Ludovic find a childcare solution and his subsequent dismissal illustrate the strong demands on employees within the company and shed light, in retrospect, on question the reason Ludovic did not ask for paternity leave.
38 This example also reveals the power relations at play within the couple around the question of work–life balance. This factor may also help to explain the higher paternity leave take-up among couples where the mother is more educated than the father than among those where both have similar educational levels. Male hypergamy, a situation where the woman has a higher income than her partner, is conducive to greater paternal involvement (Guichard-Claudic et al., 2009; Cartier et al., 2021). That said, paternity leave was rarely mentioned in the interviews (4 out of 32) as a major issue of debate within the couple. The fathers more often reported making a decision themselves before informing the mother. For fathers, seeing paternity leave as an individual right (McKay and Doucet, 2010; Romero-Balsas, 2012) means that the decision to take it or not is also a personal choice.
Box 2. Portrait of Ludovic
But very quickly, the non-standard hours of his partner, who worked in a bakery, raised awkward childcare problems. For Ludovic, it was the mother’s responsibility to adjust her work schedule. However, despite his protests, she stayed in her job. Unlike him, she loved her work in the family bakery, and her position was stable. According to Ludovic, the couple nearly separated as a result. He asked his employer to only work locally or to change his hours, but unsuccessfully. With no way out, he abandoned his post and was fired. With his maternal grandmother’s help, he took over the daily care of his daughter and said he would not look for another job unless his partner agreed to change hers.
39 Additionally, paternity leave take-up is less frequent at both extremes of the earnings distribution, as shown by the regressions in Table 2. For the fathers with the lowest incomes, non-take-up appears to reflect economic insecurity and a financial dependence on employment that discourages them from taking the risk of ‘displeasing their employer’ (Chauffaut and David, 2003). For the highest-earning fathers, the difference between their salary and the private-sector paternity leave payment ceiling [8] may be seen as problematic. A high salary may also be associated with a strong professional commitment and greater pressure to maintain a work presence, for fathers in senior positions or with management responsibilities, for example.
40 When income is added to the models, the differences by father’s educational level are no longer significant either. This finding contradicts the hypothesis whereby educational level, as an indirect reflection of adherence to egalitarian norms, is positively correlated with leave use (developed by Lappegard [2008] in Norway, among others). It is consistent with the conclusions of a Spanish study (Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet, 2021) which suggests that non-take-up by the least educated is linked primarily to their more insecure employment status.
41 Likewise, differences across occupational categories are small. Excepting farmers and other self-employed workers whose situation is described in more detail below, non-take-up rates are around 25% for all occupational categories (Table 1), and the differences are not significant (Table 2). The norm of taking paternity leave thus appears to cross the entire social spectrum. This is now also the case for men in higher-level occupations, whose take-up rate was nonetheless well below the average when the 11-day leave entitlement was introduced (49% between 2003 and 2004; Bauer and Penet 2005). Several possible explanations account for the subsequent increase in take-up not observed among the other OCs. It may be the result of collective agreements that now more often guarantee full-paid leave for those whose salary is above the daily leave payment ceiling (Gosselin and Lepine, 2018). It may also reflect a redefinition of the hegemonic masculinity ideal (Connell, 2005) among the younger generations of male managers and professionals. In interviews, the men in private-sector higher-level occupations emphasized the importance of work–life balance and their refusal to become ‘workaholics’ (Quentin). They also see themselves as ‘21st-century men’ who do not approve of ‘working 20 hours a day and never seeing [their] children’ like ‘fathers in the old days’ (Martin). These findings mirror the study of civil service executives by Bereni and Jacquemart (2018), which shows how some of these young administrators ostensibly support gender equality and task-sharing to set themselves apart from their older superiors whose ‘traditional’ male ethos is considered archaic.
42 A potential generational effect might explain differences in leave take-up by father’s age (less frequent for those over 40 than for the 30–35 age group after controls, including for the number of children).
43 Finally, the various factors of non-take-up mentioned in this subsection remain secondary in relation to labour market status and type of contract at the time of the birth: two-thirds of self-employed fathers and around 80% of job seekers claiming unemployment benefits do not take paternity leave. Non-take-up is also higher among employees on fixed-term contracts and temporary workers, with rates that fluctuate around 40% in the different surveys. While just one-quarter of the survey respondents were fathers with a precarious employment status, they represent more than half of all non-takers.
44 Of course, some of these explanations, especially those of a financial nature, are valid for both self-employed fathers and those on fixed-term contracts. For example, one of the five self-employed interviewees used only half of his paternity leave because he felt that the flat-rate daily leave payment for the self-employed (€56.35 in 2021) was too low with respect to his mean income to cover the daily needs of the household. However, in the logistic regression models, the effects of labour market status remain strong after including control variables, suggesting that other explanatory mechanisms need to be explored.
IV. Informational or administrative obstacles for fathers who are self-employed or on fixed-term contracts
1. A social right seen as the preserve of fathers on permanent contracts
45 The fathers who use none of their 11-day entitlement are primarily those not on permanent employment contracts. Yet the interviews show that in these cases, non-take-up reflects not so much a decision to forgo their entitlement, but rather non-awareness of its existence (Warin, 2017). This might seem surprising—the existence of paternity leave appears to have become common knowledge among fathers since its introduction (De Ridder et al., 2004)—especially given the strong media coverage of the debates surrounding its extension. The misunderstanding actually concerns who is, or is not, entitled to it. Fathers who are self-employed, on fixed-term contracts, or on unemployment benefits frequently believe that they are ineligible, even when they satisfy all the conditions required (Box 1).
46 This misconstruction is due primarily to the belief that a permanent contract is a precondition for entitlement to social benefits. This is a legitimate representation, since in France, ‘the social protection system is founded, under a corporatist mindset, on employment stability that enables individuals to access social rights’ (Paugam, 2000, p. 16). In their daily lives, fathers without a permanent employment contract have interiorized the limits to their social protection, especially their right to paid leave.
47 This mode of reasoning is expressed explicitly in the first interview with Ousmane, at the very start of the survey. Ousmane has worked on temporary contracts as a security guard for several years and describes how he plans to organize his time when his first child is born, but with no mention of paternity leave. When asked if he plans to take it, he replies that he is not eligible:
Because I don’t have a permanent contract and all that, so that’s that. I can’t take it. Because in temping work, if I take a day off today, for example, I won’t be paid! […] All the rights are given when you get paid in fact, you get all your rights at the same time. When you have a permanent contract you pay for certain rights, but with temping, everything is paid for at the same time. (Ousmane, age 26, no qualifications, security guard, temporary contract; partner: cook, permanent contract; first child born in February 2020; prenatal interview)
49 Here, Ousmane refers to the end-of-contract payment he receives at the end of each temping assignment. When Ousmane needs to take time off, he generally refuses the assignments offered to him on those days. This is also what he plans to do for the birth: ‘I can look after my daughter as much as I want to in fact! I don’t work every day.’
50 In Ousmane’s case, non-take-up is linked to non-awareness, and not to a lack of interest, and even less to a rejection of the leave system. Ousmane is doubtless in favour of extending paternity leave and making it obligatory:
It makes sense to make it obligatory. I don’t know, actually, what sort of parent would say, ‘Well no, I prefer not to take it!’ But then, I don’t know, depending on people’s financial situations and all that, if the person prefers to work to have more, but…as it’s refunded, paid for, I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t take their leave, it’s a right.
52 Being eligible might appear equally surprising for fathers on unemployment benefit. For Emmanuel, a job seeker who does freelance assignments, it was during the interview that the idea of taking paternity leave occurred to him:
– So, are you going to claim paternity leave or not?
– I’ve got unemployed status, so I can’t apply…[stops talking and thinks out loud]. Oh, yes? I could apply to the job centre? Oh, yes? Claim paternity leave? […] I hadn’t planned to, but actually I hadn’t thought about it, but yes…er, yes…I mean, in any case, I plan to be around when she comes out of hospital, you know. (Emmanuel, age 31, master’s degree, audio-visual producer, job seeker, freelance; partner: lawyer, self-employed; first child born in February 2020; prenatal interview)
54 Paternity leave is thus seen as a right reserved exclusively for fathers on permanent contracts who can take time off work to be at home with the child. The other fathers cannot imagine that they are eligible.
2. A lack of workplace ties limits access to information
55 For fathers in unemployment or in precarious jobs, lack of knowledge about eligibility is also linked to a lack of workplace relationships. Often working alone in multiple workplaces, these fathers have few contacts in their working environment. Their isolation limits their access to information and is a factor in the non-take-up of paternity leave.
56 Working in a company is a real advantage for access to social rights (Deville, 2015). Discussions with superiors, with different departments, or with colleagues provide multiple opportunities to obtain information and to understand how paternity leave works. Among the interviewed employees on permanent contracts, all had announced the upcoming birth to their closest colleagues at least, and discussed their situation with them, including when and how to claim their leave entitlement. Workplace relations are especially useful to fathers who have little contact with the administration and may not know about their rights. This was the case for Dorian, a building technician with a lower-secondary vocational qualification. Just before the birth of his first child, he told me:
– I’ll go back to work soon. I’ll have a week off after the birth. […]
– So, you don’t know if it will be annual leave or paternity leave?
– No, I didn’t think about it. [Pff] It doesn’t matter to me. Well, I think [my employer] will do what’s best for me, I’m not worried. […] In any case, I know, the social security don’t pay anything at all, so that’s that. [Pff] I haven’t asked about it. (Dorian, age 33, lower-secondary vocational qualification, building technician, permanent contract; partner: sales assistant, unemployed; first child born in October 2020; prenatal interview)
58 While Dorian planned to take time off for the birth of his son, he did not look for information about leave entitlements. It was his employer who told him about his right to birth and paternity leave, enabling him to take 2 weeks of paid leave (instead of 1 week, as initially planned).
59 It is fathers working in large companies who have the most access to information. Human resources departments can provide useful advice to employees on how to claim the maximum possible amount of leave, for example. They may advise them to choose the paternity leave start date so that the 11 consecutive days include only 1 weekend and not 2, a tactic fathers do not always think of themselves. Likewise, it was the head of human resources who told Denis, a 40-year-old IT engineer working in a company with several hundred employees, that he could take 30 additional days of paternity leave while his prematurely born twins were in hospital. Neither his superior, nor his team members, nor he himself was aware of this right, introduced in July 2019.
60 While their situations are diverse, fathers not on permanent contracts generally have fewer opportunities to discuss the birth in the workplace. Ousmane, who does temping jobs in multiple locations, told no-one in his work entourage about the birth of his daughter. The job seekers I interviewed did not tell the job centre that they were expecting a birth. Self-employed fathers wishing to take paternity leave must submit a leave application to the administration on their own initiative.
61 While mothers’ prenatal and postnatal leave is prescribed by a physician, the medical sector has no say in the timing or duration of paternity leave, so for fathers, information obtained in the workplace is especially important; non-takers are unlikely to be ‘detected’ by the medical establishment.
3. Applying individually for leave
62 Knowing that one is eligible for leave does not mean that it is actually taken. A major obstacle for fathers in self-employment or unemployment is the lack of outside help to make the leave application. For salaried workers, it is the employer who deals with the paperwork for claiming the daily paternity leave allowance. For the others, who must make the claim themselves, a certain familiarity with administrative tasks is needed. This involves checking one’s eligibility (hours worked, income earned, etc.) and then providing the necessary supporting documents. While the formalities are relatively simple, [9] socially situated skills are required to find and understand the relevant information. For example, the interviewed fathers (salaried and non-salaried alike) often confused ‘paternity leave’ and ‘parental leave’—two very different forms of support involving distinct application procedures. They must also know ‘where’ to address the documents; parents often intuitively assume that paternity leave is managed by the family allowance fund rather than the health insurance fund.
63 Cultural capital is a key factor in the ease or difficulty of claiming leave. In the qualitative survey, three self-employed fathers, all with 5 or more years of higher education, took leave after searching for information on the internet. Corentin, on the other hand, with an upper-secondary qualification and in training to become a locksmith, never managed to claim leave:
– At the training centre, I told them that [when the baby was born] I would be off work for a week. So, that was it: I wasn’t there for a week. Quite simply! [laughter] […]
– So, administratively, how were things arranged? Did you have to take annual leave?
– Well, I wanted to take my parental [sic] leave but, uh, well, I didn’t succeed! Because I didn’t understand how it worked in fact, and I, well I…[confused]. […] When I searched, it wasn’t at all clear to me, what I was supposed to do. […] It’s so complicated that I said to myself, ‘well, it doesn’t matter, I’ll lose a week’s pay.’ (Corentin, age 24, upper-secondary qualification, locksmith, job seeker; partner: childminder, at home; first child born in May 2021; post-birth interview)
65 Corentin’s failure to claim leave illustrates a lack of familiarity with bureaucratic procedures, especially pronounced among low-educated fathers like him, whose partner most often deals with the ‘paperwork’ (Siblot, 2006). It is not immediately obvious for him how to claim leave (and he mistakes the type of leave), and he is reluctant to spend time on the question. Non-take-up arises through a combination of the mutually reinforcing factors of job insecurity, cultural capital, and gender. Faced with the time and effort required and the planning needed to claim paternity leave, some fathers, like Corentin, may ‘quite simply’ prefer to opt for informal unpaid alternatives.
66 Unlike employees who can rely on their company’s human resources department or their employer, non-salaried fathers have fewer opportunities to obtain information and support from others about the procedures for claiming leave. Difficulties in claiming leave linked to the absence of workplace ties, and personal responsibility for submitting the claim, can thus be seen as a form of non-orientation (Revil and Warin, 2019).
V. Informal arrangements that blur the boundary between take-up and non-take-up
1. Informal alternatives that fulfil the same role
67 In some cases, fathers on fixed-term contracts or who are self-employed or seeking work have more personal control over their schedules (Landour, 2019; Gaunault, 2022). They can take informal breaks by refusing temping assignments or halting their job-seeking activities so that they can be available after the birth. These arrangements have already been mentioned in early studies (Chauffaut and David, 2003; De Ridder et al., 2004). While irrational from a strictly economic viewpoint, they are less restrictive and already form part of these fathers’ work routines. The interviews presented earlier include many such examples: each time an interviewee mentioned his non-take-up of paternity leave, he always described the alternative option that he chose. Except for Ludovic, they all took time off after the birth, most often for a period of 2 weeks.
68 These informal arrangements, free from institutional constraints, can theoretically take a variety of forms. Often, however, leave policies serve as a template, especially for first-time parents who find it hard to imagine how their daily life will be organized after the child is born (Grunow and Evertsson, 2016). During his first interview, Emmanuel, a freelance producer, explained why he planned to resume working from home after 2 weeks:
I can work when the baby is asleep and the mother is having a nap. […] There are quite a few dads who don’t have more than 11 days and who have to go back to work. So, there are hectic periods when […] they don’t see their mates anymore because they’re working in the day and helping mum in the evening and at weekends. But, in any case, you can do two things… (Emmanuel, age 31, master’s degree, audio-visual producer, job seeker, freelance; partner: lawyer, self-employed; first child born in February 2020; prenatal interview)
70 For Emmanuel, the 11 days represent a norm with which to align oneself and estimate needs in terms of availability. Likewise, Nelson, a self-employed tattoo artist aged 40, announced during the first interview that he planned to ‘take a break, for a good two weeks’ for his twins. He was then asked how he had decided on this amount of time.
There are numbers that come into your head like that, without thinking about it. I said two weeks because, on paper, that seems like enough, but if it isn’t, I’ll adapt; you know, it’s not written in stone. (Nelson, age 40, 2 years tertiary education, tattoo artist, self-employed; partner: language teacher, self-employed; first children born in March 2020; prenatal interview)
72 These ‘numbers that come into your head’ without conscious thought or discussion with others suggest an internalization of the norm that then becomes self-evident. Nelson’s employment status is flexible, however, allowing him to adapt his plans when faced with the reality of caring for his newborn twins. An extreme case, Nelson actually stopped work for 3 months to help his partner look after the twins before resuming work on a part-time basis 4 further months due to the COVID-19 lockdown and lack of availability at the daycare centre.
73 Non-take-up may thus encompass arrangements that pass under the institutional radar but which, while not labelled as such, represent an alternative form of paternity leave.
2. Ambiguous forms of paternity leave
74 Non-take-up of paternity leave may encompass informal alternatives; at the same time, the rules of formal paternity leave are sometimes interpreted ambiguously. Between the strict definition of a public policy and its actual implementation is always a grey area (Revillard, 2018). For example, the obligation to take leave on 11 consecutive days is not always respected. If no checks are made, this requirement can be sidestepped quite easily by declaring false leave dates. At the end of our third interview, Pierre, a worksite supervisor in a company headed by his father, explained how he divided up his paternity leave:
For sure, I didn’t stay at home all week from Monday to Friday! But I did a week, you know, from Monday to Tuesday. And then, I did a week from Thursday to Friday. [laughter] […] But for the health insurance fund, which reimburses us, which reimburses the employer, I did a week from Monday to Friday. But afterwards, with my employer, we sorted things out. (Pierre, age 28, worksite manager, permanent contract; partner: childcare assistant, permanent contract; first child born in February 2020; interview after first birthday)
76 Two of the participants admitted to taking their paternity leave in this unconventional way. Their profiles are similar: both work in a small construction company in a rural area. Their motives are also very similar and linked to a strong commitment to their job:
Normally, you’re not allowed. Normally, you have to take all your leave in one go. But I saw that it suited my employer. It suited me too to take it in several chunks. […] At least you’re not away from work for two weeks, that makes a hole at work, you see. I see things from my boss’s point of view. […] We took advantage of my time off to visit the family, to have a bit of a holiday. There at least, it’s a bit nicer. (Tristan, age 28, vocational bachelor’s degree, building technician, permanent contract; partner: graphic designer, freelance; first child born in January 2021; post-birth interview)
78 Like Pierre, Tristan identifies strongly with his employer. Working in one of the most strongly male-dominated sectors, these fathers see themselves as indispensable and irreplaceable, so the pressure to be constantly available for work is especially strong. The fractioning of paternity leave is an alternative to non-take-up, enabling fathers to take their 11 days while conforming to the norm of the ‘ideal employee’ (Williams, 2001). It is not seen by them as a sacrifice; it enabled Tristan to take long weekends to spend time with his family—an alternative he found more agreeable than staying home to take care of his newborn in the first few weeks.
79 Tristan’s and Pierre’s accounts show that these cases, while concerning a minority of fathers, nonetheless exist and that paternity leave can be used in a variety of ways. While a detailed analysis of these various strategies is beyond the scope of this article, the practical experience of 11 days of leave for fathers who take 2 weeks off work immediately after the birth is very different from that of fathers who break up their leave to enjoy trips away from home with the child. These examples show that paternity leave take-up provides only a partial measure of fathers’ involvement in the family sphere; another important question is how the leave is actually used.
Conclusion
80 Taking paternity leave is a widespread practice across all social categories. Enabling fathers to demonstrate their parental involvement without, in most cases, affecting their work commitments, an 11-day period of leave appears to match the contemporary ideal of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ (Connell, 2005).
81 Non-take-up is most often interpreted as a sign that work takes priority over family. While the need to be constantly available for work (Guillaume and Pochic, 2007) is a key obstacle to leave take-up, this focus of analysis overlooks a large share of cases of non-take-up, especially in a context where leave is short, generous, and used by practically all fathers on permanent contracts.
82 When the statistical findings are examined in the light of qualitative information obtained in interviews, other mechanisms, difficult to detect in quantitative surveys, come to light. These mechanisms are much like those widely identified by sociologists of public action in the study of non-take-up of welfare benefits (Warin, 2017): non-demand, linked to a strong work commitment, but also non-awareness of eligibility, or again non-orientation linked to the requirement for non-salaried fathers to deal personally with the administrative procedure of claiming leave. Self-employed people and recent immigrants are particularly prone to non-take-up in various countries (Eerola et al., 2019; Geisler and Kreyenfeld, 2019; Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet, 2021), suggesting that some of the dynamics described in this article may exist elsewhere.
83 In contrast to the social disqualification associated with non-takers, disparaged as ‘absent fathers’, men who do take their full 11 days of leave can (re)present themselves as ‘involved fathers’ who comply with the norm of a paternal presence after the birth. Yet, in certain cases, the differences between takers and non-takers are small. Some fathers make informal alternative arrangements that play the same role as paternity leave under another name, while others manage to bend the rules. These findings do not question the utility of paternity leave but call for an assessment of how fathers with insecure employment status are able to exercise their rights, and of the multiple ways public policy is interpreted, sometimes quite differently from policymakers’ objectives.
84 In France, recent reforms to paternity leave have led to even greater heterogeneity in the ways it can be taken (duration of absence varying between 1 and 4 weeks, leave days taken consecutively or in fractions, before or after the mother’s return to work). Now that the first week of leave is obligatory, including for non-salaried fathers, non-take-up rates among non-salaried and unemployed fathers should decrease. But given their personal responsibility for making a claim and the absence of controls, will these first 7 days truly be guaranteed for all?
Appendix
| Name | Age | Educational level | Type of qualification | Occupation | Situation at time of birth | Birth order | Leave take-up | |
| 1 | Etienne Margaux | 31 33 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | IT consultant Sales manager | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 2 | Ousmane Imani | 26 26 | No qualification Lower secondary | — Vocational | Security guard Kitchen assistant | Temporary contract Permanent contract | 1 | Non-orientation / Non-awareness |
| 3 | Pierre Julianna | 28 25 | 2 years tertiary Upper secondary | Vocational Vocational | Worksite manager Childcare assistant | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes, partial |
| 4 | Farid Nour | 39 28 | 8 years tertiary No qualification | General — | Teacher (high school) Homemaker | Civil servant Inactive | 1 | Yes |
| 5 | Guillaume Lucie | 29 33 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Developer Marketing manager | Unemployed – freelance Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 6 | Thomas Maëva | 35 31 | Upper secondary 5 years tertiary | General General | Community manager Project manager | Permanent contract Civil servant | 1 | Yes |
| 7 | Thimoté Oriane | 42 39 | 3 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | Vocational General | Lighting director Communication manager | Unemployed Permanent contract | 1 | Non-demand |
| 8 | Olivier Romain | 32 32 | 7 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Research engineer Librarian | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 9 | Quentin Selena | 39 34 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | IT engineer Webmaster | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 10 | Florian Joanna | 33 32 | 5 years tertiary 2 years tertiary | General Vocational | IT engineer Sales manager | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 11 | Antoine Florence | 32 32 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | IT consultant HR consultant | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 12 | Emmanuel Elsa | 32 33 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Audio-visual producer Lawyer | Unemployed – freelance Permanent contract | 1 | Non-awareness / Non-demand |
| 13 | Bastien Pauline | 39 39 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Journalist Journalist | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 2 | Yes |
| 14 | Nelson Manon | 40 39 | Upper secondary 5 years tertiary | Vocational General | Tattoo artist Language teacher | Self-employed Self-employed | 1 | Non-awareness |
| Name | Age | Educational level | Type of qualification | Occupation | Situation at time of birth | Birth order | Leave take-up | |
| 14 | Nelson Manon | 40 39 | Upper secondary 5 years tertiary | Vocational General | Tattoo artist Language teacher | Self-employed Self-employed | 1 | Non-awareness |
| 15 | Aurélien Emeline | 30 30 | 5 years tertiary 3 years tertiary | General General | Hotel receptionist Homemaker | Permanent contract Inactive | 1 | Yes |
| 16 | Ethan Julie | 30 30 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Copywriter Communication manager | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 17 | Vikas Diya | 35 35 | Lower secondary No qualification | Vocational — | Cook Homemaker | Unemployed Inactive | 4 | Not entitled |
| 18 | Ludovic Lucie | 28 28 | 2 years tertiary 2 years tertiary | Vocational Vocational | Plumber–heating engineer Baker | Unemployed Permanent contract | 2 | Non-demand (first child) / Non-awareness (last child) |
| 19 | Henri Sofia | 25 25 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Financial analyst Financial analyst | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 20 | Martin Amélie | 32 32 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Accounts auditor Communication manager | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 21 | Tom Elisa | 31 30 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | Vocational General | Worksite supervisor Marketing manager | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 22 | Denis Laetitia | 40 38 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | IT project manager Lawyer | Permanent contract Self-employed | 1 | Yes |
| 23 | Dorian Jade | 33 35 | Lower secondary 2 years tertiary | Vocational Vocational | Building technician Shop manager | Permanent contract Unemployed | 1 | Yes |
| 24 | Christophe Emma | 40 27 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Secondary school teacher Artwork manager | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 25 | Tristan Léa | 28 26 | 3 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | Vocational General | Quantity surveyor Graphic designer | Permanent contract Self-employed | 1 | Yes, partial |
| 26 | Benjamin Laurine | 37 37 | 3 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Sales representative Association director | Self-employed Permanent contract | 2 | Non-demand |
| Name | Age | Educational level | Type of qualification | Occupation | Situation at time of birth | Birth order | Leave take-up | |
| 27 | Arthur Gabrielle | 30 30 | 2 years tertiary 2 years tertiary | Vocational Vocational | Farm worker Sales assistant | Permanent contract Unemployed | 1 | Yes |
| 28 | Corentin Fanélie | 24 24 | Upper secondary Upper secondary | General General | Locksmith Childminder | Unemployed Unemployed | 1 | Non-orientation / Non-demand |
| 29 | Maxence Elodie | 34 37 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General — | Journalist Audio-visual assistant | Self-employed Self-employed | 1 | Yes |
| 30 | Frédéric Juliette | 37 37 | 5 years tertiary — | General — | Primary school teacher Musician | Civil servant Contract worker | 1 | Yes |
| 31 | Loïc Solange | 33 32 | Upper secondary 2 years tertiary | Vocational Vocational | Electrician Laboratory technician | Permanent contract Permanent contract | 1 | Yes |
| 32 | Rayane Sarah | 29 28 | 5 years tertiary 5 years tertiary | General General | Engineer Engineer | Self-employed Unemployed | 1 | Yes |
| Note: All names of interviewees are pseudonyms. | ||||||||
Notes
-
[1]
The most valued ideal of masculinity in a given cultural context and that legitimizes men’s dominance over women and the existence of male hierarchies.
-
[2]
In the CREDOC study that served as the basis for the article by Chauffaut and David (2003), a 15-minute questionnaire was administered to 32 fathers who did not plan to take paternity leave after the birth of their child.
-
[3]
The ELFE child cohort study headed by INED also includes information on paternity leave, but it is impossible to verify whether the fathers who reported wanting to take their 11 days of leave actually did so. The present study prioritizes practice over intentions.
-
[4]
This excludes families in which the biological father is absent from the household (around 10% of those interviewed).
-
[5]
MDG survey: ‘After the birth of [last child], did the father/you take the three days of leave granted by his/your employer?’, followed immediately by ‘did the father/you take paternity leave?’, followed immediately by ‘How many days of leave?’; Génération 2010 survey: ‘When your first/second child was born, did you take statutory paternity leave?’, followed immediately by ‘How many days?’.
-
[6]
The results presented in this article are based on interviews conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic or on situations not affected by social-distancing measures.
-
[7]
Situations are recorded on the MDG survey date and not at the time of the birth, which may partly explain the differences in non-take-up rates between the two surveys. For example, some respondents on permanent contracts at survey time may have been self-employed or on unemployment benefit when the child was born (up to 6 years previously).
-
[8]
Salaries above approximately €2,500 are above the monthly ceiling.
-
[9]
Along with documents proving their relationship to the child and the mother, self-employed fathers must submit a sworn statement of cessation of activity, and job seekers must provide a work certificate, their last three pay slips, notification of their registration at the job centre, and their most recent benefit statement.
