Lithuanian employer criticizes expanded parental leave: Who pays the price?

Lithuania is set to expand parental leave benefits, a move intended to support work-life balance, but which has sparked debate about its practical implications and financial burden on businesses. Starting in 2027, the eligibility age for "parental days" will be raised from 12 to 14 years.

“

From 2027, the right to so-called parental days and father's days is being expanded – the limit of children up to 12 years of age is being raised to 14 years.

The stated goal is to provide parents with more opportunities to balance work and family, allowing for increased time with children, including teenagers. However, Onutė Aleksiūnaitė, a long-time accountant and employer, offers a critical perspective, questioning the cost and additional workload these changes impose on businesses.

Aleksiūnaitė points out that under the new regulations, an employee with two children under the specified age would be entitled to an additional paid day off each month. This amounts to 12 paid days per year, equivalent to more than half of a standard work month. While the employee receives their average wage, they are not working, and this benefit is funded by the employer, not the state.

“

For example, an employee raising two children under the set age limit is entitled to one additional paid day off per month. This means 12 paid days per year for the employer – more than half of an average working month. The employee is paid their average wage, but does not perform work. And this is not a state-funded social guarantee. The employer pays for it.

Beyond the direct wage costs, Aleksiūnaitė highlights the logistical challenges for businesses. "Who will do that person's work on that day?" she asks, emphasizing that in sectors like manufacturing, retail, or customer service, work cannot simply disappear. Colleagues would have to cover, or tasks would be postponed, creating organizational problems.

“

Who will do that person's work on that day? If it is production, trade, customer service, accounting, or any other activity where work cannot simply disappear, it will have to be taken over by colleagues, a substitute person will have to be found, or the work will simply remain for the next day.

Furthermore, Aleksiūnaitė questions the premise that these days will be spent with teenagers, who are typically in school. She suggests that for many parents, these days might simply become another paid day off for personal errands or rest, rather than dedicated family time. This leads to the core question: "Are we creating a tool for time together for children and parents, or another additional paid benefit for the employee?" she asks, urging for a transparent assessment of the policy's true impact and questioning why the state's social policy costs are automatically transferred to employers.

“

Are we creating a tool for time together for children and parents, or another additional paid benefit for the employee?