A rethink has been urged by the government on a parliamentary move that seeks to extend the duration of paid paternity leave from one day to three days following the birth of a child.
The Cabinet acknowledged the social motivations behind the proposed amendment to the 2012 Private Sector Employment Law, but urged legislators to reconsider the amendment, citing a lack of legislative necessity, operational challenges, and the potential economic burden on employers – especially within vital sectors and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
The amendment in question aims to replace the current Article 63 of the law, which currently entitles a male worker to one day of paid leave upon the birth of a child.
The new draft proposes to increase this to three days of paid leave, reflecting the view that the father plays a vital role in supporting the mother and new-born during the critical first days after delivery.
According to an explanatory memo submitted by Parliament, the amendment is based on the belief that the father, as the head of the household, bears primary responsibility for completing procedures related to the new-born and providing emotional and logistical support to the mother.
However, the government memorandum argues that no regulatory or legislative deficiency exists in the current law that would necessitate the proposed change.
The existing legal framework already includes annual leave, which can be planned and divided flexibly to accommodate personal or family emergencies; maternity leave provisions that prioritise the needs of the mother and the new-born; and one day of paid paternity leave, intended to cover essential administrative tasks such as registration of the child.
The government maintains that this structure strikes a reasonable balance between work demands and family obligations without imposing undue strain on employers.
The memo also highlights the cumulative operational consequences of even modest increases in leave entitlements in critical sectors such as healthcare, transportation, security, production and public utilities.
The government also pointed out that any unplanned absences, particularly within shift-based work environments, can lead to significant disruptions, including schedule imbalances, increased reliance on costly temporary solutions like overtime or replacement workers, reduced productivity, and customer dissatisfaction and reputational harm.
It also added that the burden is particularly severe for SMEs, which lack the financial and administrative capacity to absorb additional leave-related obligations.
The government warns that added costs and complexity could compel some businesses to adjust hiring preferences, potentially leading to indirect discrimination based on age, marital status or family circumstances. The government emphasised that labour laws must balance the rights of workers with the obligations of employers.
It said legislation should not disproportionately favour one party over the other, particularly in a way that undermines economic sustainability, erodes competitiveness, and violates the principle of proportionality in employment relationships.
It explained that without concrete data demonstrating deficiencies in the current system or widespread demand for change, the proposed expansion is seen as a well-intentioned but unsubstantiated.
The memo cautions against legislative amendments that introduce new obligations without clear evidence of necessity or proportionality, particularly when such changes risk harming businesses, especially those operating in sensitive or resource-limited sectors.
The government hoped that Parliament will reconsider the draft law in light of the detailed observations provided.
&uuid=(email))