Major changes for parental leave in South Africa

South Africa is close to a transformative shift in parental leave policy as the Constitutional Court considers a pivotal case challenging sections of the country’s Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA).

This case raises fundamental questions about gender roles, equality, and the distribution of caregiving responsibilities between parents.

Currently, South African law grants biological mothers four months of paid maternity leave, while fathers receive only ten days of paternity leave.

Advocates for change argue that these provisions reinforce outdated gender norms, placing a disproportionate caregiving burden on women.

Should the court affirm the ruling, it could set a groundbreaking precedent not only for South Africa but also for other African nations with similar restrictive leave policies.

The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg ruled last year that the BCEA’s provisions on maternity leave violate constitutional rights to non-discrimination and dignity.

In its decision, the court emphasised that parents, regardless of gender, should have the right to determine how to balance work and caregiving responsibilities following the birth or adoption of a child.

The court proposed that both parents should be entitled to the four months of paid leave currently reserved for biological mothers, thereby giving families more flexibility to decide who provides infant care and how caregiving duties are shared.

However, for this ruling to take effect, it must first be affirmed by the Constitutional Court, which is now set to consider the case.

This case represents an important step toward dismantling traditional gender roles in South African labour policy.

Ziona Tanzer, legal counsel at the Solidarity Center, explained the potential significance of the case: “Although we do anticipate the Constitutional Court confirming the judgment, how it does so and what it says about gender, the redistribution of care work, and feminist labour law will be significant.”

Tanzer noted that the decision could shift legal interpretations around parental leave and shape labour rights from a gender-equality perspective, promoting a more equitable approach to caregiving that acknowledges both parents’ roles in child-rearing.

The implications of this case extend far beyond the current legal structure, potentially impacting other African countries where paid leave for fathers remains minimal.

In many African nations, paternity leave is often limited to just a few days, underscoring a pervasive norm that positions caregiving as primarily a woman’s responsibility.

A ruling by South Africa’s highest court that recognises the right of both parents to shared leave could encourage similar legal challenges across the continent and drive reform in national policies on parental leave and family support.

The case also addresses the experiences of adoptive and surrogate parents, who currently face legal limitations when seeking paid leave under the BCEA.

The High Court found that these restrictions are discriminatory, noting that the act’s provisions do not account for diverse family structures or acknowledge that the primary caregiving role can be assumed by any parent, regardless of biological connection to the child.

This aspect of the case underlines a broader commitment to ensuring that all families, regardless of their composition, are treated equitably under the law.

Commenting on this shift, Bradley Swanepoel of the Commission for Gender Equality underscored the impact that an inclusive parental leave policy could have on South African society.

Swanepoel highlighted that empowering both parents to share caregiving duties challenges traditional norms and promotes greater gender equity.

He argued that recognising both parents as capable caregivers would foster healthier family dynamics and alleviate the economic and emotional burden often placed solely on women.

Swanepoel suggested that this shift could be crucial for advancing gender equality and economic stability within households and the broader society.

The Constitutional Court’s decision will determine whether the High Court’s interim order becomes immediately applicable or if the legislature will be given time—potentially up to two years—to amend the law.

An immediate change would provide immediate relief to parents currently navigating the rigid limitations of the BCEA.

Read: ‘30% pass mark’ changes on the table for schools in South Africa