🔗 Share this article

The Republic of South Africa's supreme judicial authority has collectively determined that every caregiver of newborn children are eligible for identical parental leave - a landmark ruling celebrated as a important triumph for fair treatment and family rights.

Existing Legislative Disparity

Based on the current law, birth mothers are granted one-third of a year of time off, while fathers are granted just 10 days.

Through its ruling, the highest court stated sections of the regulation unconstitutional, calling it biased against fathers, and determined that all caregivers may now distribute the provided absence as they see fit.

"This is a pioneering move for fairness, parental health, and the destiny of parenting in the country," commented an advocate, founder of a fathers' organization.

Court Context

In 2023, a lower court determined certain sections of the work regulations and the Unemployment Insurance Fund Act unjust and ruled that they infringed upon the privileges of multiple parental arrangements.

The provincial court then ruled that the law showed bias toward categories of caregivers differently regarding the length of parental leave and financial support obtained.

Judicial Proceedings

The case was brought to court by a husband and wife, the rights body and other petitioners, who sought to address the unfair societal burden mainly affecting mothers, stressing that childcare duties should be divided.

The claimants contended that the current legislation showed bias against mothers and fathers who were different from the delivering parent - namely, fathers, guardians, and caregivers of children through surrogates - by granting them just two weeks of parenting time, while the delivering parent got 120 days.

Legal Rationale

Delivering the decision on Friday, Justice Zukisa Tshiqi declared that all caregivers should be eligible for distribute the provided period as they considered suitable, characterizing the current law archaic and one which "unequally pressured birth mothers and excluded male parents".

"The shielding of birth mothers to the omission of additional caregivers has the detrimental effect of continuing the belief that mothers are, and should be, the main guardians of children.

"The dad is marginalised and denied the possibility to involve himself as a guardian in the upbringing of the baby during the formative months of development," she stated further.

Justice Tshiqi said the decision was not only about equal rights but also about safeguarding the honor of families, emphasising that the main consideration of the judicial ruling was the health of babies.

"The discriminatory approach not only sidelines guardians but also denies babies of the chance to be with their guardians during a critical time of care and adjustment to their different situation."

Feedback and Consequences

The claimants celebrated the ruling, while attorneys warned that the decision would have major ramifications for companies, who will must change their existing absence rules to comply with the decision.

"The essence of the legal action is that it underscores the requirement to offer identical parenting allowances, understanding that caring for a baby is a shared responsibility," Tsietsi Shuping from the rights organization informed journalists.

He stated the current law "did not reflect changing cultural attitudes around parenting".

Workplace legal expert a specialist stated to official outlets that the ruling was "a welcome and predicted conclusion" for parental rights in the state.

Execution Schedule

The court has suspended its declaration of invalidity for 36 months, giving the government opportunity to modify the current laws to comply with its decision.

In the meantime, caregivers will be eligible for decided how they choose to divide the four months and 10 days of leave.

In cases where a single guardian is has a job, that caregiver may utilize the entire absence period.