Prominent research has claimed that work-family reconciliation policies trigger “tradeoffs” and “paradoxes” in terms of gender equality with adverse labor market consequences for women. These claims have greatly influenced debates regarding social policy, work, family, and gender inequality. Motivated by limitations of prior research, we analyze the relationship between the two most prominent work-family reconciliation policies (paid parental leave and public childcare coverage) and seven labor market outcomes (employment, full-time employment, earnings, fulltime earnings, being a manager, being a lucrative manager, and occupation percent female). We estimate multi-level models of individuals nested in a cross-section of 21 rich democracies near 2005, and two-way fixed effects models of individuals nested in a panel of 12 rich democracies over time. The vast majority of coefficients for work-family policies fail to reject the null hypothesis of no effects. The pattern of insignificance occurs regardless of which set of models or coefficients one compares. Moreover, there is as much evidence that significantly contradicts the “tradeoff hypothesis” as is consistent with the hypothesis. Altogether, the analyses undermine claims that work-family reconciliation policies trigger tradeoffs and paradoxes in terms of gender equality with adverse labor market consequences for women.

中文翻译：

---

富裕民主国家的工作与家庭和解政策以及妇女和母亲的劳动力市场成果

著名的研究声称，工作与家庭和解政策在性别平等方面引发了“权衡”和“悖论”，给妇女带来了不利的劳动力市场后果。这些主张极大地影响了有关社会政策，工作，家庭和性别不平等的辩论。由于先前研究的局限性，我们分析了两个最重要的工作-家庭和解政策（带薪育儿假和公共育儿保险）与七个劳动力市场成果（就业，全职工作，收入，全职收入，经理，是一名利润丰厚的经理，女性占职业的百分比）。我们估算了2005年附近嵌套在21个富裕民主国家的横截面中的个人的多层次模型，以及在一段时间内嵌套在由12个富裕民主国家组成的小组中的个人双向固定效应模型。工作家庭政策的绝大多数系数都不能拒绝无效的零假设。无关紧要的模式发生，而不管一个比较哪个模型或系数。此外，有许多证据与该假说相符，与“权衡假说”明显矛盾。总体而言，这些分析破坏了人们的观点，即工作家庭和解政策在性别平等方面引发了权衡和悖论，给妇女带来了不利的劳动力市场后果。与该假说相一致的，有大量证据与“权衡假说”明显矛盾。总体而言，这些分析破坏了人们的观点，即工作家庭和解政策在性别平等方面引发了权衡和悖论，给妇女带来了不利的劳动力市场后果。与该假说相一致的，有大量证据与“权衡假说”明显矛盾。总体而言，这些分析破坏了人们的观点，即工作家庭和解政策在性别平等方面引发了权衡和悖论，给妇女带来了不利的劳动力市场后果。