Thank you.
The benefit within California's program is similar to Canada's in that employees receive compensation for 55% to 60% of their regular employment income. There is a one-week unpaid waiting period, and it's taxable only at the federal level, whereas our CCB income is considered totally taxable income at both the federal and provincial levels, thereby reducing the value of the benefit.
Sweden provides the more generous entitlement, up to 80% of regular employment income, and they also continue to contribute to their pension plan and their other social insurance protections. Norway's compensation equals 100% of gross wage income, to a maximum benefit three times that of Canada's.
There are also other issues with respect to job protection and right to leave, which I will bypass for now.
This comparative analysis provides insights into the strengths and limitations, and the consequences and effects on women, as they are widely recognized as the primary providers of family care. Many women who provide support and care to seriously ill family members, short-term and long-term, do not benefit from this public policy because of its “dying” definition. Women with non-regular labour force participation are unable to benefit from this public policy because it is situated within the EI program and uses the regular EI employment criteria. Women's short- and long-term financial security may be jeopardized because of the low monetary value and maximum ceiling of the benefit itself.
Thank you.