Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
-
The study's objective was to examine the impact of New Jersey’s Family Leave Insurance Program (NJ-FLI) on labor force participation and other labor market outcomes for women with children. The authors also investigated the impact of a similar paid family leave policy implemented in California, the profile of which can be found here.
-
Using data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) over the period 1999 to 2019, the authors used a difference-in-differences design to estimate the impact of NJ-FLI on labor force participation for women with children. The authors used a statistical analysis to compare labor force participation for mothers and non-mothers in New Jersey, before and after the implementation of NJ-FLI.
-
The study did not find consistent evidence of a relationship between NJ-FLI implementation and labor force participation for mothers.
-
The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is low because the authors were not able to control for a pre-intervention (or pre-childbirth) measure of labor-market participation. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the intervention; other factors are likely to have contributed.
Intervention Examined
New Jersey’s Family Leave Insurance Program (NJ-FLI)
Features of the Intervention
In the United States, there is no national guarantee of paid family leave (PFL) to care for a new or adopted child. To address this gap, eight states and the District of Columbia have implemented their own PFL programs since 2004. This study focuses on the second state PFL program, implemented by New Jersey in 2009. New Jersey’s Family Insurance Leave Program (NJ-FLI) offers 66% of a worker’s wages for six weeks (increased to twelve weeks after July 2020). Workers must have been earning wages in New Jersey for at least five months in order to be eligible for the NJ-FLI program.
Features of the Study
This study used a difference-in-differences design to compare labor force participation for mothers and non-mothers in New Jersey, before and after the implementation of the NJ-FLI program. The treatment group consists of New Jersey women aged 25 to 54 with minor children. The comparison group consists of New Jersey women aged 25 to 54 without minor children. The analysis relied on individual-level data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) across the period 1999 to 2019. Information on participants’ current labor-force participation, parental status, and other demographic characteristics are recorded at a single point in time, upon their initial entry into the CPS sample.
Findings
Employment
- The study did not find consistent evidence of a relationship between NJ-FLI implementation and labor force participation for mothers. Findings suggested a positive association between NJ-FLI implementation and labor force participation for the mothers of children aged 1, 3, or 4 years old, but not for the mothers of children aged 0, 2, or over 4.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors relied on data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) to conduct their analysis, recording women’s labor force status, parental status, and demographic characteristics at a single point in time (e.g., upon entry into the CPS sample). The authors are thus unable to control for a pre-intervention (or pre-childbirth) measure of labor force participation for women included in the analysis sample, as required by CLEAR guidelines. Without pre-intervention measures of labor force participation, the authors may not be able to fully account for possible pre-existing differences between treatment and comparison groups.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors were not able to ensure that the groups being compared were similar prior to the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to New Jersey’s Family Leave Insurance program; other factors are likely to have contributed.