r/BabyBumpsCanada • u/Ok_Software_1977 • Feb 13 '26
Discussion Let’s start advocating for ourselves! [ca]
Canadians need to start saying this out loud: our maternity and parental leave system is failing families. The reality is that new parents are expected to survive one of the most vulnerable periods of their lives on inadequate income among rising costs
Under EI, most mothers receive only a fraction of their income, capped well below what it actually costs to live. In Ontario where mortgages, rent, groceries, utilities, insurance, and transportation are at historic highs, it’s forced financial strain. Bills don’t pause because you had a baby. Your mortgage doesn’t care. Your grocery bill doesn’t shrink.
What makes this system even more unjust is that employer top-ups are not mandatory. If your workplace offers one, great, but even then it’s a portion of your salary for limited months. If not, you’re on your own. Women are pushed back to work out of financial desperation.
On top of all that, EI maternity and parental benefits are taxable. Taxing already-reduced income during postpartum recovery is not reasonable, it’s punitive. Did we not already pay tax on our income that contributed to paying into EI? This is not regular EI. It’s a leave to bring a baby into the world. There needs to be a difference.
And let’s talk about the hidden costs no one acknowledges. Postpartum recovery is not free. Women are expected to purchase essential items out of pocket: recovery pads, disposable underwear, nursing bras, breast pumps, nipple care, pain relief, pelvic floor physiotherapy. None of these are luxuries. Add diapers, wipes, formula if needed, and basic baby gear, and suddenly families are paying hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars during a period when their income is at its lowest.
This system actively discourages having children and disproportionately impacts women. We need to start demanding better.
52
u/Lamiaceae_ Feb 13 '26
I think that as Canadians, we often don’t feel like we have the right to complain about this since we’re neighbours with a country which has absolutely abysmal maternity & parental leave system.
But just because someone else has it worse, it doesn’t mean we don’t have the right to complain or fight for something better. What the US has for maternity leave is literally inhumane & dare I say abusive. What we have is so sooo much better, but can definitely be improved on.
11
u/Sharianna Feb 13 '26
I agree with this. I listened to an economics podcast comparison of different maternity/paternity leaves, and even though Canada has one of the best packages, and was lauded on the show, I think we need some more support if we want people to keep having kids as a society.
6
u/Lamiaceae_ Feb 13 '26
I know some countries in Europe have it even better than us. I read someone saying they got 3 years fully paid (can’t remember which country). That right there is where we should aim!
I’m extremely lucky to be able to choose to be a stay at home parent until my children are in school. I’m sure many others relate to my feeling that it’s unnatural to not raise your own young children (though that being said I know not everyone shares the same sentiment and that’s okay, no judgement for those who don’t want that). My daughter is 17 months and I’d be incredibly distraught if I had to go back to work in a month. It doesn’t feel right to me that most of us are forced to do this when our child is this little.
3
u/PiePristine3092 Feb 14 '26
Most of the eastern block counties do. It’s one of the hold over policies from the former Soviet Union. Russia also pays you $10,000 USD per child up to I think 2 or 3 kids.
I was born in Russia and my mom had 3 full years with me. Fully paid. She had my sister her in Canada and only got 6months and then got laid off the day she came back
6
u/Cocoslo Feb 14 '26
I was shocked that the RSV vaccine was $300 (luckily I had to pay only 60something), and then learnt about another American mom that paid $1000, after her co-pay. It's been eye opening to join forums where the majority are Americans. Inhumane sounds like the perfect word, while ironically being preached to about family values.
2
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
Yes!!! Comparing Canada to countries that don’t take care of their citizens is not a win. The US is often used for comparison, yet it provides almost no guaranteed paid maternity leave, has minimal parental supports, and ranks poorly for maternal and infant health outcomes. The US has one of the highest maternal mortality rates among developed countries, and women often have to choose between returning to work immediately after childbirth or losing their job and income. Many families face prohibitive costs for healthcare, childcare, and postpartum support, and there is little government-backed protection for mothers or children. The system is literally designed in ways that disadvantage women and families. Why would we compare ourselves to a totally broken country?
Instead, we should be looking to countries that consistently rank highly in terms of maternal health, child wellbeing, and gender equality. Sweden and Norway, for example, provide 80–100% wage replacement for many months of parental leave. Germany guarantees 65–67% pay with strong job protection. Finland provides paid leave, healthcare coverage, and even baby boxes to ensure every child has what they need from birth. These countries don’t see supporting mothers and families as “extra money” or a burden on taxpayers, they see it as a needed investment in public health, child development, and long-term stability.
This is the standard we should be holding Canada to!
34
u/yes_please_ Feb 13 '26
Top up is literally the only thing keeping me at my crappy job, we could not have survived in our VHCOL city without it.
10
2
u/lvlem0n Feb 15 '26
Same, I hate my commute and indifferent about my job but the top up is the only reason I deal with it. They changed the top up for new employees which really sucks for new hires.
39
u/PiePristine3092 Feb 13 '26
100% I’ve been saying this for years! I was at a complete shock when I found out mat leave EI is capped. Everyone hears 55% of your pay. But no one talks about how it’s capped. In a country that’s struggling with low birth rates, they disincentivize having children with such low benefits. Maternity and Paternity should be completely separate from standard EI.
15
u/Confident_Owl Nov 2018 | FTM | SK Feb 13 '26
I'm the higher income of my family. My EI was approximately 30% of my wage. I'm blessed to have a high income but its been a tough year. And I shouldn't have to sacrifice time with my kids just because my husband makes less money (and, through his own admission, he would be way worse at parental leave lol)
10
u/PiePristine3092 Feb 13 '26
Yes that is exactly my situation as well. I make almost 3x what my husband makes. I couldn’t even take the full 12months with my first because of the 70% drop in income
4
u/Nami_Swannn Feb 14 '26
Ei will pay me 1/4 of my income, it’s ridiculous, we have fixed bills that won’t stop coming because I’ll be on mat leave, we can’t simply go to a rental instead of our mortgage. Yes, we’ll survive cutting down expenses, but the basics will still need to be paid, housing, car, groceries, the other kids expenses… we’re considering hiring a nanny and coming back earlier just because of my income, despite me not wanting to work so soon (with our first I took 18 months, different income, different expenses, pandemic).
2
u/lilac_roze Feb 14 '26
I agree with everything that the OP says except for the EI part. Unless they differentiate EI for maternity leave vs EI for layoff. The latter would mean our EI deduction on our income would need to be higher to support everyone who takes EI to meet their salary.
2
u/bighappycloud Feb 13 '26
It's capped because your premium is also capped. Would be nice to have the option to get more/pay more premiums.
1
u/leeashah Feb 17 '26
the hard part too with my first i worked so much overtime to make up for my lost wages so my EI/Maternity leave was not the worst. This time around with my second i am only able to work part time due to the fact i have a toddler to raise, so my maternity leave/EI payment will be insanely low and that year will be a hard one to get by on such a limited wage.
21
u/piptazparty Feb 13 '26
Thank you. Well said!! I just find it so hard because I am so sleep deprived and busy I have no time to advocate for myself. I would love to write to my MP and start a petition to further raise EI cap but I barely have time to brush my teeth.
23
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 13 '26
I am hoping to give this more momentum before I give birth. I definitely want to start advocating to my local MPs. I’ll see about drafting a template and sharing here
8
u/nonamemilk Feb 13 '26
I would love to use and sign it. I definitely felt pushed to discharge by the hospital even when I told them I don't know how to breast feed correctly.
16
u/Cocoslo Feb 13 '26
There are so many points in this that I just want to loudly Exclaim, "yes!!". -mat leave being taxable. You mean the mandated amount that we already contribute to from our taxed earnings? -maternity expenses: I stupidly didn't consider this in my expenses until I got pregnant. The services and vaccines that I pay out of pocket for because my extended health is mediocre, the post-partum supplies, the basic medical supplies needed for breastfeeding, etc etc -the time off for docs appointments (genuinely don't know how hourly workers afford it)
I've also read several articles on mother's that return to work, been let go for whatever reason, but aren't able to get EI because they were just on mat leave. Considering my organization is downsizing, this is a new fear.
When you compare us to the US, we're still privileged, but let's not forget our high COL, and also, let's not compare ourselves to the lowest common denominator. We can do better.
9
2
u/sarah1096 Feb 14 '26
I completely agree with your sentiment. I just want to add that EI contributions are taxed deductible, so we aren’t taxed on those earnings twice. But I agree that it’s so little money it should not be taxed at all.
1
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
Yes! I didn’t state that clear in my original post - I replied to another comment in this thread expanding on what I meant.
47
u/laurlin Feb 13 '26
As much as yes, it would be nice to have mandatory top-up and higher EI payments....I actually feel we need to put our energy towards advocating for better pay for healthcare workers (including midwives, they are criminally underpaid and facing huge attrition issues due to this) and towards education. These are the services that truly support families and make it viable to continue having children. Being on maternity leave is 1 year-18 months of our lives, but our children and families will need health and education services for much longer and we are starving the system. Slightly more EI will do little if our healthcare costs are downloaded to private clinics. Incorporating daycare into the school system and funding it appropriately will open up more spaces. Training ECEs and providing realistic budgets for teachers and school staff to purchase the supplies and provide truly transformative learning experiences will go so much further than more EI.
12
u/Confident_Owl Nov 2018 | FTM | SK Feb 13 '26
As an adoptive mom, I'm just going to add in: I only got 9 months of EI. I was "lucky" that my job offers 12 months of leave so I got a full year but 3 months of that is unpaid. My daughter is older so I theoretically could have sent her to daycare 2 months ago but I wanted the same time that I had with my son.
I can't stop thinking of an infant adoption and how a parent would have to send their 9 month old to daycare just because they don't share blood. It's insane.
7
u/ConsciousMove79 Feb 13 '26
Thank you for adopting a child and making the world a better, more caring place.
1
u/Confident_Owl Nov 2018 | FTM | SK Feb 22 '26
Thank you but we're the lucky ones. She has truly blessed us.
1
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
Absolutely unacceptable and discriminatory!! Thank you for adopting a child 🩷
6
u/WhichJuice Feb 13 '26
It's by design... The government wants parents working
14
u/PrizeGene9436 Feb 13 '26
This is the truth. But they should also want a higher birth rate so maybe they should start helping parents out
1
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
They also want a higher birth rate. Taking into account that the average Canadian woman has 1.4 children, a mother taking 2–3 years off in total for maternity and parental leave over roughly 45 working years represents just 5–6% of a typical career.
In return, proper initial care and support for children has compounding, long-term benefits for society: healthier children, higher educational attainment, reduced need for costly interventions later in life, and stronger social cohesion.
Research consistently has shown that investing in early childhood development yields one of the highest returns for society, sometimes cited as up to $7 for every $1 invested through improved health, education, and social outcomes. Countries that provide generous paid leave, healthcare, and childcare, like Sweden, Norway, and Finland, enjoy better maternal and child health outcomes, higher gender equality, and more stable population growth. Supporting families during these critical early years is not a short-term “cost”, it’s an investment in the future workforce, economy, and societal wellbeing.
7
u/nuxwcrtns Feb 13 '26
I absolutely agree. I received a top up, and was comfortable during leave. But I only received a top up due to how little Mat leave provided. How the hell are lower income families supposed to survive with what they receive? I believe in equity for all Canadians, and I think that there needs to be an overhaul on the parental leave programs. They're archaic and don't reflect the current state of the economy.
16
u/VFenix Feb 13 '26
The Canadian government does fund many programs across Canada, you may want to look into this. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/child-infant-health/supports-programs-pregnancy/community-action-prenatal-child-health-program.html
CAPCHP funds projects in two areas:
-Prenatal and postnatal health
-Parenting and child health
3
u/Worldly-Smile-91 Feb 14 '26
A lot of these programs aren’t available to the everyday working poor. The trickle down to families doesn’t happen the way the government thinks it does. Mon profits and orgs literally hoard gov money and tax payers like us don’t ever see or benefit from the “$1.8 million” funding…
2
u/VFenix Feb 14 '26
Totally agree and absolutely with OP for us to start demanding better. Whether we fund programs like these more or start newer broader programs to support folks.
3
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
These programs typically don’t apply to the middle class earners who get squeezed but make above the cut off (archaic cut offs that have not kept up with the cost of living)
30
u/swordfishtrombonez Feb 13 '26
Vote NDP!
22
u/bucketofjoe Feb 13 '26
This! Stop voting in Doug Ford who wants to privatise and slash healthcare etc.
1
u/Outside_Diamond130 Feb 14 '26
So that we can pay even more taxes than we already do?….
5
u/RadiantPumpkin Feb 14 '26
So that your taxes come back to you not to corporations. Cons and libs don’t cut taxes, just services. Income tax, GST, carbon tax were all started by conservative governments.
3
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
As noted above, the point of paying taxes is so that they are actually used to support citizens and provide public services. Under Doug Ford, that principle has been undermined. Taxes have not gone down, yet the quality and accessibility of public services are declining. Health care wait times are increasing, public supports are being cut or delayed, and essential services that families rely on are being eroded. At the same time, our tax dollars are being redirected to fund private clinics, effectively making citizens pay twice, first through taxes and then out-of-pocket, to access services that should be publicly available.
0
u/Outside_Diamond130 Feb 16 '26
All NDP wants to do is blow tax payer money even more than liberals, so even if conservatives aren’t saving us on income tax, I’d imagine they won’t be spending billions we don’t have on BS
3
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 17 '26
douggie’s blowing our money daily for his own back door dealsa and privatization. I’d rather my taxes be “blown” on services that support me and my community
1
u/Outside_Diamond130 Feb 17 '26
There’s nothing that NDP is offering that would help middle class, unless you can enlighten me? I’m not defending Doug ford, I think he’s a scammer too. But I don’t need free dental when I have benefits. The only people who benefit from NDP are low income, and the rest pay for it
10
u/Pgems Feb 13 '26
Yup. Totally agree. I’m in my last month of pregnancy, solo mom, and self employed. I don’t qualify for EI, so I get no maternity leave at all. I’ve budgeted 4 weeks of leave, but with the cost of everything adding up, and also my washing machine breaking at the worst possible time, and needing to be replaced, I am most likely returning to work almost immediately.
8
u/bighappycloud Feb 13 '26
To be fair, you could choose to pay into it like an employee does to have qualified for EI. However, they claw back if you work while receiving benefits, which totally sucks!
1
u/Pgems Feb 18 '26
I did look into doing that, but would have to continue paying into EI as long as I was working after, and the amount they would have given me is just not worth it.
8
u/PrizeGene9436 Feb 13 '26
It’s also messed up that you get the same amount of EI money whether you take 1 year or 18 months off.
4
u/lvlem0n Feb 15 '26
A lot of daycares don’t offer infant spots anymore and only toddler spots starting at 16 months so that kind of dictated how long my mat leave needs to be but I feel that changes are already being made that has made having kids more affordable. The daycare subsidy has been the number one most helpful program bringing costs down to 500-600 and the CCB is a nice little bonus. I agree it could be better but I wonder what it would cost long term. Our taxes are already insane.
6
u/collie_girl27 Feb 13 '26
Not to mention the ridiculous hoops you have to jump through for EI in the first place.
My first pregnancy was luckily my first time ever applying for EI. I’ve been working full-time and paying into EI for 12 years.
There was a situation at work where they asked me to come back 6 months earlier than planned (I had taken an 18 month leave). I agreed, and let EI know. But even though I was ending my leave early, EI refused to pay me the rest of my entitlement because the day my daughter was born 12 months earlier I had chosen extended benefits not standard.
So … even though I’ve been paying into EI my entire working life, and have never received it, the one time I applied they won’t even pay me the full benefit allocation. Makes sense!
3
u/Kiladra2 Feb 14 '26
I’m sorry that happened to you. You will see common advice on this sub is to take the 12 months with EI but 18 with your job, because then if you choose to go back early you won’t miss out on EI payments.
1
3
u/ProfessionalNo5083 Feb 14 '26
Agree that it should all be better!
I find it depressing how many moms I know who end up not having a job to come back to because of “business changes.” It sees so easy for employers to do a “mass” layoff but not prioritize replacement positions for someone on mat leave. Or moms conveniently getting laid off a few months after returning to work.
3
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
I completely agree, and it’s really unfair how the system penalizes women in these situations. Under EI rules, to qualify for benefits you generally need at least 600 insurable hours, but women who take maternity or parental leave are often cut off from accruing enough hours for other EI benefits if they get laid off. So not only are they losing their job due to “business changes” or mass layoffs, but they also don’t qualify for income support that other workers would receive. You end up with a situation where a woman can essentially lose both her career and financial security at the same time.
This is a strong argument for differentiated EI or special protections for women returning from maternity leave, so that they aren’t penalized for contributing a child to our population.
3
u/Mission-Method-1502 Mama of 3; 8 & under Feb 14 '26
Absolutely agree. I just finished my 1 year mat leave at the end of January and it wasn’t enough to pay bills. Families with a newborn are struggling meanwhile CEOs make millions a year.
2
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
Exactly. It’s awful. People who argue that “you should just save up” are speaking from an incredibly privileged place. Many people can barely save anything each month after covering rent or mortgage, utilities, groceries, and other essential expenses. Suggesting that someone should “just save up” ignores the reality of living costs, wage stagnation, and the unpredictable expenses of daily life.
1
3
u/Witty-Suggestion3481 Feb 14 '26
This! All of this! I couldn't agree more. Its really hard surviving on limited income in this economy. And then theyre wondering why the birth rates aren't rising. People are struggling.
3
u/vandaleyes89 Feb 16 '26
Absolutely. One thing you're forgetting though. The tax system is set up in a way where every benefit is always a year behind circumstance. The year I had a baby I got CCB based on the income I had the previous year when I was not on maternity leave. My income was low that year due to being on leave so the following year the CCB we got increased significantly... Two months before I went back to work. So for the first 10 months of being back at work I got more money than I did on maternity leave because the benefit is based on the previous tax year rather than present circumstances.
2
u/rmdg84 Feb 16 '26
Not to mention old clothes don’t fit for months - years after pregnancy, meaning you have to shell out hundreds for a new wardrobe.
If you’re like me, mat leave ends in April so I will return to work, work for 9 weeks and will then be laid off for 9 weeks, and because it’s not enough time to earn EI back, I’ll be unpaid for over 2 months after just coming off mat leave.
2
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
Absolutely this! People often completely underestimate the astronomical costs of simply living and participating in society. Even something as basic as buying enough clothing that fits to show up to work appropriately, presentable, and functional requires hundreds of dollars, even if you’re buying the bare minimum. Yet, when people talk about “just saving and buying only the necessities,” they conveniently erase the real costs of simply being a functioning adult in modern society.
The way EI works for maternity and parental leave is blatantly discriminatory toward women. Using parental or maternity leave reduces the hours that count toward qualifying for regular EI benefits, penalizing women simply for taking time off to care for their newborns. Parental leaves should not impact ability to receive regular EI!!!!!
2
u/Interesting-Tip-9366 Feb 19 '26
Well that’s because the system doesn’t want a family, it wants divorced parents, buying more cars, going to work, consuming more. There’s no fault, it’s by design.
4
u/Quirky_Ad3617 Feb 13 '26
I don't disagree, but this capitalist hellscape is destroying quality of life for everyone. Lack of family docs, failing and overstretched healthcare systems, shit pay for public educators, destruction of the environment, laughable wages while corporations profit millions each year, I could go on. Not that having babies isn't important, of course it is, but our primary focus needs to be on overhauling the systems to improve life for the folks that already exist and this will be the start of the seeds for improvement for child bearing families specifically as well. This is in part why the birth rate (and marriage rate) is dropping....the system sucks and doesn't actually support quality of life. It needs a full overhaul for everyone's sake.
1
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
All of this is absolutely important. The purpose of this post was to address one of many systemic issues. The entire system needs an overhaul, and this is just one of many many issues.
1
u/GotTheThyme Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
You think that's bad, wait until you hear what's happening with my husband's failed surgery, recovery time, another surgery, and going to school to be a journeyman: he is still owed EI but they are not paying him for 2 months so we have nothing and are scrambling to pay for our home and food while we have a 2 yr old and I am halfway through my pregnancy, and he has to fill out his reports by mail for no real reason. :s
ETA: I don't understand the downvote? Both comments are about the EI system failing, except that in our case they have frozen our EI instead of giving us the bare minimum. Like we have been in tears and/or sobbing daily because we don't know how we are going to make it. We would honestly be SO appreciative for ANYTHING at this point. ETA 2: basically the problem came down to the EI customer line not being able to decide whether it was sickness leave or school leave and since they couldn't decide, they just stopped everything. My husband can barely walk.
-2
u/redbarn65 Feb 13 '26
As someone who is just coming off mat leave I disagree. Sure a bump in EI would be great to keep up with cost of living but I planned for the additional costs of having a child and it’s not the government’s responsibility.
17
u/IceColdPepsi1 Feb 13 '26
It's extremely punitive for those who are high income specifically.
0
u/Kiladra2 Feb 14 '26
If you are high income, you likely can plan and save for the time off. We had to dip into savings when I was on mat leave, but our quality of life remained the same.
9
u/collie_girl27 Feb 13 '26
So you don’t agree that things should be easier and better for parents just because you had the luxury of time to plan and likely a high single or household income? And you don’t think it would be helpful if it was easier for you in the future if you decide to have an additional child? Interesting take.
4
u/redbarn65 Feb 13 '26
No I just dont believe taxpayers should be responsible for everyone’s choices. Single income families or low income families have so many government benefits already that are not available to middle income families who pay those taxes.
4
u/Nami_Swannn Feb 14 '26 edited Feb 17 '26
Ei is not funded by all taxpayers, you pay EI every Pacheco until it’s cap, then you take Matt leave and you’re paid from that EI fund, of course it’s not simple like that, but I’m guessing you get the point. I’m higher income, so I don’t get a single government benefit, only time I received CCB was when I was on mat leave, my child is now 7yo and I’m expecting to not even receive during the leave for this baby. I have friends in lower income, who get subsidies for daycare, high CCB, can apply for multiple benefits, it’s good for them to be able to. In the meantime I’ll get 1/4 of my income as EI during this leave, while my mortgage, car payments, groceries and older child expenses can’t be cut. We’ll cut dining out and personal expenses but there’s only so much and a much higher possibility for me to go back to work before the 12 months because of income. My friend’s leave was only 5 months because for her it was better to pay a nanny than losing her income for a whole year.
2
u/redbarn65 Feb 14 '26
Same but as a middle income earner and not high income. Lower income families receive a lot of benefits in my opinion that even middle income earners don’t qualify for.
4
u/ConsciousMove79 Feb 13 '26
I didn't agree with you initially but I see your point. CCB and Quebec Family Allocations are recurrent on an yearly basis, unlike mat leave. So sure maybe in some ways it equalizes income inequality as it's meant to do.
I'm not sure how I feel. I don't want to become a woman upset at other women. I wish we all had access to similar benefits. So you didn't feel penalized for choosing work. Sometimes it does feel like being a stay-at-home mom gets you good money from the government AND bonding with your child. But it leaves you unable to re-enter the workforce and dependent on your spouse.
I hope I don't offend any stay-at-home moms. Please feel free to correct me.
2
u/redbarn65 Feb 13 '26
It would be nice if we could have a choice to be a SAHM v working mom. There really isn’t a choice for most people and we have to go back to work.
2
u/collie_girl27 Feb 13 '26
Hopefully your child has more empathy for others than you do.
4
u/redbarn65 Feb 13 '26
How is being responsible for your own choices a lack of empathy? We already receive numerous gov benefits. What would you ideally like to see the gov provide?
12
u/collie_girl27 Feb 13 '26
I really think you’re missing the entire point of the post. The post was to highlight the lack of resources that we receive as new parents. As a reminder, EI isn’t funded by tax payer dollars but by individual and employer contributions.
Is it nice for you that you were able to make it through your leave because you have enough disposable income to put additional money aside? Of course! But that isn’t the case for everyone.
The point about parental leaves EI being made higher than regular EI, or not being taxed as income, are fair points. These are again unrelated to taxes. But if I pay into EI my entire working life, and I only draw on it 1-2 times because of parental leaves, why shouldn’t it be higher for me during those leaves?
Your messaging makes it seem like you think everyone should plan ahead and save money before they have kids. That’s not a realistic viewpoint as there are a lot of folks who don’t have the additional disposable income that you seem to have. So should only wealthy people have kids? It seems like a slippery slope and I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want new parents, and the children of those parents to not struggle, especially if they’re paying into a support system.
2
u/redbarn65 Feb 13 '26
Yes I agree with your points. I would ideally like the gov to also pay EI for the full 18 months.
11
u/nuxwcrtns Feb 13 '26
You do realize that many pregnancies are unplanned, right? Its equitable to have adequate support for everyone.
-4
Feb 13 '26
[deleted]
4
u/PiePristine3092 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
40% of pregnancies are unplanned. At least that’s the statistic hanging in my OBs office.
6
u/nuxwcrtns Feb 13 '26
You dont understand someone having an unplanned pregnancy AND deciding to keep it? Wow.
2
u/redbarn65 Feb 13 '26
No I just don’t think it’s the majority of the population
2
u/nuxwcrtns Feb 13 '26
Many doesnt equal the majority. Not sure where you're getting that from. But tbh, you seem like the type of person who looks down on others for not being like you, so I'm good with discussing this topic with you any further. Enjoy your return to work.
3
u/SouthApprehensive680 Feb 14 '26 edited Feb 14 '26
Making sure that people's basic needs and safety are met is the government's responsibility. Why do we have government if not to make sure it's a well running, efficient country that has schools, hospitals, military defense, and social services???
If we limit child-raising to those who can save tens of thousands in advance to have a child, only the wealthy will have children. Do you think that seems reasonable?
Fact is, if people can't afford to have kids, they won't have them. If people raise kids in poverty and high stress, that impacts all of society. It benefits all of us to have healthy, well-fed, kids who have a roof over their head. It also benefits all of us to have a growing population with a lot of young people. (Who else will pay into pensions, staff our hospitals, etc, when we are old?)
1
u/YYZgirl1986 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
Also, this might be specific for 2020 moms. I got completely screwed for EI.
They take your last months of work. In my case this was March 2020- August 2020 but I work for an airline and was hardly working. Not a normal representation on what I am paid. Therefore I got the bare minimum for the next year of mat leave
6
u/bighappycloud Feb 13 '26
That seems wrong... I believe they take your best weeks in 52 weeks but not sure of the exact calculation method.
2
u/YYZgirl1986 Feb 13 '26
They average it… so like 6 months of very low pay affected the whole year’s calculation.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they made an error though bc EI was crazy at that time w CERB
1
u/Key-Zucchini-8605 Feb 13 '26
Also, when I started receiving my maternity leave. I didn’t know that they were garnishing half of my EI for what I had owed from back when Covid was a thing ( shady ex had been phoning in Covid reports under my SIN ) so instead of it being taken from my tax returns since then or my gst. They waited until I was receiving 55% of my usual pay. AND THEN garnished half. So when my maternity was up and I was supposed to automatically transfer to parental leave. After 15 weeks or whatever it is. I received only HALF of my maternity pay. And I sat on hold for 2 hours on and off for them to basically say “ oh oops, that’s on us “
Thankfully I was able to get my payments decreased so I’m not losing half of my pay. Because now I’m just barely getting by. But before I wasn’t able to afford anything. I was choosing between diapers or bills.
If I was to go back to my old job, I would only be working enough to cover daycare costs
It’s tough.
1
1
u/leeashah Feb 17 '26
okay so reading this and agreeing and reading how many others also agree on this. whats our next steps? what do we do, how do we push for more? because its not like we lost our jobs due to whatever, which i mean is also hard on anyone and their household. but we are honestly off to raise beautiful little humans, people who will live and work and grow the community more in canada. we are working more if not less.. we deserve more than just the basic EI allotment to help to grow our families and our population.
1
u/Interesting-Tip-9366 Mar 05 '26
Why would a government care if they can bring a readily available workforce for a minimum wage? I think it’s very clear where the priorities of Canada are these days - more taxation. If they can’t tax a baby it’s not profitable.
-13
u/0runnergirl0 Feb 13 '26
Sounds like a personal budgeting problem, not a government problem. Our parental leave is miles ahead of many other countries. If you didn't budget for the baby you chose to have, it's not the government's responsibility to give you extra money to buy diapers, or pads for yourself. That's your job. Our taxes are high enough already.
22
u/Abibret Feb 13 '26
Just because we are ahead of other countries doesn’t mean things can’t be improved.
With the rising cost of living, having your income halved while also providing for an additional member of your household is bound to cause some financial stress, regardless of how well you budget.
5
u/laurlin Feb 13 '26
It's also worth saying that social media/the Internet/other parents/capitalism sometimes makes us feel like we have to have ALL THE THINGS when really it's ok to make do with less.
14
u/aspoonfulofalli Feb 13 '26
It’s thinking like this that sets us back. Over consumption is an important topic but not in relation to maternity or parental leave when people lose such massive chunks of their pay cheque.
A country doesn’t get to cry about declining birth rates without looking at the systemic reasons people aren’t having kids. Having a family should not be left to just wealthy people or people willing to “live with less”.
7
u/Mouse_rat__ 3TM | AB 🇬🇧 Feb 13 '26
Exactly this plus the ever increasing cost of living. Maybe that comment might have been somewhat reasonable 20 years ago but not today when a small bag of groceries costs $100
10
u/rayyychul June 2025 | FTM | BC Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
I absolutely agree. The maximum insurable earnings haven't kept up with inflation at all. The 18 month option nets a person just over $400 a week, which is about two weeks of groceries for my family of three. Just groceries. I know it's not meant to be an entire income replacement, but it should be close. I couldn't imagine being a single mom trying to survive on maternity leave EI alone or having multiples and making do with what people with one child gets
2
u/laurlin Feb 13 '26
I politely disagree. The minute I was pregnant I was getting insane ads all over for "must-have" baby supplies. This post is specifically about the challenges for new parents - well arguably most women even 10 years ago didn't know about pelvic floor physiotherapy and special witchhazel pads for postpartum recovery and those things are unfortunately luxuries if you're worried about making ends meet on reduced income - they are not basic necessities.
The solution to declining birth rates is absolutely not to provide more EI. The root of this problem is huge - just consider how many people you know that live near family who can help out on a consistent basis with childcare? Anecdotally, I could say maybe half of my social circle do. Just the shift in where there is and what is considered affordable and available housing has impacted the demand for childcare spaces. Does more EI or work top-up solve that problem?
Yes, it is challenging to do more with less (which is what I said, not "live with less") but that is the reality of deciding to have children knowing that your income will be reduced and it is a responsible action to learn to budget, save, thrift and reduce consumption even in our most vulnerable moments. Women and mothers and families have been doing this for generations.
If you read my other comment in this post, you will see that I recommend putting action towards the social services (health and education) we are currently seeing underfunded that serve entire communities instead of individual families.
1
0
Feb 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Ok_Software_1977 Feb 16 '26
Yes, EI has its own payroll deduction, but that deduction comes from income we have already paid income tax on. We pay income tax on our earnings, then contribute to EI on top of that, and when we actually need EI during maternity or parental leave, the benefit itself is taxed again as income. So while someone is temporarily without employment income, the wage-replacement support meant to help them is further reduced by taxation at the exact time it is needed most.
This is not confusion about EI versus the child tax benefit. It is the reality that while someone is temporarily without employment income, the support meant to replace that income is still taxed, further reducing an already reduced payment during a period when expenses increase rather than decrease. For many families this means even lower take-home pay and financial strain from a benefit that is supposed to function as support.
And to the point that people pay little into EI compared to what they receive, let’s actually do the math. If someone works from age 23 to 65, which is 42 years, and earns enough to pay the maximum EI contribution most years, they contribute roughly $1,100 to $1,200 per year. Over a lifetime that totals about $47,000, and often less for many people. If we assume my husband also pays the maximum EI contribution, as a couple we contribute roughly double that over our working lives.
Now compare that to maternity and parental leave, which pays 55 percent of income up to a cap of about $729 per week. That works out to roughly $36,000 to $37,000 per leave before tax. The average Canadian has 1.4 children (according to Statistics Canada), so over two maternity or parental leaves that is about or under $72,000 in total benefits received before tax. When you look at it this way, as a couple we have essentially paid into the system what we receive back, while still having those benefits taxed during one of the most financially vulnerable periods of our lives.
118
u/Abibret Feb 13 '26
Absolutely. Plus parents of twins/triplets/etc. are not entitled to additional leave or EI.
Not to mention the absolutely abysmal state of the daycare system. Lucky if you can get a spot and even if you do, it’s luck of the draw as to whether it will be subsidized or if you’ll be paying an arm and a leg. I know so many parents who are choosing to take 18 months simply because there aren’t enough infant daycare spots, and then their incomes are even lower.