In October 2011, Chile doubled its promise to working mothers: the government extended postnatal leave from 12 to 24 weeks for women contributing to the country's social security system, while introducing five days of paid paternity leave for fathers. Fourteen years later, economist Francisca Rojas-Ampuero's research published in the Journal of Development Economics reveals something that defies the usual pattern in wealthy countries—the expansion actually worked to keep mothers in formal employment.
The timing of the policy created a natural experiment. Mothers whose children were born on or after July 25, 2011, qualified for the full 84-day extension. Those whose children arrived before May 2, 2011, did not. By comparing outcomes across this sharp cutoff, Rojas-Ampuero could isolate the reform's true effects from other factors shaping women's work lives.
The results were striking: formal employment among eligible mothers rose by approximately 15 to 16 percent in the first three years after their leave ended. That's not a marginal gain—it's a meaningful boost in women's attachment to the formal labor market at a time when many drop out entirely. The effect faded between years four and seven, but not because mothers left jobs. Instead, ineligible mothers eventually caught up, narrowing the gap.
What made this outcome possible was something researchers hadn't fully grasped before: the reform didn't just add leave. It simplified a chaotic workaround system. Before the change, many Chilean mothers extended their time at home by claiming sick-child leave, mental health leave, or leave for pregnancy-related illness. After the reform, eligible mothers significantly reduced their reliance on these alternatives. Extended maternity leave replaced a patchwork of informal arrangements with a single, legitimate entitlement. The pre-reform system hadn't been preventing extended absences—it was just making mothers work harder to arrange them.
The gains proved largest for society's most vulnerable women. While Rojas-Ampuero found no significant differences by marital status, age, education, or pre-birth wages, one variable stood out: tenure. Women with less than ten months of formal employment in the year before maternity leave gained substantially more than those with stable work histories. The effect was strongest in municipalities with limited childcare access. For mothers with thin labor market footing and few affordable care options, extended leave provided the stability needed to stay in formal employment rather than drifting into the informal sector.
This result diverges sharply from what maternity leave research typically finds in wealthy countries, where outcomes tend to be modest or neutral for long-term employment. The difference lies in structure: limited childcare availability, weaker job protection, and higher labor market informality create different incentives for mothers deciding whether to return. Chile's policymakers designed the reform explicitly to address low maternal employment among lower-income mothers and compensate for thin childcare infrastructure. The data suggests they succeeded, at least for the three years where evidence is clearest.
One limitation shadows the findings: the study covers only women already in the formal sector before childbirth, a group better positioned than most. Whether the same effects would appear among informal or lower-income workers remains unknown. But for the women measured, Chile's expanded leave delivered what policy is meant to do—remove a barrier and watch people flourish.