As a young woman in the world of work you have the choice between bad and bad, between being an employee and being self-employed. Why are both not optimal perspectives? Well, the prospect as an employee is: a lower salary than men and the often ongoing discrimination, whether in the application process or in management positions. The woman can become pregnant, which many employers perceive as a risk. Sounds unattractive? Then there is still the second possibility: you become self-employed with your own project, work hard, maybe hire employees.
But with the second option, there is a big risk: what to do if you get pregnant? As a self-employed person, you are not even entitled to 14 weeks of maternity leave, as employees are entitled to, because in Germany the self-employed receive zero euros in maternity benefit in the three months before the birth. For many, fixed costs continue to run and so many are still in the workshop, on appointments or in the shop with a round stomach until shortly before the birth.
A master carpenter from Lower Saxony, Johanna Röh, has finally brought this situation, which is precarious for many reasons, into federal politics. Your demand: equal maternity protection for the self-employed. The quorum of 50,000 votes has been exceeded by far. Now the Petitions Committee has to invite the initiators to a hearing.
MEPs should take the demands of the self-employed very seriously. First and foremost it is about the health of pregnant women and newborns. Most self-employed people just can’t choose how long they pause to give birth. Not because they manage poorly, but because the profits, especially in the early years, are not so great that they finance a three-month break, even if “self-employment” sounds fancy to many.
Pregnancy is not an investment decision
In Germany, one million women work on their own account. More than half of them are self-employed, for example as photographers, artists or event technicians. Many of the others run small businesses: as florists, doctors, lawyers, hairdressers, physiotherapists, architects or craftspeople. They all often have their first child at a time when they have to invest a lot and there is hardly any profit.
Obviously, many of these women share the demand of master carpenter Johanna Röh for maternity leave for the self-employed. They post photos of themselves online, heavily pregnant at work. And regretfully write how they gave up their independence with their first child – because of financial insecurity. That’s just an entrepreneurial risk, critics immediately reply. After all, the self-employed are allowed to keep the profits of their company for themselves. This attitude not only suppresses tax payments, but is also misogynistic: After all, pregnancy is not an investment decision. The supposed entrepreneurial risk that is attempted here is solely the risk of the birthing sex and that was not chosen.
Women must finally have the same opportunity to start a business
Actually, the argument goes the other way around, it is the third major point that speaks in favor of maternity protection for the self-employed: as long as such protection is missing, women are prevented from implementing their business ideas. In total, almost twice as many men are self-employed, with start-ups the ratio is even 10:1 – in favor of men. Germany cannot afford that, regardless of whether it is about succession in craft businesses or innovations. It’s a shame how much unused potential is currently being neglected.
The only legitimate question that remains is who should pay for the 14 weeks of loss of earnings. In the case of employees, the health insurance company pays 13 euros per day, the rest is paid by the employer. The self-employed are their own boss, and the state should step in to cushion the loss of earnings. It would be conceivable that the health insurance pays 13 euros per day, as with employees, and that the family ministry tops it up. Then women would have good prospects – and so would the country.