Fixing a gap in family policy: two professionals campaigning for fairer parental leave in Luxembourg

In Luxembourg, the parental leave system is often held up as a model of family support. But for many long-term residents and dedicated professionals, a little-known clause can cause disproportionate setbacks. If you’ve had a break of more than seven days in the 12 months preceding your parental leave, you may be disqualified from financial support — regardless of your long-standing contribution to the labour market. The deadline to sign the petition is August 31, 2025.

This is the challenge that inspired Chelsea Bain and Aisling McCaffrey to launch Petition n°3654, calling for updated parental leave requirements to better reflect the realities of modern careers. Their initiative resonates with many professionals navigating layoffs, transitions, or international relocations especially in a post-COVID job market where career paths are increasingly non-linear.

We spoke with Chelsea and Aisling about what triggered their campaign, what needs to change, and how employers and HR leaders can be part of the solution.

What personal experience led you to launch this petition ? 

Aisling: I changed jobs in 2022 to join a startup for an exciting career opportunity. I had asked for my new employer to give me another month after my notice period, but they were adamant about me starting as soon as possible. I didn’t plan to get pregnant so soon, but it happened early in my time at that role, and when I checked the requirements for parental leave, I realised that this push to start as soon as possible had been a gift, since I would have been disqualified for parental leave had I taken that time off. At the same time, a friend was pregnant and ran into the parental leave issue. Luckily she was able to find a financial solution that didn’t impact her family too much. Since then, I’ve met a few expecting families in this situation, where the father is forced to take the parental leave first due to a gap in the mother’s work history, meaning the mother has to go back to work when the baby is only 3 months old. It’s a really difficult situation for all families who experience this.

Chelsea: I changed jobs in December 2024, starting my new role in January at an incredible job that was a big step up in my career. Adding to the joy, we discovered we were pregnant with our second, so charged into Christmas excited for the year ahead. As my husband had an operation planned for early January, and our son was shifting to full time crèche, I delayed my start date to be there to support them both. However, when time came to discuss parental leave applications I was startled to learn this decision cost me my eligibility, having exceeded 7 days between roles. Despite phone calls, in person visits and attempts to negotiate paying the gap; the response held hard and fast - I needed to complete 12 continuous months in my new role. The result; as I give birth tomorrow I am lucky to still have maternity  leave to carry me until the end of October, and my husband will take the first parental leave until I am “qualified”, though still facing the reality that my child will not have the same access to me in his first year. The layering of our leave also means he will start crèche younger, and the financial impact in our combined loss of earnings (comparative to parental leave payments) will “hit” at once. The incredible support from the WhatsApp group of mothers guided me through this journey, and introduced me to Aisling who felt as passionately about this topic as I did - it’s simply unacceptable to uphold policies that ultimately punish parents for seeking out both career and family goals, without consideration for their entire input to the system accumulatively.  

Can you share how this rule impacted your own family planning or career path ?

Aisling: I have personally had to postpone planning my second pregnancy due to this issue. I am in the process of becoming an independent, because I have a great idea to fill a niche in the market, but also in the hopes that I can avoid instability of employment in the future.  

Chelsea: My second son will have less access to his mother at the most critical time. Being pushed into crèche months earlier than planned. I do not regret my choice to move forward with my career, as the main breadwinner I am proud of what I’ve built and the new role I’ve taken on. I simply lack any logical explanation as to why a government that benefits from my advanced career and income, would ultimately penalise me for it.  

Could you explain the “7-day break” clause and why it creates such a barrier for many working parents ?

Aisling: In the 12 months leading up to your parental leave, you may not have more than a 7 day gap 
between working contracts. Some people wrongfully believe that they only need to be affiliated with the CNS, which you are under chomage (unemployment benefits), but the requirement is to be affiliated with the CNS on the basis of an employment contract. 

Chelsea: as above.

Your petition talks about recognising long-term careers — why was that concept important to include ?

Aisling: I think that people who have paid into the system for a long time deserve to benefit from that system, similar to retirement or other concepts. I’m not saying to give them more, but I’m saying there should be some level of understanding that sometimes you change roles, get laid off, or experience other issues that don’t adequately reflect how you’ve contributed to the collective.

Chelsea: This is not a petition seeking to put the government at a detriment, aka suggesting that they should offer parental leave payments for any birth in Luxembourg. Rather, requesting they logically consider the fullness of the person they are assessing as an individual and not a set of criteria. For a parent to have contributed years of CNS payments, to only be declined at the point they need that returned, isn’t an acceptable practice.  

Who are the most affected by this rule in your view?  
Are there specific patterns — for example, expats, freelancers, young mothers, or laid-off professionals ? 

Aisling: Primarily women, but all expecting parents can benefit from a system that has a little more wiggle room for life’s ups and downs. For me, I’ve definitely heard of a few women in the startup world who have been affected, or like me who also work in marketing, because we tend to change roles more often than other people in order to receive higher levels of income or higher responsibilities. There tends to be less internal opportunity for growth otherwise, and these jobs can be high stress, so taking 2 weeks or a month off between roles (unpaid mind you) is very standard practice. There are also more opportunities to be laid off when you’re in a position that is non-essential during economic downturns. Freelancers have different challenges, and I am sure I’ll figure out what they are as I launch my own project. 

Chelsea: I’d agree women are more impacted. We already need to consider timelines to promotions or end of probation periods, calculate back to see if we can “afford” being pregnant at a specific time. The need to consider energy, hormones, travel for work so that carrying a child isn’t detrimental to our performance. Not to mention the high rate of reductions in workforces, the ambiguous environment making future planning a risk, without the parameter of days between jobs adding to it. In Luxembourg the most impacted in my opinion are those who do not work in the “major fields” such as Finance, Consultancy etc. or lack fluency to work in languages such as French, German or Luxembourgish. Ultimately, if impacted by RIF, or freelance work dries up, these folk are less employable within a week gap and cannot afford to go unsupported through parental leave. I’d also look at the relationships where mothers are the main breadwinners. As is the case for our family, the pressure to ensure I maintain my career trajectory is higher as my income maintains the majority of our lifestyle. Personally I’ve found the balance incredibly hard, with internalised pressure to maintain momentum whilst physically growing life. Something I learned the impact of; having suffered miscarriages prior to our son being born.

How do you see this issue evolving in the context of more flexible, non-linear careers and growing expectations around work-life balance ? 

Aisling: This is the thing - a lot of people are changing the way they work right now. I know quite a few people who, like me, are interested in entrepreneurship, but that doesn’t mean they won’t go back to a salary-based role in the future at a different company. With all the opportunities to start building more flexibility into your work, there are also great advantages for parents who want to build flexibility into their lives and be there more for their kids while excelling in their careers. So, legislation will still have to catch up with that change. 

Chelsea: We’ve seen the rise of Gen Z career paths with substantially lower average tenure as they seek diversity of experience, and a lot more autonomy than historic generations. As the population of next generation parents comes into their years of family planning, should Luxembourg be serious about maintaining population growth, we will need to make changes that recognise and support alternative work trajectories. As recommended by this petition.

What role should employers and HR leaders play in supporting fairer access to parental leave? Can they contribute beyond legal compliance?

Aisling: I think there could be more encouragement in general in the workplace to be family friendly. I know when I’ve realised some of the men and women I’ve worked with have great careers in addition to a robust family life including kids, it’s encouraged me to see that as a vision for myself, and get educated on what I need to do to make it happen. I also know people who have had the opposite experience - even people practicing law for example, who know a baby will set back their career. This has in fact made them less prepared when it does happen because they didn’t really get immersed in the details beforehand as it probably caused them a bit of anxiety. 

Chelsea: Two small edits could’ve changed my experience;

1. Any mention of this policy during my exit/onboarding by either employer would’ve given me the opportunity to change my start date before the impact was realised. I know that sounds excessive, but having that little extra consideration could protect other parents.
2. Offering support in lieu should the parent not qualify through the government. I noted that both my previous and current employers offer parental leave in other countries, paid by the company, however as Luxembourg is supported through our tax inputs - it wasn’t offered here (bar a top up payment if you’ve been employed long enough prior to the birth, again I did not meet this criteria).

I understand the fiscal impact of opening these policies to exceptions, so did not feel professional to challenge or seek support - instead using holiday allowance to bridge my gaps where possible. However, if employers want to continue to secure and retain the best talent, there will be costs associated with that such as aiding parental leave that should be as openly discussed as sign on bonuses or other joining incentives. 

Have you received any feedback from policymakers, employers, or social partners since the petition launched?

Aisling: Yes! I have a few politically-involved friends, mostly in the Green Party, and they’ve been very supportive. As an immigrant it’s really nice to be encouraged by my local friends to get involved in topics that inspire me. The RTL also wrote an article about our experiences shortly before the petition was published to help generate awareness.

Humakina had a great response! You guys offered to do this interview about it, which I really appreciate!  
Chelsea: As above - RTL and Humakina, love that folk are ready to advocate and share our stories.

What would be your message to Luxembourg employers — especially HR departments — who want to support talent planning while embracing family inclusiveness?

Aisling: The most loyal and best employees I’ve met were women and men who have been encouraged by their employers to make sure they get to take their parental leave (especially men who are more likely to not take it by choice) and you know, go see your kid’s recital in the afternoon, or feel welcomed to stop by the office on a day off with their kid to say hi, etc. Basically, employers who treat you like a whole person and not just a cog in the machine. We’re just human at the end of the day, so we want to feel human, even at work. It was drilled into me in business school how much better companies function when they are inclusive of employees in all situations because happier people do better work. So, I always look for companies to work for who offer that kind of culture. 

Chelsea: keep considering the person not the policy. I’ve had the honour of leading teams full of mothers, and can honestly say what they achieve in a shortened day, bouncing a sick kid on their knee or running for school pick up - is above and beyond what many others achieve without the time and attention pressures. Yet many offices forcing a return to in person attendance, or tracking breastfeeding hours to the minute - are telling these parents that their parenthood is an inconvenience to their career. Being seen as a whole person, not “just” a mum, is a huge reason many return to the workforce, so employers can do a lot of good things by recognising the fullness of what the individual offers to them as a business.

Join Aisling & Chelsea by signing the petition

This petition aims to update Luxembourg’s parental leave policy. Its goal is to make the system more flexible and better adapted to the careers and realities of today’s families.

The deadline to sign is August 31, 2025.

Click here to sign and share the petition