The HPS Podcast - Conversations from History, Philosophy and Social Studies of Science · HPSUniMelb.org

Working Fathers Mini-series. Ep 3 - Are Fathers Free?

·46 min·4 clips

Miranda Stewart explains why mothers face an 80% tax rate on extra work hours due to Australia's family payment system.

This episode examines the economic and policy constraints shaping fathers' choices regarding work and care, hosted by Dan Halliday, an Associate Professor of Political Philosophy and father of four. Guest Miranda Stewart, a professor of law specializing in tax and social policy, analyzes how policy design influences family decisions. Guest Hee Jung Chung, a professor of sociology, discusses the unintended consequences of flexible work arrangements. Miranda Stewart explains Australia's individual income tax system contrasts with its family payment system, which uses joint income testing. She details how adding a second earner's income can cause a family to lose benefits like the Child Care Subsidy and Family Tax Benefit. Stewart calculates the effective tax rate on a secondary earner's labor can reach 80%, creating a strong disincentive for increased workforce participation, typically by mothers. She notes this reinforces a "1.5 earner" model as the dominant family structure. Stewart observes same-sex couples statistically share care and housework more equally than heterosexual couples. She points out the irony that legal equality now subjects same-sex couples to the same joint income-testing disincentives. The discussion references philosopher Nancy Fraser's critique of the outdated "breadwinner model" and her questions about alternative policy goals. Stewart cites Nordic countries, which collect higher taxes to fund universal benefits like extensive childcare and parental leave, resulting in higher female workforce participation. A surprising insight is that flexible work policies may entrench traditional gender divisions by enabling mothers to add paid work on top of unpaid care without redistributing domestic labor. Hee Jung Chung describes a "flexibility paradox" where control over work schedules leads some professionals, especially men, to work longer hours to meet "ideal worker" norms. Chung notes that, paradoxically, working-class men often use flexible work for more egalitarian "tag team" parenting out of economic necessity. Chung argues reducing overall working hours is key, as historical thinkers often worked only four to six hours daily for deep thinking. She advocates for generous, non-transferable "daddy leave" to establish fathers as primary carers early on. The episode notes that even in Sweden, with "use-it-or-lose-it" leave, fathers take less leave than mothers due to entrenched workplace norms. Stewart advocates treating childcare like public education, as a societal investment in children and future labor supply, linking it to addressing Australia's below-replacement fertility rate of 1.6. The tone is analytical and educational, blending policy explanation with philosophical inquiry into social norms. The style is conversational, featuring extended interviews with experts who present research and data. This episode would appeal to listeners interested in the structural economics of family policy, gender equality, and workplace reform. Those seeking a purely personal narrative on fatherhood might find it too focused on systemic analysis.

As heard by us

A policy focused conversation about whether fathers have real choices in how care and paid work are divided.

Working Fathers treats fathers' freedom as a policy question, asking how care and paid work are split and what government and organisational policy can do about it.

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

For when you want to think harder about fathers, freedom, and childcare policy.

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from The HPS Podcast - Conversations from History, Philosophy and Social Studies of Science