A benefit only for their own: why parental allowance remains a privilege for officials in Luxembourg
Getty Images
Almost 18,200 civil servants and employees in Luxembourg receive a monthly "family allowance" (prime de chef de famille) for dependent children. The amount is 675 euros for civil servants and 639 euros for salaried civil servants. This measure, according to the government, is not considered as social assistance, but as a preference from the employer - the state.
But not everyone agrees with this approach. Dara Miranda, a mother and author of a petition that has gathered 4,823 signatures, publicly appealed to MPs in parliament to extend a similar supplement to parents working in the private sector. "I did not submit this petition for my own sake, but for the sake of my children - so that everyone has the same rights," she said.
However, Georges Mischo, Labour Minister for the CSV party, cooled expectations: according to him, it is not the state's task to introduce such a payment in the private sector. He emphasised that such a measure would require the identification of funding sources, which could place an additional burden on employers. In 2023, the state spent 133 million euros on family allowances for its employees, and a similar amount for the private sector seems unrealistic to him.
Francine Closener, LSAP MP and chair of the petitions committee, also took a reserved stance. She recognised that the proposal seemed "difficult to implement" because it was about the pay that the state provides in its role as employer, rather than a universal right.
The Minister recalled that parents in the private sector already have access to a range of support measures: flexible parental leave, family allowances (Kannergeld), and other mechanisms that he believes compensate for the lack of a special allowance.
In the meantime, the discussion in the parliament also provoked a civil response. An online poll conducted in the media showed different perceptions: some respondents were in favour of equal rights for all parents, some were in favour of preserving the specifics of the civil service, and some suggested assessing the financial implications first.
