The common-law risk map

In which regions of Quebec does a common-law mother run the greatest financial risks in the event of separation? This is shown by the map produced by an INRS team, of which we propose an adaptation here.

Disadvantaged mothers

For each region, researcher Hélène Belleau presents the proportion of common-law unions among couples with children (on the map), as well as the wage gap between women and men who live in a couple with children (table below) . Contrary to the traditional way, it illustrates this gap from the point of view of women, by indicating by what proportion the income of men is higher than theirs. However, the greater this gap, the more a mother in a common-law union runs the risk of being financially disadvantaged in the event of separation.

Reverse the problem

It is in Abitibi-Témiscamingue and on the North Shore that common-law mothers run the greatest financial risks if they separate.

More than 60% of couples with children live there in common-law unions, but above all, these are the regions that show the greatest income gap between women and men who live in a couple with at least one minor child.

The card that proves it is the fruit of the compilation carried out by Hélène Belleau, full professor at INRS and specialist in family, couple and money issues.

“With the explicit aim of taking the perspective of women… and sparking discussion,” she says, the researcher has reversed the traditional way of presenting gender pay gaps.

Rather than comparing women’s earnings to men’s, the map shows how much more men’s earnings are than women’s. In other words, in this report or this ratio, it is the income of women rather than that of men that serves as the denominator.

This allows at the same time to strike more incisive percentages, although just as exact.

Here is an example from across Quebec.

Median salary of men and women in a couple with children

For each region, the researcher and her team established the proportion of male/female salaries among couples with children.

In Abitibi-Témiscamingue, these women earn on average half the salary of men (49% of the male median salary). Conversely: men earn twice as much as women: 99% more. On the North Shore: 93% more.

What is happening in these regions?

“The explanation is quite simple, says Hélène Belleau. In these regions, there is a lot of exploitation of natural resources, mining, large forestry. »

Fewer opportunities to stretch or multiply working hours, therefore.

At the other end of the spectrum, it is in the Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine region (+33%) and in the Outaouais (+34%) that the gap between men and women is the smallest.

Another factor relates to the proportion of common-law unions among couples with children. Here again, Abitibi-Témiscamingue and the Côte-Nord are among the leaders, those of the regions where the proportion is greater than 60%. At the other end of the spectrum, Montreal has a proportion of 23%.

Cross-reference these data and you obtain a map of the risks run by common-law mothers in the event of separation.

“Get married before you have babies”

Hélène Belleau will not advise common-law couples to flee Abitibi-Témiscamingue or the North Shore. This is not the lesson to be learned from this card. “But I would say to people: get married before having babies,” advises the researcher. “It’s a lot simpler. »

Because that’s where the underlying message is.

Couples married religiously or civilly are subject by the Civil Code to the division of the family patrimony. Common-law couples are freed from it. The common-law mother has no guarantee that the couple’s family home or the savings and retirement plans accumulated during the union will be shared equitably upon separation, when she has often sacrificed years of work or refused promotion to take care of the children.

Who keeps the house?

“In a free union, at the time of a separation, the two spouses are practically considered as strangers, notes Hélène Belleau. There is no family home protection, there is no spousal support. »

The fate of the family home therefore depends on the good will and the respective means of the ex-spouses.

“We realized that when a married couple separates, there are as many men as women who keep the house after the separation. But among common-law couples, there are twice as many men as women who keep it. »

Most often, the spouses, whether they are married or not, nevertheless buy their house in common. “Is it because common-law women can’t afford to buy out their share?” That could be. But we don’t know why. This will be the subject of my next investigation! “, she says.

long term savings

Another layer of difficulty: retirement savings.

“We noticed that among married couples, 48% of people will save together in the longer term, whereas among common-law couples, it’s 26%. This means that even when they say that they manage together on a daily basis, in fact, in the longer term, they manage each for himself. When a separation occurs, when there have been children and the spouse has reduced her working hours, it costs her very dearly because during all the years she has spent taking care of the children, she has couldn’t save. »

This largely explains why women’s retirement income is lower than men’s.

A cohabitation contract?

A cohabitation contract could correct the inequalities. The risk here lies in the fickleness of intentions. “There are many who have the project, but there are very few who do it”, underlines Hélène Belleau.

In addition, the cohabitation contract can be challenged.

“If it is the spouse who has no money who has to demonstrate that she has lost out on family life, does she have the means? For most people, the costs of this kind of lawsuit are so enormous that we don’t do it. »

Some mothers will not want to initiate a dispute for fear of antagonizing the ex-spouse and indirectly harming the well-being of the children.

Despite everything, a cohabitation contract is better than nothing at all.

A free and informed choice?

“Legal experts have long said that people should be given the choice of whether or not to marry,” observes Hélène Belleau. It makes perfect sense, but is it a free and informed choice? »

Let us first shed some light on the point of illumination.

“What emerges from our research, she says, is that this choice is not informed. Half of common-law couples firmly believe that being married or common-law is the same. »

They are wrong.

“The reason for this lack of knowledge is linked to the tax report and social laws, I believe,” says the researcher.

Common-law couples who have lived together for a year will be treated by the tax authorities as if they were married. If a common-law person applies for loans and bursaries or social assistance, government authorities will inquire about the situation of their spouse.

“People have the impression that married or common-law is the same,” she says. Because “it is the information sent by the State”.

Choosing to get married?

Failing to be enlightened, is the choice to marry or not free?

Research conducted by Hélène Belleau and her colleagues shows that in 25% of common-law couples, one of the two spouses did not want to marry.

Among some couples, “it is the spouse who refuses the marriage who has the big end of the stick”, underline Hélène Boileau and her colleagues, in a presentation document.

To justify their refusal, men often mention the cost of marriage.

Hélène Boileau and her colleagues have calculated that by reducing the costs to the strictest regulatory procedures, a civil marriage could cost only $150.

In short, the choice to marry or not “is not really there for everyone”, concludes the researcher. “We expect to have a reform of family law in the fall for de facto spouses. The problem is that lawyers often rely on what they believe to be reality rather than on real sociological data and statistics. »

It will be necessary to marry the law and the facts.