在1993年家庭與醫療假法頒行之前，美國並無任何國會立法規定私部門雇主必頇提供雇員雙親假之權益，何以在1970與1980年代之際，即有許多私部門雇主自訂產假制度？本文主要研究目的即在，檢視美國產假政策與私部門產假制度採行間的關係，釐清影響私部門先期採納產假制度因素似是而非的迷思，比較行政命令與國會立法對改變雇主先期採納產假制度效力之高低，並藉以了解私部門組織是如何受公共政策、組織環境與市場力量之影響。本研究發現，單一「經濟事務」與「政治事務」理論觀點並不足以說明殆盡私部門雇主早於國會立法採行產假制度之作為，但透過新聞媒體報導、行政命令、司法判例、女權運動與勞動市場女性化等影響因素之加入，確能有助於提高渠等對美國私部門雇主先期採納產假制度行為之解釋力。

The United States had no national family leave policy requiring employers to provide parental leave until the passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993, but in the 1970s and 1980s, many employers had already created maternity leave programs. The purposes of this study are to examine the relationship between the national family leave policy and early maternity leave programs created by private sector, to clarify the paradoxes in explaining employers‘ maternity leave practices, to distinguish the relative efficacy of administrative ruling and federal law in changing employers leave programs, and to understand how employers responded to public policies, organizational environment and market forces. The findings of this study conclude that neither economic nor political affairs theory is best situated to explain employers‘ treatment of maternity in the absence of any government mandate solely; but with the intervening factors of press coverage, administrative and judicial rulings, women‘s movements, industry feminization and trends in feminization can become more influential in illustrating early maternity leave programs provided in private sector in the United States.