"Can't afford to go back to work"

[sphinxa]

Genuine question ...

I often see people saying they couldn't afford to go back to work because of the cost of childcare when they only have 1 child.

The minimum wage is over £7 and the average cost of a nursery is £5/hr. There's tax free child care or vouchers to reduce that cost.

So what do people mean when they say "my wage wouldn't cover childcare costs"?!

When I went back after my 2nd child, I had two under two and after childcare costs I think I came out with about £50 a month. We decided it was still worth going back to work for the benefits of maintaining my own career, pension contributions, autonomy... and eventually when the kids get their free hours we'll be laughing (hopefully).

If people want to stay at home that's great but do people use "can't afford" instead of "want to be a SAHM"?

We sat down and worked it out. Even though we were splitting the cost of the nursery, it would still leave me -£237 a month. In a job I hated and was being bullied in. I chose not to return to work and take the hit of paying back additional maternity pay.

As it happened I actually claimed for constructive dismissal, won and part of the settlement was me not having to pay back additional maternity pay.

Not everyone has access to childcare for £5 an hour OP, and even when they do manage to find childcare there are incidental expenses associated with it.

You're being naive, if you have a career to maintain your position in maybe you can justify only taking home £50 while your dc are young. Not everyone is in that position, if I hadn't had a career to maintain, no way would I have gone to work in an ordinary job for such a tiny amount. Also you aren't taking in to account the additional.costs pp have mentioned like travel, clothing, food etc. So some people would end up paying more.

Most nurseries don't give you an option to pay by hour, only full day or half day. What about people who don't have set hours?

I can't believe that a little more thinking around the subject doesn't result in the realisation that not everyone has the same experiences and circumstances as each other...

" am always astonished that people are happy to spend £10-£15 an hour for a cleaner "

I suppose those people aren't paying the cleaner's travel costs and travel time though so the per hour wage will be higher for someone who has to make the effort to come to you for a couple of hours than for someone who works full time in the same place. Plus, the cleaner is presumably self-employed and paying her/his taxes out of that as well.
(It's also more than I earn so I'm not sure people where I live pay their cleaners this much).

chopc I stayed home until DS started school and relied on government benefits. I couldn't care less what you or others think of that.

Also love the fact that the person who started this thread didn’t realise you pay tax on the £7 an hour so that it’s not as simple as nursery being £5 an hour and you getting the money leftover.

Cleaners earn minimum wage where I live. Then most other people earn up to a pound more an hour than minimum wages - shop, factory, secretaries, teaching assistants, admin, data entry, call centres, assistants, theatre/cinema staff, cooks, waitresses, photographers, small business owners, post office etc etc all on less than £9 a hour.

£50 a month is less than public transport per week

I've done the calculator and with 2 DCs under 3 I can only afford to be P/T due to childcare costs until oldest hits 3 hour funding

It's not a myth. It's the maths.

Then you have to then look at the social costs. So whilst your career would be benefitted, your family life would be diminished. Also, people who have a job compared with people who have a career may feel very differently.

Going to work costs money in commuting costs, lunch costs, work clothes, etc.

I work with quite a few women with high-earning husbands and these ladies always, alwats, invariably pay for childcare. I do not understand why it’s not a shared cost.

In addition, their husbands typically see their wives’ salaries as a bit of pocket money that they shouldn’t have to work too hard for, leaving the rest of us working harder than them to get things done.

This is really fucked up.

I wish I paid £5 an hour too

Always been fixed rate for session eg. Per day or half a day. Never come across anywhere I can have the exact times I need. So an extra couple of hours would cancel out any earnings.

There’s a lot of middle class snobbery in this thread.

As I’ve said before, there is a whole demographic of people (nurses, police, teachers, lectures etc) who earn enough to be middle earners but don’t qualify for the extra help (beyond child benefit) who struggle to pay for childcare and work full time without additional family assistance.

Anecdotally, my middle class mummy circle (start sneering now middle class mummy haters) mainly works part time because of lack of available family support and not being able to afford full time childcare for two. Lots of them would really like to get on with their careers and work full time but have to wait until at least one child is school age and the other is on 30 hours.

This is down to a number of factors- stagnated wages, house price inflation, rising food prices, rising travel costs etc. Where I live is rural and most people commute to bigger cities. Homes aren’t that affordable here. But some people are stuck because they have family help in the area and some people are stuck because their DH works in the opposite direction and here is the middle.

So nurseries will need to make savings somewhere and less profit if they want to keep customers

all the nurseries around here have waiting lists and people really struggle to find a space because they are so busy!
The staff makes no profit, just earn minimum wage. How much does your nursery really cost you an hour? That hourly rate covers the facilities, bills, staff, insurance, sometimes even the food and nappies... Of course it's a shared cost with the other parents, but nurseries are really not a profit-making machine.

Child minders earn even less!

Around here, cleaners charge between £12 and £15 an hour... and are in shortage too!

these ladies always, alwats, invariably pay for childcare. I do not understand why it’s not a shared cost

it is, but it still makes no difference!
Husbands earns £2000 a month (after tax if you want to be generous)
Wife earns £1000 a month after tax

childcare costs £1000 a month. Makes no difference if you say family money is £3000-£1000: £2000
or wife earns £1000-£1000:0 so family money is £2000

OP you don't seem to have thought about this much at all

firstly I don't know anyone who pays £5 for childcare

secondly you haven't factored in any travel costs or associated work costs, or commute time

despite many posters pointing this out, you don't want to acknowledge those factors.

So we're still very firmly in a world where in almost all of these posts the mother is earning far less than the father? It's never of benefit for the father to give up work?

The PP whose ex wasn't paying any childcare cost, which is another post, he's preventing her from having a career (if she wishes) by proxy!!

Wanting to be a sahp is great but if there's so much "can't afford but want to work" what is happening?

-Men are still out earning women.
-Childcare costs are too high.

• Women still make up a high % of the unskilled workforce.

Your calculations don’t seem to take into account tax, pension contributions, travel etc?

I’m a midwife. If I went back to my previous role where I did a mixture of community (8-4) and hospital (7-8) shifts, plus a 45 minute commute each way, never mind all the unpaid overtime I did, there is no way we could afford the childcare. DH works a mixture of shifts in his job too (leaves the house shortly after 4am several mornings per week but also does the occasional 3-11pm shift and some 9-5ish days) so we just couldn’t make it work unless we had a full time nanny or a childminder who could potentially do any hours between 6am and 9pm with no pattern or regularity!

Luckily we have some family help and I’m going to reduce my hours.

I'm acknowledging all the points and have become more aware of different situations of the posters on MN (which I always perceived as middle class). I'm not sure where I was arguing with anyone!

Asked a question... got responses... have a new view point. 👍🏻

And for the record... I don't pay £5/hr childcare. That's what a quick google search told me the national average was.

So we're still very firmly in a world where in almost all of these posts the mother is earning far less than the father? It's never of benefit for the father to give up work?

I actually have, in theory, higher earning potential than DP, who works for NMW. We both had significant time off work (he was between jobs) when DS was born, and decided he was the better placed of the two of us to return to work, knowing we wouldn't gain much financial benefit from both of us working. While he works for NMW, he's got more options in what he does within his field, in terms of who is hiring, and my background means I'm more comfortable with doing the bulk of childcare.

Women still make up a high % of the unskilled workforce

I'd guess this is more true after having children. So many women take jobs below their skill level because these are the ones where the employer is willing to allow part time work. Unless you are both fantastically high earners and can afford a nanny, who the children will be happy with and feel attached to, families realistically need one parent or another who has some degree of flexibility. If you are very senior you can negotiate for this because you are so valuable that you can call the shots. If you are very junior you can probably find part time work. If you are about 30ish and starting a family you are likely to not be high enough up the ladder to call the shots.

Women's childbearing years unfortunately coincide with the time when people are starting to climb higher.

OP- what do you mean by ‘middle class’? You seem to be assuming a lot about people based on your very cliched vision of how certain people live.

So we're still very firmly in a world where in almost all of these posts the mother is earning far less than the father?

well, as the mother is the one who HAS TO take maternity leave, yes, it usually is. You can share parental leave later on, but she is still the one popping out the child.

It also make no difference if you make the calculation with identical salaries anyway:
husband earning 1500, wife earning 1500, childcare 1000, family money still 2000 anyway...

DS came “home” with lots of “the additional options” that go with being a micro preemie. We couldn’t find childcare that was prepared to take him. If we had I doubt very much we would have been able to afford it!

DH worked shifts & I worked long days, no over-time, 2 counties over from where we live

I work almost full time hours, term time only.
My household income only increases in the school holidays when I don’t pay for childcare. I do it because childcare costs will decrease over time and eventually it will be worth it. And because August is awesome lol

There’s a subsection of people whose household income means they are not eligible for any financial assistance from the state, but their individual job doesn’t pay more than childcare and travel costs.

I find it a bit depressing that so many women appear to earn so much less than their husbands, even before they have taken time out to look after their children.