Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

to think that tuition fees will mean fewer women working full time in the future?

43 replies

darleneconnor · 12/12/2010 12:55

Another possible long-term side effect of the changes.

For some people there will be a disincentive to work full time (and repay) when they can work part time (and not repay).

It depends on the pay band people are in, of course.

Maybe some tories people will see this as a good side-effect.

OP posts:

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 13/12/2010 12:24

tinselina - Someone who's job title is 'Nurse' (so qualified and not specialist I presume) earns between 21,176 and 27,534.

So tuition loan repayments would be between £9.12 and £49.01 per month.

Deliaskis · 13/12/2010 12:40

In response to the OP, no, not at all. Those hovering around the threshold will find any payments they do have to make when they slip over it will be so small (in some cases less than £10 a month) that they will be barely noticeable. Those earning significantly more will always be better off earning significantly more.

penfoldgnashers · 13/12/2010 12:52

I'm unlikely to every repay my student loan and it's relatively small compared to the figures being quoted for the new system. It's not the main reason I have for not working full time but it's definitely an additional reason not to slog it out for little extra benefit.

oneortwo · 13/12/2010 12:54

really? we're not repaying ours at the moment but we would be much better off overall if we were in a earning enough to be in a higher repayment catagory!

it won't make us not want to be paid more! that's bonkers?

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 13/12/2010 12:57

penfoldgnashers - under the new system you would pay back even less.

coraltoes · 13/12/2010 13:13

if you borrow, you should pay back...those are the terms of a loan. Rather than looking for ways to avoid repaying! Also, what is the interest on these loans? The longer you take to repay...be it through part time work rathe than full time, the more the total sum outstanding will grow to. Surely that alone is incentive enough to maximise your earning potential and pay back asap?

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 13/12/2010 13:18

coraltoes - No, they aren't like normal loans. You pay back at a rate proportional to your income not the size of the debt, there will be penalties for early repayment, and any outstanding will be written off at retirement.

The intention is for them to have as little impact as possible, and assumes that a proportion will not pay back some/any.

jessiealbright · 13/12/2010 13:46

Penalties for early repayment?

gingernutlover · 13/12/2010 13:54

i went to uni in 1997 and graduated with a 4K debt - I ave never earned enough to start paying it off, before I had my dd i worked full time as a teacher but below the threshold for annual defferment, and now I work part time I am still just below the threshold.

YANBU to hink this might affect omen going back to work full time - it's certainly played a part in my decision to stay part time, mainly due to the amount I have to spend on childcare.

sarah293 · 13/12/2010 13:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

oneortwo · 13/12/2010 14:06

Riven is that not already the case? I thought that university of the third age people that do uni courses had to pay their fees upfront? (maybe I'm mistaken and they all CHOSE to?)

coraltoes · 13/12/2010 14:08

Riven, agree, there should be no age cap on being an elligible "student".

Im surprised about early repayment penalties though. I paid mine off in a large chunk and was not penalised. Seems a bit self destructive a system if that is the case as for every non payer surely the system would welcome an early payer...

tyler80 · 13/12/2010 14:13

The early repayment penalties are to avoid the system being a form of regressive taxation.

coraltoes · 13/12/2010 14:21

Ugh that sounds grossly unfair to those who are suddenly fortunate enough to rid themselves of the debt.

Merlotmonster · 13/12/2010 21:01

why cant women work without having gone to uni??? I never went, yet have a good job in the city...worked my way up from 17.... uni just seems an excuse to have a 3 year piss up (followed by the inevitable gap-year!!)... (and some of the graduates we see are right idiots so probably shouldnt have wasted tax-payers money in the first place!!)

snurrk · 13/12/2010 21:46

I think it might put some women off - after all currently many find that they are worse off or no better off working with young children due to childcare costs. With an extra 9% on their marginal tax rate even more will find themselves in the same situation. And for some of those, even the bigger picture of later earning potential (which will also be reduced by an extra 9% marginal) won't be enough to entice them back to work (or to ft work).

Iheartchristmas · 13/12/2010 21:55

Just a thought, could the higher university fees that indviduals (male or female!) will think more carefully about doing a degree and the type of degree they do??
Rather than those (and i'm not saying everyone) those who do a degree for the sake of it?

snurrk · 14/12/2010 13:00

I don't think so Iheartchristmas - people who do a degree 'for the sake of it' fall into two camps I think. Firstly those who are so passionate about their subject they can't help themselves (musicians, artists) - for most of these as they will be better off under the new system in their chosen low paid careers they are unlikely to be deterred (possibly even more might give it a go). Secondly we have those who go into it with very little or no thought at all (eg forensic science). As they're not really thinking too hard about things, I doubt a bit more debt will make much difference.

Flip

1 2