Aibu....is too blinking hard too get a job that fits in with children!

[Muckyhighchair]

a little bit of back story

I've worked all my life started when I was 12 earning money to pay for my horse (it was no job, no horse in my house) all fine.
Left school and started working full time as well as doing a full time college course, fell pengant at 18 and left college (horses and not safe to conitinue)
Had baby went to work as a nurse fine for a few years, ended up leaving due to health reasons.

Went back to work as a home carer which I did for 4 years, lovely at first but as time went on it really started to get to me that I was treated as a slave/maid/bit of scum by both the people I looked after, their family and the office. Ie went to make someone tea, only to find family had done a full 3 course Sunday dinner and left ALL the washing up for me, even though 8 family members had been there.
Ended up again leaving with health issues

Got my self back together and I find a job that fits in with c/care. No I tried working for a retail shop for a few months but got moaned at because I couldn't work Saturday's (even though it was a weekday post) and then after school club was costing me 400 a month when I was only bringing in 700. And on top of that benefits were cut, so I was actully losing money at the end of the month.

And now I can't find a job that fits in without having to use c/care. All jobs seem to want you to work on Saturday's which I can't do as dp has too work, evening work would be ok, but then I don't have bar skills etc, or working as a home carer, which I really don't want to do.

Why is it so hard to find a job, that just fits in with child care! Really need the money but every time I call up a job I get shot back because of having kids!

I can't even get a get a job during school hours because 1 there aren't any and b I'm then stuck at holiday time.

AIBU just to stay at home and claim benefits and say sod it to the job world.

I think you sum it up well Hester. This thread is full of women who are not in a dissimilar position to the op- they've had their fair share of set backs, childcare issues, having to spend all their earnings on childcare, having to work anti social hours etc. What strikes me most though - which is quite heartening- is that many women approach this really creatively, looking for opportunities (eg setting up own business, working from home, getting more qualifications, deciding to put up with short term crap for long term gain etc)

It's about focusing on what you CAN do not what you can't, and remembering that employers are not all out to screw you over. At the end of 'the day they want someone reliable and able to do' the job effectively. Recruiting and training people is costly, and employers don't want to be taking people on just to drop them two months later. And remember Many employers are mums too - struggling to balance their own childcare and balance the books. It doesn't have to be a 'them and us' scenario- its about making yourself as marketable as possible and putting yourself out there and accepting that no Job will meet your exact requirements , you Weigh up the downsides with the upsides. At the end of the day, the employer will pick the person they believe will do 'the job best - why wouldn't they?!- so the onus is on each of us to try to be that person. I know it's hard not to dwell on the negatives, eg when I returned after ML I had some collegues who got all their childcare provided free by grandparents; they also had total flexibility to work early or late (no dashing to catch the nursery at 5.30 and then handing over most of my wages to them). It would have been easy to feel that they had it so much easier than me, but tbh where would that have got 'me? If id jacked my job in, those other women would still have been there climbing the career ladder. Sometimes you just have to take a long term view and invest for the future.

That's exactly WHAT I'm trying to do - but it's not made easy by the lack of childcare available, that fits in with what employers want. It's not so much the downsides versus the upsides as much as the fact that there is NO WAY I can work weekends, and if the employer insists on flexibility, then I am not right for that job as I CAN'T be flexible. I want to invest in my future, but I can't leave my DC at home alone in order to do so....

But thats the backdrop against which most of us operate isn't it? We have to work within the limits of available childcare. Apart from the few who have grandparents on tap to provide free childcare any time. Though tbh I don't think thats the answer- its not right to put grandparents who have already done their years of childcare to do it all over again.

Tbh I am still confused by the op. Apparently she has one 6 and half yr old. How can she end up out of pocket by working? Even on minimum wage, she would make a profit over the year, given that at school age, the majority of working hours cost nothing.

The other point which is odd is that she says she is desperate to work, and would 'shovel shit with her bare hands' (though not care work) but then claims she can only be available 3 days because the after school club is full on the other 2. When someone suggested looking at childminders, the ops response was 'oh, I assumed they were expensive!!' . Surely someone desperate to work would have sounded out all opportunities? You wouldn't wait for someone on MN to suggest that. Childminders wont be expensive anyway- they will charge the going rate for the local area. It may well seem expensive if the after school club is heavily subsidised as many are. But again- it's all a matter of perspective isn't it? Some women will grumble about a cm costing more; others will think 'great, I've had the luxury of cheap after school club for several years, now I'm going to just have to pay the going rate'

And if there's no CM's that take school -age? (like my area?)

The ability to balance work and childcare is enormously variable depending on individual set-up.

Anyone who is completely reliant on professional childcare is going to find it very hard. With the exception of nannies (and even some of these will refuse to care for sick children) a parent is going to have to take time off every single time their child has an illness covered by OFSTED guidelines. When my DTs were 2 I couldn't manage to go more than 3 weeks without taking time off work. Fortunately I have a wonderful, supportive boss (who is a father of 4) and I can work from home, but many people in my situation would have found themselves unemployed. I don't have family to fill the gap and my friends work so they couldn't help either.

Anyone in a rural area is going to find it 10x harder than anyone in an urban area. In my area, for example, no CMs or nurseries are available on the weekends.

IME those who have managed to manage work and children successfully have either had very supportive families or worked at a high enough level to afford a nanny.

In my case I've just been lucky to have worked where I do, but I am under no illusions that that's all it is - luck. I would actually like to change career since I am working well under my qualification and experience level, but due to being a single parent with no family support, I know I cannot make it work. There is only me if one of the DC is sick, childcare falls through, school is shut, etc. That doesn't work with a demanding career and it's a situation that many women find themselves in, even married ones, since the overwhelming attitude in this country is STILL that childcare is primarily the mother's problem and her responsibility to sort out.

And let's not pretend that childcare costs last only a few short years. They don't. My DC will have cost me £150,000 by the time they no longer need any kind of childcare. I am sacrificing eating to pay for my childcare costs, and yes it's worth it IMO, but if I were on NMW type levels I would be starving in order to be losing money...

Childcare is a feminist issue. It takes TWO parents to make a child. It's about time we either changed working practices so that both parents taking responsibility is the norm and flexible working is something that all appropriate employers offer because it's taken up equally by both genders, OR we start subsidising childcare more - like most other countries do (we have some of the most expensive childcare costs in the world).

Loudlass - the people have suggested the op sets herself up as a cm. Or she could plan to move to an area with better prospects and more childcare. Not easy I know- but Many of us move for work. (In my case there were plenty of job opportunities where I was brought up, but I had to move away from any family support network as I couldn't afford house prices there).
No, it's not easy when you rely totally on paid childcare- but no one ever said it was easy, and tbh it comes with the territory as a parent .

Given that 82% of people become parents, shouldn't we be looking as a nation to what we can do to make this easier? The same way we do with health care and education generally?

And TBH it's far more of an issue for female parents than it's ever been or is for male parents.

Yes- extended year long maternity leave, introduction of paternity leave, working tax credits, two days free childcare 'for 3 yr olds... All examples of how it has been made easier over the last couple of decades.

Oh I agree it's all a step in the right direction, and believe me I'm grateful for what has been done.

My point is that there is an awful lot more that can be done and if it wasn't for the fact that this is an issue that mainly affects women, more of it would have been done IMO.

It's not as though women are being handed out charity here. For every man who is working and has a child, there is someone looking after that child. And in most cases it will be a woman, usually unpaid or low-paid. For every single mother, there is a father. Quite often one who is not contributing to the living costs of his child, let alone helping out with childcare costs to enable that mother to work.

Take away mothers and low-paid childcare workers and our economy would completely collapse. That needs greater recognition instead of the rhetoric that SAHMs are "living off" either their partners or sponging off the government. That recognition could and should come from a greater redirection of tax into subsidising childcare, since men would be unable to work without it, even though it is women who are routinely unable to work because of it.

I am starting my own business so I can determine what hours I work and when. Also trying to sort out reciprocal childcare with my SIL so we can support one another when she returns to work for the odd shift soon.

Sunshine, I agree with you, but have to ask why we don't make it a 'mans' issue ourselves.
So there are issues in society, but I think we can all start at home, too. How often do we read on here things like "If I go back to work all my money will go into childcare", "My DP has a demanding job so I can't work/not the hours he does", "My Dh's work isn't flexible so I can only work around him" and so on.
Why would the DH's work be more important? Why do women think they are the only ones responsible for paying childcare?

I think it's time we become more selfish to be honest. So if you go to work you have the same money left over at the end of the month as if you don't-wht should it matter? In the long run it will be more money, or you might just be 'selfish' and want to work etc. All acceptable and we should be more selfish like that.

So if you want to work but can't because of DP-then there is a need for discussion. You both made that baby, you both have to work something out. So maybe he has to reduce his hours, maybe you can both work part time, whatever. I just don't understand why it's constantly women who make sacrifices, make your men chip in!
Why should you take a low paid job that works around school hours even though you have good qualifications and could work in a great job? Why are we as women accepting that throw back career wise to let our husbands stay in their careers?

i am not saying we shouldn't change some things in society but I think we should start smaller and at home. how is attitude going to change overall if we basically always sit back and do not ask our partners to make sacrifices as well?

Well said Toniguy
To add on, surestart centres and after school and breakfast clubs. The fact that employers have to leave a job open for employee on maternity leave but the mother doesn't have to say when she will return until last minute.

I think all these things are fabulous but I also know many women who abuse these rights. Starting a job knowing they are pregnant and will soon take a year off. I also know someone who started with a new company very quickly went on maternity (paid) then returned for a few months did the same thing again and then gave her notice.

I am definitely all for women demanding action at home, and feminist history clearly demonstrates that women only ever achieve greater rights when they fight for it themselves. But that doesn't mean it's solely their responsibility.

Our whole culture is geared up against women developing this attitude. The fact that the finances/maintenance arrangements of separated couples never takes into account childcare costs reinforces the notion that childcare costs are a woman's responsibility (since women make up 92% of single parents). The fact that you never get a SAHD v WOHD like you do for mothers. The fact that even if a woman does say "my job is worthwhile and I expect both of us to pay for childcare from our wages equally" as a household their finances could still be running at such a loss that this principled stance is simply unworkable, even if it would lead to significant long-term gains.

That's why the change needs to be led by government IMO, starting with changes to paternity leave, flexible working for all (since many of us will have to care for elderly relatives as well as DC) and subsidised childcare.

surestart centres are closing and breakfast clubs etc are not free. Help with childcare costs have been cut.

I sort of agree with what you are saying but...

I wonder how women would feel if they got the same treatment as men, for example the courts are heavily biased towards women getting the children in a divorce even if the father desperately wants them and has been wronged by the wife.
I personally know someone who got divorced because she had an affair she got given the family house and kids and the husband got nothing. He then had to support her and the kids while she had the affair bloke almost living there. I have to say I couldn't deal with that situation but many men have to put up with it.

Perhaps it's also about aspirations for our dds and ourselves so that it is worth it for both parents to be at work. I disagree with childcare coming out of the woman's wage and not both. It is workable for us as a family to have these principles because I earn far more than dh. I only got to this position by earning virtually nothing in the early days if you go by the principle of childcare just coming out of my wage.

That's a completely separate issue.

Besides which, the reason the courts tend to routinely award residency to the mother is because there is (fortunately) a recognition that children whose parents are separating tend to do best when they continue to spend most of their time with the parent who was their primary carer before the split. Which in the vast majority of cases is the mother. Residency is about what's best for the children, not about punishing the 'wrongdoing' parent.

If anything, this supports the argument that if we get more men involved in childcare they will get more rights should they separate from the mothers of their children.

I understand why this is the case I am just saying that I wouldn't be able to cope but many men just have to put up with it. In the case I mentioned they had a full time nanny so the mother wasn't the main carer BTW.
You are right though if men did more caring they may end up with more chance.

I think it is quite normal for one career to take precedence whilst children are young, intact to me that would usually make sense.

Do and I have decided that whilst dd is young my career will be the main one. Our readying is that I have the better pension , more job security and a better chance of promotion. I am also more career driven than him. As a teacher I also have the holidays which gives dp a break from taking the lion's share of the housework and childcare. He could earn more, infact he was offered the chafe of a promotion today which he is probably going to have to turn down as it will mean having to use childcare and will mean working away from home.

Of course it need not always be the woman who has to neglect her career.

Hello

Toni, the reason I didn't know about childminding was in fact as I have stated before I used to have family around, but they have know moved on.
I have never had any dealings with childminders before and thought it was a alternative to nursey, not knowing they took on school aged children.

And the reason the after club is so high is because there no competion within the area, they charge what they like.

Having spent the morning on the phone I have know found 2 Childminders but both have limited spaces one only 2 days and the other can't pick up from ds school, so when I get job I'm looking into mixing the childminder with the after school club. However no one does Saturday's and they all apart 1 I called finish at 6.

The ideal as stated is too start up a nursey/school club in my area which I love to do, but have no idea where to start (yes I'm looking inti it) but that then would mean my college course would have to go on the back burner as I wouldn't be able to run and train for a brand new business which I'd have open on Saturday's as there is a demand for in my area, talking with the childminders.

I have before that I can't do childminding myself as my is tiny we don't even have room for a table and chairs, so extra children would be mad.

So doing another bout of cv's this afternoon as ag few have up the net to look at. And as for moving it would be to move out the currant area 1) we are contact, 2) houses to by my are like hens teeth 3) dp doesnt/ can't drive so got to be close to his work, which yes would be great if it had flexibility but it doesn't but he has good chance of movement within the company, and getting a much better wage then I will unless I go uni etc.

So a friend of a friend is meeting me in the city on fri to look at nursey / after school club, she used to a asst ant manager of one before going into teaching.

On wards and up wards

Sunshine, I definitely agree with you in that both working etc is not possible in every family set up and that society has to change.
I just despair with women sometimes who keep saying the things I stated above. I just think that if their husband expects them to take the back seat all the time due to childcare something is wrong and needs to be challenged. I have made it very clear to my DP that I do not want to be at home and that I expect him to compromise as much as me, and that includes his career. Obviously depends on personal circumstances again, but I feel that while I want to change society I think it needs to start at home.

Mucky, I am sorry you are finding it so hard at the moment. I hoped it might be possible for your DH to change his weekend day but if that's not possible you will have to work around that I guess.

It sounds like there is a real lack of child care in your area. Are you sure you couldn't make room somewhere in your house to become a childminder yourself? Change around rooms or something I appreciate this won't be possible in most flats and small places though.
Is there a college or university close by? Could you try and find a reliable babysitter for Saturdays? Maybe someone who studies something childcare related.

I for example worked as an au pair for a year and had year of experience before that, and I am sure you would be able to find a lot of students with that sort of experience. Maybe a mature student if you don't want anyone too young?

WannaBeMarryPoppins - I have to agree with you. But the reason I think why it's a "womans issue" and not a "parents issue" is that we take the majority of the childcare early on and so the burden gets shifted initially onto us and remains with us. If we made parental leave split equally between both parents, you'd find that women would start to earn similar salaries to men (because they wouldn't be expecting different treatment when they had kids to a man) and you'd also find that the burden of childcare shifted to both parents, rather than just one.

But unfortunately most women just see maternity leave as a universal womens right and until we're willing to forfeit that, I don't see the balance shifting.

Yes I agree. I definitely think parental leave should be equally split if the couple wants to do so and think this would be a worthwhile cause to fight for. I am not sure whether it would change society and our outlook on childcare as a womens issue quickly though?

I know that they introduced a law in Germany a while back that both parents can take parental leave, up to three years. I.e. one of them can and they can decide who.
I do remember that it was still mostly women taking it though. I wonder whether that has changed? I will look into it.

"If we made parental leave split equally between both parents, you'd find that women would start to earn similar salaries to men (because they wouldn't be expecting different treatment when they had kids to a man)"

northerngirl, think you are oversimplifying the gender pay gap!

"Yes- extended year long maternity leave, introduction of paternity leave, working tax credits, two days free childcare 'for 3 yr olds... All examples of how it has been made easier over the last couple of decades."

toniguy, few of the policy measures you mention are actually relevant to OP's situation or lots of other single parents' situation. Maternity leave is just one year, and actually, childcare just gets more difficult once kids are older, due to school drop-offs / pick-ups etc. Paternity leave is 2 weeks. Sure Start centres do not provide childcare. etc. etc.

And it is not "2 days free childcare" for 3 year olds. It's up to 15 hours per week, the pattern of which is at the discretion of providers (many of which opt out of the scheme or only offer sessions like 3 hours a day 9-12, or 3 mornings a week), and the hours don't kick in until the term after the child's 3rd birthday - so an April child wouldn't qualify til September. And it's term-time only.