To think the government should subside the wages of nursery/preschool staff?

[Bumpitybumper]

I am absolutely shocked about how badly nursery and preschool workers are paid and really feel that the government should intervene in this area in order to raise standards and make these jobs more desirable for talented, motivated individuals.

The current system just doesn't seem to work as SAHPs are the minority as more people need or choose to work. This obviously creates increasing demand for childcare places and therefore staff but these positions are poorly paid, under valued and lack career progression. Most parents either can't afford to pay higher fees and fund higher wages or don't want to as they want to turn a "profit" from working even if they are in relatively low/averagely paid jobs.

I think if most parents were honest we would hope and expect the staff at our childcare providers to be motivated and diligent but if we had adult children with these traits I think we would be encouraging them to enter other professions with more opportunities and better pay. Surely we therefore realistically are looking at a situation where the majority of childcare workers will be those who are lacking skills and motivation and have no better opportunities (and as almost every other field pays more for a comparative level of responsibility there are a lot of "better" opportunities out there).

This seems madness when the vast majority of parents would rank their children as the most important people in their lives and would recognise that their care in the formative years is really important. AIBU unreasonable to think the government must step in here?

@AnnieAnoniMoose
But lots of parents can't or don't want to be SAHPs. Do you think these parents should be forced to be SAHPs or be forced to put their children in childcare with underpaid, undervalued staff?

I am noy asking because you have offended me as I am a SAHM who is lucky enough to have a toddler in a preschool with fantastic staff however I think the amount they are paid for the job they do is nothing short of scandalous. Nobody could live on that salary! I also think that people should have the choice to return to work if they should so wish and for this to be a good option then they need good childcare options.

Also I found these stats interesting:

• 94% of children who achieve a good level of development at age five go on to achieve the expected levels for reading at key stage 1, and they are five times more likely to achieve the highest level
• pupils who start off in the bottom 20% of attainment at age five are six times more likely to be in the bottom 20% at key stage 1 compared to their peers

Bad childcare between 0-4 could potentially have a big impact in the longer term.

Childcare workers need a grade 2 or 3 qualification.
Like any other job you can go to uni, gain a degree and go for better paid positions, and make a career out of it, like nursery manager.
I know they are needed by some parents, but children come with free childcare in the form of a parent.
Childcare workers aren't undervalued they are paid the min wage like most other people who don't have a higher education qualification.
It's a very low bar to gain work in this field, a couple of GCSE's is enough, if you don't leave school with Maths and English you take a level 2 at college.
If you have the old D this is acceptable.

you actually have to have a min of level 2 and there needs to be a level 3 at all times.

level 5 and 6 will be management.

level 3 and up you can actually teach in reception in school as well.

childcare isnt one where a high turn over of staff is good for children.

level 3 and up you can actually teach in reception in school as well

What? Level 3 is A level standard, isn’t it? You can’t teach in a reception class in a school unless you are a teacher.

Unless it’s an academy who can employ anyone they fancy in any position, except the senco, I believe-who by law, has to be a qualified teacher.

Yes yabu, there are two main factors for why wages are low. One is supply and demand for staff and the second is parents generally wanting the cheapest possible childcare. Any nursery that pays their staff a decent wage would be priced out of the market immediately

holiday you can teach as a Level 3 TA to cover teacher PPA time.

Why are you shocked early years is the one sector we’re private nursey staff get paid less than council staff

Why should the government sibseide Nursey staff they already help pay for the actual childcare

Anyone can cover PPA in any year group-LSAs who have just started with no qualifications do it at my school. They are cheap, that’s why.

I don’t consider that equivalent to being qualified to teach in a reception class. Why do you specifically say in reception?

I worked in this field when young. Most intelligent staff moved on because the wages were so low. And unless you have your own kids, then these wages are rarely subsidised by benefits.

@Ohhdear
Supply and demand of what though? I would argue that the demand for dedicated, motivated, talented nursery nurses massively outstrips supply. The fact that there may be technically enough bums to fill seats doesn't mean that this demand has been met.

And market forces may well be an issue but that's because so many people struggle to pay for childcare full stop, this would also be the case for education at other ages if parents had to pay. Obviously it doesn't make sense for people to go to cheap primary/secondary schools full of underpaid staff so why are we happy to do exactly that with younger kids? Do we think the ages 0-4 don't matter?

And qualifications are known to raise the standard of care provided.

NIC and income tax both go into the same pot of money, they just have different rules on how they're calculated. So the effective tax rate on wages is 32% at the basic rate, 42% higher rate, 47% additional rate.

Plus another 13.8% on top paid by the employer. So that's 45.8% in tax take on a basic rate salary for the government.

NIC isn't ring fenced or put in a separate NHS or pension pot, even if your contribution years are used to determine your eligibility for social security and pensions.

Besides which, if workers were paid more they would pay more tax themselves, they would have more money to spend and invest in economic growth, more spending means more VAT revenue, higher wages means less reliance on social security, people less exhausted by being on the breadline means fewer support services and other resources need to be used...

An economy (and society) isn't the same as a household budget.

And if everyone just chose not to have children then we'd all be screwed.

I mean the opposite to what you think. Nursery staff are easily replaceable, the qualifications required mean there are many people looking for nursery jobs. There’s no incentive for a nursery to retain the kind of individuals you are talking about because they come at a premium, a premium which many parents are unwilling to pay for. There just isn’t enough money in the government pot to subsidise this and the pay for the subsequent regulation that would come with ensuring value for money

There’s no incentive for a nursery to retain the kind of individuals you are talking about because they come at a premium

This is exactly the same situation schools are finding themselves in now with the extreme funding cuts. Two experienced teachers cost the same as three NQTs. We need three teachers to put in front of 3 classes, so are forced to value cheapness over experience. Those NQTs then cannot progress up the pay spine as there is no budget for them to do so so they are stuck.

When budgets are tight, experience and qualifications are not value for money, sadly.

@Ohhdear
The "pot" can increase though to fund things that are deemed to be important enough. I think parents that can afford to contribute more should do so but there will be many families that simply can't. Children are expensive and although I can see why people without children can feel resentful about subsidising other people's kids, surely most people can see how vital it is that the next generation recieve a good start in life? Lots of these children are spending the majority of their waking hours in these places with these staff so they are going to have a huge impact on their formative years.

If there is a general acknowledgement that a low barrier to entry combined with poor conditions and pay means thay it's unlikely that nurseries will attract the calibre of worker that would give our (society's) children the best start in life then surely this is worth looking at?

Personally, I would much prefer any spare money that the government has to be spent on other things, and for parents to be the primary carers for all 0-4 years old. The push to get these very young children into nurseries, often for extremely long days, seems much more problematic to me than nursery staff being on low wages. I'd rather the government looked at things like extended maternity leave and increased tax credits for sahps.

0-4 absolutely does matter, but realistically I don't think you do need the same level of qualifications to support a predominantly play based environment in a nursery, as you do to teach in a full blown educational environment.

Some of our best staff have been the least qualified - and our worst was the most qualified. By a country mile.

Note - I am in no way saying no qualifications required but there has to be a degree of pragmatism and making everything degree level (as is increasingly the trend) helps nobody.

What seems to have happened with free provision of nursery places is similar to a number of other services introduced in recent years that are free to the person taking them up, in that the budget provided by government is woefully inadequate.

I guess it depends on whether the activities children are doing and the skills children are picking up in those initial 4 years are deemed important enough to invest in

The problem is that the government have tied providers hands by advertising to parents that they can have 30 hours free childcare on the one hand but not giving settings enough to cover costs let alone raise wages and just to make it worse said that you can't charge a top-up. Have a lovely at the Facebook page Champagne Nurseries on Lemonade Funding if you're interested.

Except for kids who are already falling behind, investing in high quality under fives care makes a lot of sense. Won't happen though.

Nursery owners around here are minted. Seriously minted. They all drive range rovers and spend their lives on amazing holidays. I think the industry definitely charges high costs, pays its staff the minimum and pockets the rest. Awful but that UK child care for you!

Sadly highly qualified staff at degree level will not usually want to work in private nurseries because the salary offered is disgraceful. Early Years needs a complete rethink. It will never be an attractive career for many due to pay, long hours and lack of respect.

Early Years Teachers holding Early Years Teacher Status (EYTS) and its predecessor Early Years Professional Status (EYPS) are graduates, who must have a degree and EYT/ EYPS. They are level 6 and can work on a 1:13 ratio in a nursery or pre school with 3_5 year old children at certain times of the day. They would be likely on minimum wage and cannot teach in a maintained school.

An Early Years Teacher with QTS (and possibly EYTS/EYPS) can choose to teach in early years in school or a nursery. Most would choose school because of the better salary. They are also level 6 if in a nursery or pre school.

Legally there has to be at least one level 3 (broadly equivalent to A level) or above (e.g. level 4 or 5) member of staff in each age group and half of all other staff must hold a level 2 Early years qualification that is recognised.

Private Nursery, Pre_School, Maintained Nursery Class in School or Childminder all are required to follow the same early years curriculum. The EYFS.

Early Years matters, qualified Teachers at graduate level EYTs or QTS are critical to raising the quality of early years education in nurseries, but until the sector or The Government recognise this and suggest a national pay scale it will remain low paid and undervalued.

We need state run nurseries!! You can give the private nurseries all the extra funding
you want the money will just end up in the owners’ pockets!! That’s how privatisation works and that is what’s wrong with this country. Instead of throwing money at private companies that just find ways to kee
the profits the government should use the funding to set up its own nurseries. That way it would have better control over finances and understanding of demand etc.