To wonder what working parents are meant to do in school holidays?

[StepAwayFromGoogle]

DD1 starts school in September. DP and I both work because we can't afford for either one of us to be off. I have applied for part time but my work have been spectacularly backward and refused point blank, which is a whole other thread. I am looking for another job but work in a very specific field in a very specific industry so it's not looking likely that I'll get something, much less part time.
DD1 school have a before and after school club which is over subscribed so she won't get in for the first year. We have scrabbled around and managed to cover the week with GPs and a childminder.
So on to the holidays. DD1 will have 13 weeks off school a year. Between us, me and DP will have just under 10 weeks holiday. AIBU to think that if the govt wants parents (particularly mothers) to work then there needs to be better holiday provision? I'm not blindingly sure what working parents are expected to do after 3pm every day and for the 13 weeks children are off in the year. At the moment all our holiday days will be spent covering time off school and we won't be able to have a holiday together as a family.

Make sure you're organised with your leave requests, OP. When I managed a team, generally it was the parents that put in their requests late and expected others to change theirs. It's not how most on MN seem to work so hopefully it was just cultural in that office!

I'm childfree and take time off to spend time with nieces and nephews etc. I had 2 weeks in the summer off last year to go away with a friend after she split with her husband. It went down like a sack of shit!

Friend and her children.

Yes its difficult and arguably unfair, but you knew this would happen when you chose to have children so I don't really see why you're deciding to complain now when you knew this situation would arise before

Where are you getting the information that OP knew before TTC that she would be unable to purchase holiday childcare, despite having the money to do so? Her posts say something quite different.

Personally I would prefer the holidays to be more spread out, rather than a six week block, as I think you get diminishing returns after 3 weeks or so, and they
get outof sorts, but August is the quietest month at work, and it gives people the chance to visit family abroad etc for a longer period. As you say, you can't please everyone.

We’re on the same page then solo

I’m guessing though that I’m probably older than you? I’m mid 50s and have seen first hand how much better things are now from when I had my babies... better maternity and paternity rights (actually paternity leave didn’t even exist when I had babies ) right to take planned parental leave, right to request flexible working... all the things that were hard fought for by my generation. And going back to previous generations, the right for women to even work at all once they’d become parents. And then of course there’s the funded hours from age 3, the childcare subsidies for low income workers... none of these things existed until relatively recently.

So I see this as a journey, whereby legislation has improved massively over my lifetime. There may be a way to go but honestly things are way better. If anyone told me when I had my dd that by the time she had kids she’d be able to take a year off work I’d have honestly laughed in their face. When my friends and I were returning to work with 12 week old babies it would have seemed impossible that things could improve so much .

It just feels as though there’s a bit of a backwards movement from a people who don’t want to capitalise on what the govt is already offering. And the irony is, if the shared parental leave option was ended, you can bet there would be uproar from people saying ‘what about equality.’ Use it or lose it, really, isn’t it. By all means campaign for even better childcare and affordability, but if people don’t use what’s already on offer then the future doesn’t look great

trouble is a lot of employers still think that family friendly only means children.

It also means elderly parents or ill spouses but its still not seen as being as important.

Acciocat - I agree - things really are much better! I'm glad you have reminded us of that. I can remember how difficult it was for me in the mid-90s as a single parent working full-time, with my youngest child.

So things are getting better ... But even though there are many more options for working families, why is it still so hard? The only way I can answer that is what I said before: the government has to step in, and use tax payers' money to subsidise more early years education.

And I'm older than you ... .

Through holiday clubs my dcs have learnt to ride (dd) and sail (ds). In the next 2 years these skills will enable them to do interesting, relatively well paid holiday jobs. I wouldn't have been able afford for them to do either of these if I wasn't working, but very much would have wanted them to have these opportunities. They cost £15 per day (riding) and £100/ week (sailing) so not extortionate.

My way round it is shifts. I couldn't do 9.5. The stress of organising childcare would finish me off

No need to feel sorry for them "stuck" in holiday club.

@acciocat not disagreeing with you, but I think part of the reason ShPL isn’t taken up is because occupational parental pay hasn’t caught up yet. When I took mat leave, my occupational mat pay was much higher than maternity allowance, so it would have made no economic sense for us to have shared leave and lose my DHs salary for MA. Until the shared leave makes economic sense, we’re not going to see better take up. I’m also imagining that, at this point, men might worry about how taking shared parental leave might affect career progression.

My DH is from a Scandinavian country and all his family are there (we live in UK). The culture there is very family orientated. It’s frowned upon for anyone to ‘work late’ and it’s not an expectation to put in extra hours. Parental leave is 12months paid, shared however you like between parents. We have friends who have taken 6 months each to SIL took 12 months herself. After the 12 months, there is quality, subsidised, state owned and funded childcare. Formal education doesn’t start till 6/7. My SIL pays £200 a month for full time childcare. When the kids start school, there’s provision after school until the end of the typical working day (5pm), like forest school, sorts, music, drama, art, cooking clubs.

childfree ppl are going to become very resentful if asked to contribute more while still being treated as lesser (see previous threads about Christmas/Boxing Day working ) and then being told they cant have time off and basically get hints that their ill husband is a bit of a malingerer as he isnt a child so cant really need care or be ill (yes this happened to me)

Family friendly needs to mean the whole family not just kids.

Just to be clear I'm talking about clubs ran from school halls with minimum wage staff who arguably don't want to be there themselves. I'm not talking about special interest holiday groups or outdoor activity centres.

(see previous threads about Christmas/Boxing Day working )

meaning threads posted by different MNers

Solo- nice to hear from someone even older than me

Yes that must have been even tougher for you as a single parent.

I think it has to come from both sides... govt help, but parents then using that help.
Just imagine for a moment, if 50 % if couples used shared parental leave... I think if that were the case we’d have seen a massive positive societal shift already. Dads would have a far better insight into what it’s like being sole carer. The challenges of it, how isolating it can be and also how relentless to read the same story umpteen times, or to give your child their blanket, feed them, change their nappy and still not know why they’re crying! As well as all the joys and pleasures of time being sole carer. And how nice for mums to know that they have a few months easing back into the workplace without the morning rush to drop their child at nursery because dad is at home. I think any very temporary financial shortfall (and we’re talking minimal because I doubt many women would transfer more than 3-6 months) would be more than compensated for by the benefits. Because I expect the benefits would continue long after both parents have returned to work, simply because of that first hand experience.

And think of the knock on in the work place... imagine if every time a bloke said his wife was pregnant, it was a natural assumption that there would be a strong chance that man would be taking a few months out of the workplace... it would be such a step forward in equality. And all of this has been perfectly possible for several years now.

I can’t do anything about it as an individual because my child bearing is long past. I really hope my ds and dd consider it though if they decide to have children

Kolo- interesting. genuine question though... when a couple have a baby there is going to be a financial impact whatever. The mum is going to have to take ML (however minimal she decides to take she will need some time off.) They will then need to pay for childcare once both parents are back at work. Or, if they choose, one parent will give up work to be a SAHP. So there is a huge financial impact whatever. So why is the (relatively) small impact of shared parental leave such a barrier? I’m genuinely confused. Compared to what the parents will be paying once the child is in nursery it’s really not significant. You’re talking 3 months, maybe 6 months at most when they are on a lower income than if the mum continued at home. In my view, the massive long term benefits of dad having that time as sole carer would far outweigh the financial impact. If anything, it’s a bit of a lead in to getting used to being on a lot less money with both parents working!

I’m just interested because I honestly thought when the govt introduced this that the take up would be higher and I hoped it would be a massive step forward towards equality. It’s so disappointing that it isn’t. For children as much as the parents IMO. How great would it be for young children to experience dads taking time out to care for them as a matter of routine...

The thing is the simplest clubs are the ones that most closely replicate the old fashioned playing out that is so good for kids. At after school club my dd plays with a mixed age group in a church hall with a big garden and attached green. There’s craft on offer, and some toys and games, and she’s fond of the staff, but it’s quite unstructured and it’s where she exercises most of her creative skills- forming secret clubs, putting on shows, making books or whatever. You need to be a little bit bored before you start to entertain yourself and my dd prefers to do this with other children rather than on her own. at home she doesn’t so much. She comes to look for me, asks for snacks, the telly, screens, bickers with her sister and I end up taking her out for another day out somewhere.

If we lived somewhere they could play out unsupervised I would kick her outdoors and let her find her own fun, but holiday and after school club is a close substitute, so I deliberately mix this in with the fancier clubs you mention, and she often picks it, given the choice, even wheb grandparent care is an option, though she enjoys this too sometimes. Variety is good, but endless days at home wouldn’t suit my dd1.

If shared parental leave could be split so both parents work part time each for a while I think that would be better. I didn’t want to work full time when my baby was tiny, and couldn’t afford to live on one part time income. We ended up doing part time each without using the shared parental leave and I am surprised more people don’t. It’s more tax efficient, which counteracts the fact both parties are taking a risk with career progression, and is more equitable. It’s becoming more common where I live for dads to go part time, and in the civil service where I work, but it’s not yet equal.

It's a shock of sh*t in my opinion, in the UK. We had our two in France, and both went to nursery and school there for 3 years. Drop off and pick up are designed around working families (whole other discussion point as a SAHM is very unusual in central Paris, where one is expected to return to work after 3 months' mat leave).
But, childcare is subsidised and means tested, and we lag woefully behind here. Our only workable solution is au pairs who live in. We are just about to welcome our fifth one so far and they've worked out well overall. It's a give and take. You do lose privacy but then again, you gain loads in other ways. The children love them (considering us "very popular with au pairs"), and get an insight into other cultures and getting on with people who aren't just mum and dad. We don't have the good fortune of family nearby sadly, and both of us need to travel a fair bit for work which puts us outside of usual childcare hours often.

We did that too longestlurkerever. There's a lot of focus on shared parental leave in these conversations, but it's only for a short period and does cover a time where many women will be dealing with health complications relating to pregnancy and birth and with feeding. Not all women would actually be sufficiently fit for work to give up any of the paid leave. Whereas this gets less likely as the children are older.

Take up SPL is certainly worth discussing, but equally it's very far from being the be all and end all. Even with one child, there's at least a decade where some level of childcare is needed. If you have two or three it might be quite a bit longer, depending on age gaps. I think the SPL issue might be over-emphasised when we talk about parents, childcare, careers etc. I suppose because it's easy data we have access to. But I'd like to know more about what happens later too.

My children loved the holiday club run at their primary school. They had their friends there and was familiar and near home. It was cheaper too because they run for less hours. They are too old for those now and I have to send them to a " proper" holiday camp that charges for 8 hours. It's a lot of fun but it's tiring for them. Unfamiliar environment and people and so many activities... They don't need that much fun...

Sitdownstandup - I agree SPL isn’t the be all and end all. But I do think it’s significance goes far beyond the actual time taken using it. I believe a big take up would have marked a paradigm shift in thinking and how society views mums and dads in their caring responsibilities and in the work place.

I also disagree that ‘many’ women would still be suffering from health complications to the extent it would prevent them from returning to work. There are always exceptions to the rule so ok there would be a small minority who suffered awful birth injuries and are unfit to work. But it’s exaggeration to say ‘many.’ The feeding thing too is a red herring because babies are weaned from 6 months and we’re talking probably most women transferring the final 3 or 4 months. Besides, as has been mentioned many times, women managed back in the day when they got only 3 months, and later extended to 6 months, ML. And many of us were long term breast feeders too. So it’s simply not true that vast swathes of women physically cannot be back at work after say, 8 or 9 months off.

I agree that the childcare issue extends far beyond the first year of life. But I also think that patterns which are established early, have far reaching benefits. If SPL were the norm, I would bet my bottom dollar we’d see a pretty fast shift in attitudes and govt support towards childcare later on.

Oops rogue apostrophe there

I didn't say many women would be suffering from complications that would prevent them from returning. Plus some maternity leave on health grounds is taken pre baby when the issue of returning cant arise. You're applying the wrong test.

It's about whether the woman's physical experiences of pregnancy, birth and feeding make it a less attractive option for her to go back because of them. Put bluntly, women on maternity leave are often able to work if they had to, but also sufficiently physically compromised that it would be harder for them than their partners. With the one of mine that was more straightforward and didn't require early ML, I reckon I wouldve been capable of going back to work, commuting etc around maybe 15 weeks if I'd had to. I was also in worse physical shape than DH at that point. Now this will depend on the individual couple, baby, commute, job etc, but the situation I describe isnt unusual. This is often characterised as women selfishly refusing to share the leave, but the reality is that for some of us, the physical aspects take a significant enough toll to be a factor. The existence of women for whom this isn't the case doesnt negate that.

And the fact that you're betting is kind of my point. We dont really know. Though I suppose it is still very new, I've got a preschooler who was born before the new system came in.

Well I said I would report back honestly how holiday club went today. She’s only just back because she was invited to go back to her friend’s house for tea and begged to be allowed. That was probably the highlight of her day, to be fair, and I couldn’t drag her home. She said the rest was good, kind of. They did a lego competition (she brought her model home) and got the bus to the apple store for an activity (designing an emoji), ate their picnic lunch and played. That’s all the info I got from her.

I don’t think she had the time of her life, but she certainly wasn’t miserable, and it was a free day out. She keeps asking what she is doing tomorrow with her grandma. When I said “ I dunno, we haven’t planned anything, staying at home I guess” she looked disappointed and says she wanted to go to the trampoline park. The thing is the trampoline park ends up being about £25 plus travel and only lasts an hour. Not every day can be a trampoline park day, and even fewer would be if I didn’t work. Sometimes days are just days, rather than magical, and that’s ok, surely?.