To ask what employers will think when people refuse to send their kids back to school?

[ArgumentativeAardvaark]

Quite a lot of people on MN are business owners or senior managers. The general mood seems to be shifting towards parents deciding not to send their kids back to school when they re-open.

Many employers have, rightly, been happy to make allowances for employees working at less than full ability/hours while they have had children at home needing care. Do you think that tolerance is likely to change if an employee has school or nursery available but chooses not to use it?

My nursery WhatsApp group has mums saying that they aren't sending their children back on 1 June. Everyone else hasn't said one way or the other. Same with people on fb (nursery and school users). So my impression would be that it's very heavily anti returning on 1 June. But that could be that anyone who is planning on sending them back isn't saying so due to all the "it's too early" people making them feel like it's the wrong decision.

I think much will depend on how parents wfh have managed this on whether the employers will have issues.
If they haven't had children present on conference calls, haven't reduced their output significantly etc. Then they're less likely to have an issue or indeed even realise if opt not to send.
If however that hasn't been the setup, then yes they're not going to necessarily as amenable.
Those that are shielding employers won't really have a reason not to continue as it would be potentially discriminatory.

@TorysSuckRevokeArticle50
The CEO is based out of the US and has said that with global differences they cannot and do not expect for people to have their children in childcare and as long as everyone continues to deliver against their objectives they're fine with it.

If this is conditional on people continuing to deliver against their objectives then the employer is not making any allowances.

On the assumption that the objectives have not been tweaked, of course.

@DahliaDay
I am glad you said it first, I actually typed it in one of my previous responses, but then thought I'd be shouted at and deleted
It is quite sad to see that amongst all the managers / business owners I know, the "good guys" seem to be now in most trouble. The ones who hired single parents and people with serious medical needs with no second thought.

Thing is it’s not the employers problem if there’s no childcare
If schools are open and parents ‘chose’ not to send the kids in then those parents will be first on this when redundancies happen

Harsh but true

If this is conditional on people continuing to deliver against their objectives then the employer is not making any allowances

as long as they are not imposing strict working hours - unless strictly necessary for the business - of course they are.

If strict working hours are not necessary for the business then the employer loses nothing by ditching them, so it’s not making any allowances.

And if they are necessary for the business then they will form part of the objectives.

My business is looking to make redundancies...............So sadly anyone not able to work for childcare will be first on the list

I think that is classed as discrimination so your business may well have a number of unfair dismissal claims if that is the criteria they are basing their redundancies on.

I am not a boss but I would fire anyone who didn't come in for this reason for gross negligence. Want a tribunal? Good luck getting one sorted before you take any job you can find.

I think that is classed as discrimination so your business may well have a number of unfair dismissal claims if that is the criteria they are basing their redundancies on

Days off work for whatever reason are used in the redundancy matrix.

@pennylane83 employment lawyer here : in these circumstances it wouldn’t be discrimination as the school would be open and available and the parent was making a choice not to utilise it. If they weren’t sending DC because they were shielding and then lost their job then one could possibly advance a disability discrimination claim if reasonable adjustments (like working hours) weren’t made. If reasonable adjustments weren’t possible then the employee could be legally dismissed.

Not an employer but someone working in a job where lots of my colleagues have children at home and therefore haven't been completing as much work during lockdown. Whilst they have not had any other option I have (slightly begrudgingly) picked you the slack (despite this meaning I work more hours, and complete more tasks than them for the same pay).

If parents choose not to send their children back and therefore continue to be less productive I will be making a formal complaint. It is not my job to facilitate their childcare by picking up there extra work, especially when there is an open alternative.

@ArgumentativeAardvaark neither I nor my colleagues think it unreasonable that we are expected to continue to deliver the same productivity in return for incredible flexibility.

Yes it's hard fitting in a full time job around parenting a 6 year old, yes it means starting early and finishing late but it also means I have lots of breaks and time to spend with my daughter.

There are some meetings that can't be moved and I make sure I attend those and find ways to occupy DD so I can fully participate.

I'm extremely happy with the concessions my employer has made to give me job security and allow me to care for my child.

It's has engenders a sense of loyalty and a willingness to give more than ever before from yet he majority of the global workforce which numbers in the thousands. More employers should try it.

I’ll be sending mine back, only 1 is eligible. I suspect what will happen in reality is that the start date in most areas will be pushed back from 1st June and only some will open then (which is what the government has always said. I really don’t think all the children being back by the end of June is realistic and if it happens it will be a minority of schools.

I think most will go back when they can, it’s just the ones who want schools to close until it’s 100% safe are making the most noise

It’s funny people mentioning teachers not sending their DC back, I know a few teachers (tiny sample I know) who will be returning to work but not sending their own kids back.
Even with kids going back, some people will still have other DC at home, most will probably be on a reduced timetable, I don’t know how much it is really going to help a lot of working parents.

The issue is that if school is available then people will be expected to use it. I don't necessarily agree with opening schools but at some point people need to go back to work. I work in childcare and have had a lot of people contacting me as they need to start going back to work.

It will help me, even if it is on a part time basis. Although on other threads teachers have said it will be full time, not part time

I don’t know how much it is really going to help a lot of working parents.

Well it will mean we don’t have to ‘homeschool’ at the same time as doing our jobs. Personally I think education and having a life away from the nuclear family is important for children also.

My public sector employer won't expect us back in the office for quite some time yet, it'll probably be the summer holidays before that happens and probably we'll never got back full time.

There's considerable understanding that people have DC and other family members in the house and we were forced into this way of working with very little notice. There will come a time though, when even my very understanding employer moves to a position where we are now WFH some or all of the time as the new normal and the old policy that you can't WFH and look after young children will come back into play - usually applies when people want to WFH to cover sickness - and then it'll be annual leave/unpaid leave and eventually parents will have to send their DC to school or take a leave of absence or resign.

It's like a snow day scenario, if you can't WFH on a snow day (and the office is open) because you have DC at home (or didn't take your laptop home etc.) then you take annual leave, time owed or an unpaid day.

I have just finished maternity leave. Have gone on furlough. Have been told that I am expected back at work on 4 th June and it's in my best interests to sort childcare.

Pre-coronavirus I would have been doing Kit days 2 days a week before I came back to 5 days a week to get my son settled with a childminder, of whom I would have interviewed and selected.

I have not been able to get hold of a childminder who will say they will have him , I can't go an see the setting and the person who I would be leaving my son with. My boss wants me back as I am the youngest in the office. Has asked me several times what hours I will be doing, told him I can't give him an answer until I know what childcare is available! Feel completely backed into a corner.

Not a key worker.

We would at most put the person on unpaid leave and at worse dismiss them if it went on.

My NDN has been told by school her daughter can go in for 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the afternoon but will need to be collected and taken home over lunch time, so it isn’t going to help her very much.
If you can continue to WFH it might be helpful to you but I thought the point of the thread was returning to work 🤷🏻‍♀️

Tbh, if i could in any way shape or form afford to, I would take a year off and keep my reception or year 1 child at home. Seems pointless sending them in for what will be patchy provision delivered in an environment of extreme tension.