Parents wfh and the furloughed for childcare

[baskininjoe]

I am childless, currently by choice because I am in my twenties but do plan to have a child in the future at some point.

AIBU to be getting annoyed with the short end of the stick that the childless are getting right now with everything regarding childcare and lockdown.

I have so many colleges who are currently wfh whilst looking after children. I completely sympathise and understand this is hard but I am really starting to get annoyed with them being less productive, and logging less hours for the same pay (no reduction), whilst the rest of us are expected to pick up the slack, and work more hours to make sure tasks still get completed, whilst not being paid anymore for our extra time and effort. I know there is no perfect solution but it really grates on me that they aren't being paid for what they complete which could therefore compensate the rest of us for the extra we are having to do because they are not fully fulfilling their role.

On top of this with the idea of school provisionally going back in June some of these parents have said they will not be sending their DC to school, despite a place being open and available to them, and therefore expect the rest of us to continue to pick up their slack because they can't work as productively whilst looking after their children.

My housemate (shared house) works in a place where many parents have been furloughed for childcare reasons, despite their being lots of work to do, just because they've asked to be. This means that my housemate has been incredibly stressed as the workload is still high but the team is now smaller, whilst many of their colleges are receiving 80% on the taxpayer, despite their actually being work for them to do, all because they complained to their employer that it was too hard working with children and thus asking to be furloughed. This is especially grating as it is taxpayer money that is being used to pay them, despite their actually being a job they could do and be payed for.

I am not at all against the furlough scheme, another of my housemates work in a restaurant and is also on furlough and this is absolutely the right thing as they can not work, despite wanting to, as their place of work is not allowed to open.

However I think:

1. Some employers and employees are taking the piss by allowing staff to be furloughed/asking to be furloughed despite their actually being a job to do. Which then negatively affects the rest of the teams as the work level remains the same but there are less people to do the work so the remaining people have to work harder with no extra pay.

1. Employers need to be understanding but also firm with parents that although some productively will be affected by having DC at home, a certain level still needs to be consistently met or they are not doing their job properly and that negatively affects the business and the rest of the team.

1. Employers need to be especially understanding and grateful to employees still working, who are picking up the slack for those not being as productive because of DC at home/furloughed for childcare reasons despite their still being work. And actually need to consider financially compensating them for the high level of extra work and overtime and/or promise to look at these people first for upcoming promotions as as they have shown serious dedication to the business.

1. Employers should not be allowing parents to choose not to send DC to school when they can if it continues to affect the parents productivity level.

I understand this is a hard time for everyone, and parents do have it hard with few childcare options for DC, however that is not the problem of their colleagues and they should not be negatively affected by being expected to work far far more for no extra gain. My housemate and I are stressed beyond belief both having to work 10-12 hours every day for what would be a 9-5 office job in order to pick up the slack for colleagues whilst not being paid anymore whilst these colleagues are only completely 4-6 hours a day yet continuing to be paid the same as us. And on top of this are expecting it to continue despite their child being able to go to school soon because they are choosing not to send them.

Laurie - not sure you'd want to argue your employment contract has been frustrated...im sure it is a argument in some cases though, not to the benefit of employees.

If an employee (male or female) has childcare responsibilities to the extent that they cannot work their full hours (productivity or hours) then they can take unpaid leave (statutory right) or discuss with the employer a more suitable arrangement such as different hours, reduced hours (reduced pay), different duties.
All quite fair.

Says a lawyer who is paid how much and can afford a pay cut. Unlike many.

My friend and her husband get up at 5.30 am and work for 2 hours before the kids get up. Then one works a full day whilst the other does childcare for the 2 and 4 yo and then that one works into the evening
That's great, but how many employed parents will be devoted enough to their role to do that. 8n most cases people are much more focused on what their company should do for them than what they should do for their company. Then when those who've shown loyalty to the company are rewarded with promotions, they cry discrimination.

The reality is that some parents will go beyond the norm to fulfill both their roles whilst others will fail on both accounts and fell sorry for themselves. Most cases will fall somewhere in between.

@LaurieMarlow it sounds like your factors are not sex-based though, if it’s just that your industry has taken a hit. I would of course expect some women to be affected, but it should be on a scale that is comparable to men. What I’m saying is if women are overwhelmingly MORE affected, we need to think about why. In some of the situations it will be chance yes, but bad luck doesn’t lead to millions more women being worse affected than men.

@oblada you would need the consent of employees to reduce working hours and pay though otherwise we are in redundancy territory. You cannot enforce a deduction to wages without consultation and offering redundancy.

Getting annoyed at parents getting full pay for doing less work whilst they also struggle with childcare during an unprecedented global pandemic is a bit silly, don't you think?

Do you resent people off on sick pay too?

"Being a parent doesn't give special rights."
No but being a carer when fire most people they're is no accessible external care available does mean that businesses need to accept people's capacity has temporarily changed. People don't just care for children

OP you can take away the positives or negatives from the situation.

We are both key workers and opted to send children to childcare throughout. It was an incredibly tough choice because my DH does work from home right now but needs to report for calls and be focused all day and doing this whilst minding a 18month and 3yr old is not possible. I have to continue going to work. I felt so guilty at the prospect of putting my children at risk when everyone else in my circle had theirs at home with them.

All my friends (including those working from home) have been doing so much with children in the time I'm at work. Many are furloughed and really enjoying the time they have with the children even though it's tough. Childless friends have been baking, binge watching series and movies and talk about it when ever we catch up. I do feel the odd stab of jealousy when we all catch up.

However, I am grateful for 2 full incomes, job security and, most importantly, a healthy family where all 4 of us have no significant underlying conditions that put us at risk. I am not dwelling on the negatives and suggest you try do the same. If your employer is overworking you, raise that and do your contracted hours but leave the parents out of the picture as that part isn't in your control

OP can't come back for a while, she's busy compiling a little snitching chart for her bosses about who isn't pulling their weight and should lose their job. Great addition to society, OP!

@HeyDuggeesCakeBadge sorry if you find it so laughable the idea that women might, just might, have a part to play in pushing back against the deeply ingrained sexism in society.

Has the OP come back to tell us parents what the solution is yet?

@RibenaMonsoon
If you are on full pay and a colleague is in a less desirable position and are struggling (maybe they are furloughed on 80%), should YOU personally, as a worker, help top their wages up to pay their mortgage for the house they chose to live in?
If it's out of taxpayers money then yes.

No, I meant (and said) 'personally'.

Why you would ask someone working on full wages to give their money to people on furlough is just a ridiculous and irrelevant hypothetical situation that has nothing to do with what's being discussed here. It's the workload that's in question.

It's an analogy. You say why would you ask fully paid workers to give their money to those earning less. Ridiculous. I say yes, why should workers with more free time (no children) subsidise those with less free time (due to caring responsibilities).

There are so many entitled responses on here. And I question why all of you who can only see negatives and hard work in bringing up kids alongside working for a living (pandemic or not) even bothered with them.

OP I think your bosses need to prioritise more about what is essential work and what isn't in a global pandemic. I suspect they prefer to shift the responsibility of squabbling it out to their employees. Possibly collecting their same bonus at the end of the year.

When you were at school and maybe at university as a taxpayer I was paying for you to be economically inactive. Your parents' family allowance and any other support they took was from my taxes. Your healthcare, dentistry, streetlights, rubbish collection, parks and leisure centres cane from other people's money.

Fine by me, I'd love to pay more taxes. But you live in a society with people who support each other. Don't imagine hour by hour you are doing less work than people wfh and looking after kids. It's just different work that needs doing if you want them to grow up and pay their taxes (if you want to think about human beings like that).

Right now things are shit for everyone but I'd be blaming the people who are profiting from your work for their fat bonuses rather than those who are leaning on you for support.

OP can't come back for a while, she's busy compiling a little snitching chart for her bosses about who isn't pulling their weight and should lose their job. Great addition to society, OP!

That's hardly fair, MIsty - after all, measuring productivity and output's a perfectly legitimate business exercise and OP's already made it clear the decisions arising from that aren't hers

I guess we could reduce this to the level of playground repartee if you like, but it's worth remembering that's hardly a good look to employers

@baskininjoe My company has always stated that you can only wfh if you do not have childcare responsibilities.

So without the 80% furlough scheme the childless would have worked at home for full pay and the parents would have been on unpaid leave.

I’m grateful it didn’t turn out that way but in some offices they actively discriminate against parents wherever possible. So don’t worry, we’ll be first in line for the job cuts at my place. Does that help with your feelings about fairness?

Yabvu for thinking the childless have the short end of the stick. Trying to work full days while home-schooling 3 children or working slightly longer days for a while. I know which one I’d prefer.

There are so many entitled responses on here. And I question why all of you who can only see negatives and hard work in bringing up kids alongside working for a living (pandemic or not) even bothered with them.

I can only assume you’ve never had care of a child for as much as an hour or two to make such an idiotic comment.

I’m also staggered that people so lacking in empathy and imagination exist. But you live and learn in these tough times.

@WillAshton oh yes, imagine being stressed by having to do 2 full time jobs at the same time. I had my children because I truly wanted them and i love them dearly. When i chose to have children I had a whole raft of support in place, aunties, grandparents, childminders, nurseries who were more than willing to help. I therefore made my decision that I was able to have children and work - that has support has been taken away through no fault of my own. I, as well as many others are struggling through this as best we can and expecting some leeway from employers and colleagues is not entitled.

all of you who can only see negatives and hard work in bringing up kids alongside working for a living even bothered with them.
If the option was to work full time from home whilst homeschooling the 6 and 4 yo and looking after the 1 year old, most peoe wouldn't. Which is fairly sensible given its impossible to give 200% effort and both those jobs require 100% to do them properly. And before anyone gets their knickers in a twist over the use of the J word, I stand by it in this context

Some employers will do it to survive and some will do it because it is sensible in the circumstances. Some can afford to be more generous and that's fine, but not required

Some of those not reducing pay won't be doing it just because they can afford to. They will be looking at the bigger picture and the all round impact on productivity and wellbeing, both now and coming out of this.

A senior leader at my company has been pulled up for openly praising a single parent who is working late into the night and every weekend. It is worthy of praise but simply not possible for everyone for a variety of reasons and very bad for the morale of those struggling. Made worse by the senior leader's wife being SAHP.

Heyduggee - absolutely (except for the redundancy comment - it is not relevant if the work is there but the staff cannot do it) but if staff cannot work their full hours they cannot demand full pay either. So either they go on unpaid leave or reach a compromise with the employer. Seems fair to me.

Joan - of course they need to look at the bigger picture. I wouldn't be impressed by a pay cut if I was doing 80-90percent of my role when usually I do 120percent and they know the situation is temporary. But nor would I expect full pay if I can only work half my hours/be half as productive. It's a balancing act and looking at the bigger picture absolutely.

So ...the parents are saying that it’s impossible to absorb childcare and schooling, as well as work because no one can easily do 2 full time jobs so work will have to give.

But it’s not acceptable for the person who is then having to absorb the work that is being left - to the extent that they are working nearly the hours of 2 full time jobs - to say that they can’t do 2 full time jobs.

@oblada that's not true, if it causes financial hardship and you are changing hours/wages for an organisational reason then you need to offer redundancy. You cannot force an employee to reduce hours or take unpaid leave. You can offer to work flexibly or look to frustrate contract or performance manage or furlough but in the current circumstances none of these will be reasonable to a tribunal (as hopefully this will be very temporary) so you would have to justify the reduction in salary as an organisational one and offer redundancy.

But it’s not acceptable for the person who is then having to absorb the work that is being left - to the extent that they are working nearly the hours of 2 full time jobs - to say that they can’t do 2 full time jobs but no one here has said that's OK have they? Has anyone said I shouldn't have to do all my work but Mandy can do the extra cos she doesn't have kids at home? Or I should be furloughed and Terry can just do all the extra cos he doesn't help with the kids anyway?

If you are being asked to do more work than you can reasonably manage without you paid hours, you need to speak to your boss.