to think it's bonkers but also not to turn down this pay rise

[fortunatefamiliar]

Name changed as I will likely get flamed.

DH and I have a very good household income, I am not denying that. DH is in a sector which pays well and thankfully has not seen a covid-related downturn. (I'm public sector but in a good job).

He was due a payrise in April but they deferred them due to covid, very understandable. As it happens their sector has been largely unhit and so payrises are now being discussed. DH has been offered a very large payrise as during COVID he did a really big piece of work which has saved the company hundreds of thousands over the next few years (company has a multimillion pound turn over) - he came up with the idea, in his own time did a demo to show it could work and then supported his team to get it up and running. He definitely deserves the payrise.

BUT

if he takes it it, it means we will no longer be eligible for DSs 30 free hours and DD won't get hers next year when she becomes eligible. After tax, the payrise will not cover the nursery expenses of the 2 children and we will therefore be worse off.

This seems like absolute madness! But it will cost us around £30k in 3 years, and the payrise will be just shy of that over than time period (after tax).

I've suggested to DH that he counter offers for a LOWER rise, which will put him just below the threshold for the free hours. This is still a good rise.

The alternative is to ask for a rise that will cover the loss of the 30 free hours, but this is quite a bit more, taking in to consideration tax.

It seems like a totally bonkers situation to be in (5 years ago we were scraping money together to pay the bills!) but can anyone else an issue with rejecting a payrise?

@velourvoyageur

Using the term to dehumanise the working class - vile, yes. Calling out people who are actually admitting to playing the system when they don’t need to - sorry, don’t think it warrants this level of affront. It’s a literal use of the term which has been divorced from the class context and is not being used to refer to a group.

The problem is that you didn't use the term merely to call out OP, you asked what the difference between her and one is. You could've made the point you were attempting without using the term benefits scrounger entirely without qualification. Had you said this is the sort of behaviour that would be called benefits scrounging in those on lower incomes in an attempt to dehumanised them, that would've made your point whilst correctly identifying the vileness of the term. You didn't.

I understand your point, and I guess I should have thought twice before using the word since I honestly haven’t come across it much and it doesn’t seem to have the same resonance for me as it does for you. When I used the term I was using it in the more neutral sense - i.e. what’s the difference between OP and someone playing the system - so I don’t think your account of things is applicable here. Anyway, no point being pedantic, I’ll avoid using it in future.

I had a bonus this year for working through covid and not having anytime off. After tax I was actually less well off than had they not given it to me at all. My dh's bonus was 4x my monthly salary, he chose his profession I chose mine and do not begrudge him. It seems only on mumsnet that we should begrudge anyone who earns over £30k, how dare they struggle when joe blogs manages on £13k!

I do not think a pay rise should penalise your overall household income and if your dh can put more money into his pension he should as long term that will be better. If my dh's salary goes over £50k we will not get child benefit but I earn a lot less than him and use that money for the kids.

Your maths is wrong as you would still get the 15 hours so may not be worse off but still have very little to show for it. I would definitely not knock back a bonus as it is more than likely to affect his negotiation for a raise in salary going forward. The 'squeezed middle' really is an issue.

You’ll get a pasting no doubt (I’ve not read the full thread) but if you search on here there is a good thread about the 100k threshold and the stupid tax implications. It’s a really badly designed threshold where people lose a lot proportionally and there is a big incentive to put anything above 100k into pension. You’re not alone in thinking it’s daft.

So this is where my taxes are going? To protect the income of a couple with a six figure income. When childcare barely existed when mine was small. Frankly, I’m appalled that anyone would think this was all right. The world really has fallen down a rabbit hole.

People like you disgust me. So greedy.

Alsohuman It is much better for the government long-term for women to stay in professional jobs and not quit due to childcare costs. It’s a short term subsidy for long-term financial gain so you can look at your tax money being invested wisely if that makes you feel better about it. There’s a far better roi on subsidised childcare than many other things the government spends money on.

Aside from the fact that the 15/30 hours is about universal provision of education for 3 year olds which most people would say is pretty important.

@velourvoyageur

I understand your point, and I guess I should have thought twice before using the word since I honestly haven’t come across it much and it doesn’t seem to have the same resonance for me as it does for you. When I used the term I was using it in the more neutral sense - i.e. what’s the difference between OP and someone playing the system - so I don’t think your account of things is applicable here. Anyway, no point being pedantic, I’ll avoid using it in future.

Fair enough, and good call.

Op, many of us took a financial hit during the nursery years. Why are you any different ?

@Sailingblue

Alsohuman It is much better for the government long-term for women to stay in professional jobs and not quit due to childcare costs. It’s a short term subsidy for long-term financial gain so you can look at your tax money being invested wisely if that makes you feel better about it. There’s a far better roi on subsidised childcare than many other things the government spends money on.

As a tax paying pensioner who was defrauded of five years of state pension, I’m afraid I can’t see subsidising a couple who could easily pay their own child care costs as a wise investment of my money. I’d rather see it go to someone who’s struggling. The level of entitlement is unbelievable to me as is the number of pp who can’t see it’s morally reprehensible.

I’m afraid I can’t see subsidising a couple who could easily pay their own child care costs as a wise investment of my money.

But they cant "easily", the OP even said if they had to it wouldn't be worth her working. The government arent subsidising childcare to make life easy for her, but to encourage her to keep working and thus paying more tax that she receives in childcare support.

It's an investment in keeping people working, and it does actually mean theres ultimately more in the pot.

It's not about it "not being her worth working"

Unless childcare should solely be paid by females ? It is a joint cost and one that the whole family meets to preserve both their careers. That's what we did anyway. It's only for a few years, and reaps benefits later in ongoing earning/career potential. For both of you.

CurlyhairedAssassin wrap around care is booked termly at the school DC is likely to attend, so would need 5 days breakfast and after school club. We get a significant discount on second child fees at nursery, so we also lose that (£200 per month).

No grandparents locally plus 2 work full time, unlikely to be able to make reciprocal arrangements with other parents due to school catchment area. No relatives locally either, all friends work full time. Annual leave, is complex but there has to be 2 people at my level each shift, to make it fair we can each have 1 half term, 1 summer week and the odd other days here and there. DH only gets 4 weeks leave and 2 have to be taken over Christmas) as there's no nursery or holiday club and I'm on a rota which doesn't get decided until after DHs holiday deadline. But that leaves DH with 2 other weeks (12 days actually). 1 week family holiday = 1 week school holiday cover.

So we'd have to get some child care provision for 8 weeks of school holidays.

I've done my maths on that one as it has an impact on the schools we apply for in September. Our local doesn't have wrap around care at all so is immediately out as I can't guarantee I'll find a childminder (they are like rocking horse poo round here).

AnyFucker I'm not different, I'm currently taking a significant financial hit and this will increase when eldest goes to school. But the situation I was describing means we would have taken a bigger financial hit than we currently do.

Alsohuman I live your level of optimism that what I don't get will be given to someone else! You realise that it doesn't work like that right? More over what isn't used is removed from circulation.

Do what you "rich and successful" people do and up the pension contribution to keep you in the bracket.

It's ridiculous how you've actually come on here to ask how to still get free hours when clearly that funding could be provided to someone much more in need.

There are families out there struggling to pay their bills and keep a roof over their kids head right now and you are here covert gloating about how rich you are now.

Your advice to your husband about asking for a lower rise wont keep you "rich and sucessful" for long though. You're essentially asking him to tell the company he isnt as valuable as they believe him to be.

I would think of the long term. Deal with the childcare cost thing now and recoup later. The salary sacrifice is worth exploring too.

The first answer you got was bang on. The thread should have closed after that!

There is certainly a tone deaf feel about this op.

Well it turns out it's not actually going to be an issue. DH has been given a new contract which need to get a solicitor to look for over. The company essentially want to buy the work DH has done, in addition to a pay rise.

The company have been very honest about the situation and the value DH has added. I'm quite flabbergasted to be honest.

AnyFucker I can't ask for advice because other people have it worse?

Just do what is best for you financially. That's what most people seem to be doing these days.

You knew your question was "off" but you did it anyway. Don't come the innocent now.

Well done to your husband. I would say definitely think longer term.