Childcare costs and wages

[showmethegin]

Am I the only one that gets frustrated when a woman my wage would be cancelled out if I worked and paid for childcare and people say 'but childcare is a shared cost and should be shared'?

In the vast majority of cases in a partnership money is pooled and if money is cancelled out it doesn't benefit the pot in general?

In our house I didn’t pay for the childcare. We both had careers we wanted to continue with and the childcare costs were a joint responsibility. Paying for childcare is a short term cost but enables you to continue with your career, build up a pension and financial benefit when the childcare costs have finished

@RedskyAtnight

Yes there are other benefits to working but there are also benefits to not working. More time with the kids, able to take them to activities they want to do, able to support your partner in their career.

It’s a bit tricky to expect people to save for childcare before they have kids when they are also saving for a house deposit etc. I had my first at 23 so there wasn’t exactly much time to save either, I have endometriosis and I was told it would get harder to conceive as I got older.

Although I went back to work after DC1 and DC2 now that I have DC3 it seems like I’ve reached the point which it’s just not worth it. DH earns around 6 times my salary so mine feels kind of irrelevant. I work for the civil service so I can apply for a career break and return to the same grade job when the little one is starting school so it just feels like a no brainer. In the meantime I can support DH while his career is at a crucial point and he’s having to put in some silly hours.

plus the chance of the sole breadwinner dying, becoming unable to work due to illness / accident

That’s what insurance is for.

Well people on the dole say the same, that it’s not worth working.
In most circumstances it’s always worth working. If you work hard you progress and step on to better jobs. It’s about the bigger picture. It’s only a couple of years to get through.
DS has just gone to nursery and essentially while we do pool our money DH wage pays for childcare and mine covers everything else.
Of course if you want to stay at home with your children that’s also absolutely fine.

@Bryyy

The point is "if you have a career" or career prospects for that matter. If you don't then... In our case we have spoken that whoever has the lower wage stays at home.

If you never go to work, you have zero percent chance of a career, even working in the lowest skilled role can start you on the road to a career

I've had a career in the past. It's a mix of different things, most importantly (IMO) location. What I sued to do is fairly niche. Now with COVID maybe working properly remotely might become an option but I was made redundant form that job almost 3 years ago. I have a "nice" job and there is some career progression within it but I'd be surprised if it ever pays beyond £25k. I'm retraining so it's a moot point. But I can see how people who've never had a career not higher education can't see the point. I wouldn't either.

It's very hard in the preschool years as costs are so high it effectively bars many women from working at all. Once they start school, the costs are still there, breakfast clubs/childminders to do the school run twice a day/ after school care etc. Then there's the school holidays to cover, 12 weeks a year. When they're still children at least there are usually holiday schemes available. Once they hit the teenage years, it gets tougher again, too old for play schemes too irresponsible to be left on their own or with siblings. If you can anyway afford to keep a job it will be beneficial in the long run, you will contributing to a pension and have possible promotions to come, eventually it will pay off but it can be a long slog financially.

Asking for a Baskin
Why is it a stupid decision?

You make yours for your choice and other women can make a different one. Not everyone will have a career or be well paid or split up and even if they do, maybe just maybe it was worth more to them to have less income over their lifetimes to have had more time with their children when they were younger.

Also not everyone loses out on pension if they stay at home, they either pay into one as a family for the sahp or they make other provisions.

Even if I knew that I would split up, be poorer and all the other possible reasons for not staying at home, I would still choose to do so if able to as it was important to me. My first child it was not as important to me, I yearned to but I had things to prove to myself and to others. (Also hadn't been exposed to the sheer grind of office politics and work issues)
With my second child, I knew that I would never not be there to see my child's first steps again.

Why are women calling other women stupid? Just because they make other decisions to you, does not mean they have not looked at all the angles.

And being educated means nothing when so many graduates do not ever find graduate level employment. And not just now with so many going to university, but even 20 years ago when I graduated, probably a third ended up in coffee shops and supermarkets as they has never been the level of graduate jobs for all the graduates. It utter bullshit about work hard and you'll be okay. I know people both graduates and not who have worked hard for 20, 30 years and more and still only make enough to survive, or a little more. The vast majority of jobs in this country are low wage. It is a low wage economy and has been for a long time. People who live in their bubble truly don't see this. The masses do not earn the money and education rarely takes you out of being grouped in the masses. Class and networking in this country count for far more than if you have a first degree. Don't get me started on all the other barriers that mean that hardworking does not always or often mean any kind of success.

So on the back of all this, why should women, in particular, buy into this? Maybe they are the stupid ones who have not yet realised how the system works or maybe they are the lucky ones who the system works for, so they are paid a decent wage to enable them to work and pay childcare and have luxuries and feel like they have made the right decisions. Life is not like this for everyone and some women regardless of their wage level being decent and high will still choose to stay some time at home with their children and what is wrong with that???

So all the things about jobs and career aside, why can't we accept that some people, men and women are happy to work inside the home and some will always choose the work outside the home option. Why label someone else's choice as stupid?

What makes your choices better than mine? I don't think your choices are better for me and I don't pour scorn on them, as they are your choices for yourself.

But time and time again, a thread like this about childcare costs and how they are phrased, subtlety starts to throw shade on sahm/sahp and their choices.

Because removing yourself entirely from the job market between the child being 12 months and 3 years old when you get free hours does not outweigh the benefits from working throughout.

It will take you a lot longer then 2 years to regain your place in employment and it's a permanent answer to a temporary cost.

You still get 20% tax free childcare and even if your only going to work for "£200" a month, it's only that for a temporary period.

I think it's madness giving up work completely based purely on cost and it
leaves you open to having even less money when your relationship could end and you'd be stuck.

It shocks me how many people on here think so simplistically about it and don't think long term.

@flirtygirl

Asking for a Baskin Why is it a stupid decision?

You make yours for your choice and other women can make a different one. Not everyone will have a career or be well paid or split up and even if they do, maybe just maybe it was worth more to them to have less income over their lifetimes to have had more time with their children when they were younger.

Also not everyone loses out on pension if they stay at home, they either pay into one as a family for the sahp or they make other provisions.

Even if I knew that I would split up, be poorer and all the other possible reasons for not staying at home, I would still choose to do so if able to as it was important to me. My first child it was not as important to me, I yearned to but I had things to prove to myself and to others. (Also hadn't been exposed to the sheer grind of office politics and work issues)
With my second child, I knew that I would never not be there to see my child's first steps again.

Why are women calling other women stupid? Just because they make other decisions to you, does not mean they have not looked at all the angles.

And being educated means nothing when so many graduates do not ever find graduate level employment. And not just now with so many going to university, but even 20 years ago when I graduated, probably a third ended up in coffee shops and supermarkets as they has never been the level of graduate jobs for all the graduates. It utter bullshit about work hard and you'll be okay. I know people both graduates and not who have worked hard for 20, 30 years and more and still only make enough to survive, or a little more. The vast majority of jobs in this country are low wage. It is a low wage economy and has been for a long time. People who live in their bubble truly don't see this. The masses do not earn the money and education rarely takes you out of being grouped in the masses. Class and networking in this country count for far more than if you have a first degree. Don't get me started on all the other barriers that mean that hardworking does not always or often mean any kind of success.

So on the back of all this, why should women, in particular, buy into this? Maybe they are the stupid ones who have not yet realised how the system works or maybe they are the lucky ones who the system works for, so they are paid a decent wage to enable them to work and pay childcare and have luxuries and feel like they have made the right decisions. Life is not like this for everyone and some women regardless of their wage level being decent and high will still choose to stay some time at home with their children and what is wrong with that???

So all the things about jobs and career aside, why can't we accept that some people, men and women are happy to work inside the home and some will always choose the work outside the home option. Why label someone else's choice as stupid?

What makes your choices better than mine? I don't think your choices are better for me and I don't pour scorn on them, as they are your choices for yourself.

But time and time again, a thread like this about childcare costs and how they are phrased, subtlety starts to throw shade on sahm/sahp and their choices.

If you had split up and became an unemployed single parent would you have used benefits?

@AskingforaBaskin

I wouldn’t be eligible or try to get any benefits if DH and I split up.

Why would you assume that? Can’t possibly bring yourself to respecting other people’s decision or understand that they may have actually made a choice that is he best option for them and their family?

I've seen plenty of women go back into the workforce after having a few years out with kids without much difficulty. Maybe it's harder in some industries but it's not in others.

I think it is worth it in the long run to work if you can. Maybe part time is a better option than assuming you need to work full time cuts down on childcare too. Going back to work gives you your own independence, a break from your children, other adult conversation and if anything should happen like a relationship breakdown you will be finically stable more than a SAHP.

After my 2nd child our childcare costs were more than my income but we shared the same goals. Now at 45 I earn £150k a year. Not possible if I had sacrificed my career to be a nanny

@Thneedville

I understand and the argument that it is a shared cost doesn’t work when it comes to affordability- but why is it ALWAYS the woman’s wage and job which is seen as the optional one?

I don’t agree that’s it’s always the case. It’s not in my relationship- we don’t have children yet but are actively ttc. We’ve discussed it and if any of us were to go part time it would be OH as I earn significantly more than he does. Neither of our careers are optional, but if it came to it I’d still be working full time.

@Thneedville

I understand and the argument that it is a shared cost doesn’t work when it comes to affordability- but why is it ALWAYS the woman’s wage and job which is seen as the optional one?

This^, but I have to confess that we chose for me not to go back to work after taking redundancy on Mat Leave with dc1, because my salary was so much smaller than DH's! Such a cliche . But, I also have to confess that he worked his arse off at school, university and after, so I can't really blame the patriarchy entirely^.

I'm now trying to get back to work, as dc2 is now 2 and a half. It is hard! I would never choose to be a SAHM again, IF it was a choice. The think is that I think choice doesn't come into it very much ime. Some women cannot afford to go to work and others cannot afford to stay at home. It is rarely a choice, as some people seem to think.

We can afford childcare till dc2 turns three, as we have some saved, so this is why I can now look for work. Otherwise, I'd have been applying most likely for entry level roles which would have been cancelled out by the costs of childcare, whether it be shared with DH or not. The pot would have been minus money after childcare.

The bigger issue is why is it that in the majority of cases is it that the women is on the lower salary and therefore more likely to be the SAHP. What is happening at schools, colleges and Universities that women aren’t competing for the higher paid roles?

Luckily on my post grad Uni scheme (many years ago) it was about 50:50 male/female so equal opportunities.

@Parker231

The bigger issue is why is it that in the majority of cases is it that the women is on the lower salary and therefore more likely to be the SAHP. What is happening at schools, colleges and Universities that women aren’t competing for the higher paid roles?

Luckily on my post grad Uni scheme (many years ago) it was about 50:50 male/female so equal opportunities.

For me it was very simply that my DH is 6 years older than me. I became pregnant a year out of Uni and so had built no career. He had those extra years where he just got his head down and progressed as fast as he possibly could in an industry that he started working in while still doing his degree.

Thank god mine teens now but I took some years out. It just didnt pay me 2 in creche and its still good few years of childcare when they out school. Eats into money quickly

The bigger issue is why is it that in the majority of cases is it that the women is on the lower salary and therefore more likely to be the SAHP. What is happening at schools, colleges and Universities that women aren’t competing for the higher paid roles?

I know a number of extremely well educated women (top universities, postgraduate qualifications) who became SAHMs or worked in a very part time low paid job after they had children. Whether consciously or not, a lot of women still feel they need to follow traditional gender roles.