To wonder why my job is so low paid and feel frustrated by it?

[eggsontoast9]

I’m a nursery nurse and I earn £8.72 an hour (minimum wage for over 25’s, I’m 26).
I’ve been in this job for the last three years and do enjoy it apart from the odd day but I’ve always wondered why it’s so low paid. It’s a hard job. I know a lot of people assume we just sit on our bums all day and play with children but that’s really not the case. I work in the baby unit and we can have anywhere up to 15 babies on a busy day, which in itself is bloody hard work. We have to deal with sick, poo, unhappy/unwell children, difficult parents etc. We have to complete paperwork now, normally whilst looking after the children because we’re short staffed and can’t always have time away from the room. We work long hours not because we want to but because we have to as the wages are so low (I work 7:30-6:00 four days a week and 7:30-5:00 another day). Holidays aren’t very generous. I guess the only bonus is we have weekends off unless we have training. I suppose it’s the same as health care jobs such as care assistants.

I like the job and work with a good team but can’t see myself staying here long term just because of the money which is a shame as it’s really hard to find a job that you enjoy sometimes. I was speaking to my younger cousin who’s 18 and she told me she’s just started a job in Asda earning £9.20 an hour and whilst I’m extremely happy for her and proud of her, it has made me realise my job is incredibly low paid and not very well respected in terms of how hard we all work. Before anyone jumps on me, I’m not saying my cousin shouldn’t earn that amount as I appreciate working in a supermarket is hard work to and any job should be paid a fair wage.

What is more frustrating is that we have to complete training each year and work towards gaining qualifications yet our wages are based on our age, so IMO there isn’t any progression available.

AIBU?

I've always been appalled by the pay for nursery staff. My son's keyworker was incredibly skilled and a really important figure in his life.

The UK average salary is approx £30k, which works out about £90 per day after tax. Take off maybe £20 for transport and other expenses - the average person is getting about £70 per day in their pocket. They need to pay you significantly less than that that to look after their kids otherwise it’s not worth working. So childcare will always be low paid because otherwise it simply won’t exist. If parents had to pay more for childcare they couldn’t afford to work and would just stay at home.

Of course sensible countries understand the value of keeping people in work, keeping the economy going, and having good quality childcare. If parents can’t afford to work it’s detrimental to everyone in the long term because they pay less tax and need more government assistance. Sensible countries subsidise childcare. Unfortunately the UK doesn’t - well, not enough to enable average parents to afford to work anyway.

@gretnacastle, it's way more skilled than the jobs you have listed there.

I think the level of qualification and responsibility means it should be worth way more than living wage. It's also an area where with more investment, staff qualifications could also be justifiably increased- what they do is just as important as teaching work in my opinion.

And the figure I plucked out of the air was somewhat arbitrary, but it was an illustration that following other comments on cost, actually on a sum-per-taxpayer basis, the sums involved in a policy like this are not outrageous. The actual costs/benefits and associated analysis involved in that kind of policy gone way beyond my couple of minutes of division.

And there are already huge differentials in salary. I have a job where I spent 5 years at uni, 5 years working on a professional qualification- 10 years of study. But because of the area I work in, my salary will never be anywhere near that of a doctor/lawyer/financier
with similar experience even though my qualifications are equivalent. I chose it because I was interested and it paid enough.

Properly funding childcare, if anything, may mean that staff retention is helped whichbwoukd benefit the children in the setting. It could also result in it becoming appealing/competitive as a career, raising standards and qualifications all round.

There can't be many jobs with that level of responsibility which are paid so poorly.

[quote Canyousewcushions]@gretnacastle, it's way more skilled than the jobs you have listed there.

I think the level of qualification and responsibility means it should be worth way more than living wage. It's also an area where with more investment, staff qualifications could also be justifiably increased- what they do is just as important as teaching work in my opinion.

And the figure I plucked out of the air was somewhat arbitrary, but it was an illustration that following other comments on cost, actually on a sum-per-taxpayer basis, the sums involved in a policy like this are not outrageous. The actual costs/benefits and associated analysis involved in that kind of policy gone way beyond my couple of minutes of division.

And there are already huge differentials in salary. I have a job where I spent 5 years at uni, 5 years working on a professional qualification- 10 years of study. But because of the area I work in, my salary will never be anywhere near that of a doctor/lawyer/financier
with similar experience even though my qualifications are equivalent. I chose it because I was interested and it paid enough.

Properly funding childcare, if anything, may mean that staff retention is helped whichbwoukd benefit the children in the setting. It could also result in it becoming appealing/competitive as a career, raising standards and qualifications all round.

There can't be many jobs with that level of responsibility which are paid so poorly.[/quote]
It’s not a skilled job - sorry.

It’s far more about having the right caring and nurturing attitude than it is about skills. Hence how easy it is to find replacement staff straight out of school and so the low wages

And it's absolutely a feminist issue.

In most cases, it's women who do the work in childcare. In most families, it's women who give up work if they can't afford childcare as they are often the lower paid one of the couple.

So it's a double whammy- what people can afford to pay for childcare will generally be based on the lowest household income in a 2 parent family. The fact that so many women earn less than their male partners then suppresses the salaries of other women who are in the childcare role.

It's not right, but it's how the system is geared up here, which is why I'm in favour of further support for the sector.

The clue to why the OP earns so little is in the fact that she didn't do very well in school. Our society measures worth, particularly in younger people who haven't much experience, by the number and level of qualifications they hold. No /few qualifications generally means low wages. That's not rocket science and must have been completely foreseeable when choosing childcare as a career.

They don't come straight out of school, they need qualifications or an apprenticeship.

And it is really skilled. It's not just about being a lovely patient csrinf and fun person, it's also the understanding of child development needed to provide the right stimulation to develop well rounded children. They follow a curriculum in the same way that schools do, track the progress of each child and work with them to fill any gaps. There's a huge amount of responsibility for developing children through some of their most critical years.

I get the same pay as you I work as a lsa in a sen school.I agree that pay is terrible.

I love working in early years snd I'd love to work in a nursery, but yes the pay is terrible which is why I'm a childminder- ok it's not amazing money either, but much better than a nursery. I am studying towards a masters degree and consider myself very intelligent and dedicated to Early Years. It saddens me that Early Years are always overlooked in this country. In many other countries working with 0-7s is regarded as a highly skilled job. It is a really important time in a child's life, but sadly the UK does not view it as such. Keep up the good work OP!

@Canyousewcushions

And it's absolutely a feminist issue.

In most cases, it's women who do the work in childcare. In most families, it's women who give up work if they can't afford childcare as they are often the lower paid one of the couple.

So it's a double whammy- what people can afford to pay for childcare will generally be based on the lowest household income in a 2 parent family. The fact that so many women earn less than their male partners then suppresses the salaries of other women who are in the childcare role.

It's not right, but it's how the system is geared up here, which is why I'm in favour of further support for the sector.

Go on then.

Give me an example of a minimum wage job where men and women don’t each get paid the same

Jgjgjg I cannot believe what you are saying, what world do you live in

Criminally low paid and absolutely a result of structural misogyny. Anyone who argues otherwise is ignorant or an agent of the patriarchal system which 100% benefits from massively under-valuing and diminishing care work. If the people (women) who do this work demanded fair (or, often, any) recompense, the economy would collapse. Our society relies on this work being under-valued in every sense.

Uuuuurrrr @gretnecastle if we're talking minimum wage jobs then the pay will be the same for both- it will be the minimum wage.

However there are plenty of examples where they are not equivalent- jobs like bricklaying are more akin to childcare in terms of qualifications/skills, but the 'male' job is paid more than the 'female' equivalent. Glasgow city council has recently lost court battles about this issue.

The gender pay gap is real- there's plenty out there about it.

@juliainthedeepwater

Criminally low paid and absolutely a result of structural misogyny. Anyone who argues otherwise is ignorant or an agent of the patriarchal system which 100% benefits from massively under-valuing and diminishing care work. If the people (women) who do this work demanded fair (or, often, any) recompense, the economy would collapse. Our society relies on this work being under-valued in every sense.

So give an example of a minimum wage job where men and women are on different money.

Male nursery nurses earn the same as female.

Female refuse collectors earn the same as males.

Unless you can show us different?

Yanbu the staff at my son's nursery are amazing. I couldn't do their job. They clearly love it but it is woefully underpaid. Very much like health care assistants.

@Gretnacastle of course looking after humans is a skilled job!! Even if the skill is nurture and care - not just anyone can do the job.

If something goes wrong with a bin man or supermarket worker, it's likely a low impact and easy fix. Working in a nursery comes with safeguarding issues, health and safety and the consequences when something goes wrong can be catastrophic- it is certainly my not low skilled

So give an example of a minimum wage job where men and women are on different money

Well anyone would be hard pressed to do that considering it would be illegal.

It's about the culture of what is a "man's job" and what is a "woman's job", enforced by a patriarchal society. It's not an accident that women work more with humans but are valued less than men who don't. It's no as easy as saying "well just be a sparky" when trade jobs are so deeply entrenched in being for men, dominated by men (which is of course off putting for women seeing as how women are treated by men in the workplace, look up sexual harassment stats) and are traditionally geared to alienate women from them.

I think women could be perfectly good electricians, but as there are so few, they would be a curiosity and some customers and building sites might be funny about employing them. And they'd have to bit mind being the only woman on the college course etc and would have no role models. You'd need a critical mass for things to really change. You only have to read the bios of the first women doctors, lawyers etc to appreciate some of the difficulties.

Also, bin men are not that badly paid!

not mind

@Gretnacastle

Err, you what? Obviously I'm not suggesting men and women are paid different minimum wages (which is a set amount, in case that's passed you by) - I'm telling you that far far more women work in under-valued caring roles, including nursing and early years, than men. This is not an opinion, it is fact. Which takes me back to the point I've made above.

Looking after people pays less than looking after money. It’s a harsh reality.

Isn’t it down to market forces. If the nursery couldn’t recruit enough people at the skill level they needed they’d increase the salary until they did. Supply and demand. Unfortunately if they can fill vacancies at min wage then they will.

It’s not always the case but the fewer qualifications you need to do a job the more people who are able to do it, so the lower the wage.

@BillMasen - The bottom line is that the nursery can only pay out to staff what comes in from parents.

Parents do not want to pay for childcare. In most cases, it is now heavily subsidised by the government, but parents resent paying for the small amount they are asked to contribute.

Nursery workers are paid poorly because parents see childcare as something that should be provided for free. Primary schools are free, so why should they pay for nurseries?

I am telling you the truth of it. It doesn’t help anyone giving people free things because they just want more and resent paying for anything.

I can’t even get parents to pay for food at my nursery. They’re outraged when I give them the bill. Food is provided for free at primary schools so why should they pay at nursery? This is their attitude. However, there’s no extra funding for food from the government, not in nurseries. And if a parent won’t pay, the nursery mustn’t force them. That is actually written in the guidance.

So who is supposed to pay for it then? Me, that’s who, when they won’t. How? By paying the staff less - but believe me, when you factor in employer’s NI and pension contributions, it’s no small amount. Not in comparison with what comes in.

What could the government do? They could start by removing the requirement for nurseries to pay VAT on goods when they are not allowed to charge VAT to parents. They could subside nurseries by paying rent for them and removing the requirement for nurseries to pay business rates.

All the benefits of subsidised childcare should not be for parents. The childcare provider should at least be paid fairly. As things stand, we are being robbed.

what people can afford to pay for childcare will generally be based on the lowest household income in a 2 parent family
This. Childcare has to be paid less than average for an average parent to be able to afford it.

If the nursery couldn’t recruit enough people at the skill level they needed they’d increase the salary until they did
No because if the salary was too high the demand would drop, because people couldn’t afford it.

I think the level of qualification and responsibility means it should be worth way more than living wage

But the level of qualification is generally low in childcare settings. It’s not a requirement and many teens go into childcare because unfortunately they didn’t get the grades they wanted to do something else. If you’re easily replaced because the entry level qualifications are easily achievable, wages will probably be low.

[quote EYProvider]@BillMasen - The bottom line is that the nursery can only pay out to staff what comes in from parents.

Parents do not want to pay for childcare. In most cases, it is now heavily subsidised by the government, but parents resent paying for the small amount they are asked to contribute.

Nursery workers are paid poorly because parents see childcare as something that should be provided for free. Primary schools are free, so why should they pay for nurseries?

I am telling you the truth of it. It doesn’t help anyone giving people free things because they just want more and resent paying for anything.

I can’t even get parents to pay for food at my nursery. They’re outraged when I give them the bill. Food is provided for free at primary schools so why should they pay at nursery? This is their attitude. However, there’s no extra funding for food from the government, not in nurseries. And if a parent won’t pay, the nursery mustn’t force them. That is actually written in the guidance.

So who is supposed to pay for it then? Me, that’s who, when they won’t. How? By paying the staff less - but believe me, when you factor in employer’s NI and pension contributions, it’s no small amount. Not in comparison with what comes in.

What could the government do? They could start by removing the requirement for nurseries to pay VAT on goods when they are not allowed to charge VAT to parents. They could subside nurseries by paying rent for them and removing the requirement for nurseries to pay business rates.

All the benefits of subsidised childcare should not be for parents. The childcare provider should at least be paid fairly. As things stand, we are being robbed.[/quote]
That’s all fair. Yes if the market won’t pay for something the provider is limited and can’t offer more. I think free hours at a very low rate are also part of the problem, so fully agree with you on that.

That holds wages down but there also just be a supply of people willing to work for that of nurseries would be unviable (appreciate a lot of you are pretty close to that)

It’s broken at the moment, I agree