One key worker, child should stay home

[Areyouactuallyseriousrightnow]

Not sure if there has already been a thread but AIBU to think that if only one parent is key worker and other is WFH, child should be staying home as school provision is for key workers who cannot complete their important role if they have to look after child at home, not so that the other parent can continue with work without interruption?

My partner is a key worker, but I don’t consider us eligible as I am home and therefore technically can be with the children.

YABU- if there’s one key worker take that opportunity to send the child in.
YANBU- if there’s another parent at home, child should stay home.

@riddles26
“As multiple posters keep on repeating:
Keyworker = lower pay“

A lot of our ‘key worker’ parents are highly paid bankers..

Can I add that at both our school and my nieces school the head teachers had to send out pleading emails in the last 24 hours to remind parents that if someone is at home they should be looking after their kids, even if there is a key worker parent, as both schools have had so many applications there is barely any point closing.
I’m very sympathetic to ensuring that our critical workers are not prevented from doing their important jobs. But in order to avoid prolonging this absolute agony, key worker couples with a parent at home should be caring for their kids not putting them in school. Like non key worker families had to for months earlier this year. We’ve got to be in this together.

yet parents with just one key worker..both wfh, are sending their kids into school

As they're permitted to. Also, many key workers are publicly funded. Furlough rules are different for public sector workers so that option is often not open to them.

I disagree op. As pp have said, if the key worker is the lower earner, then the family will prioritise the higher paid job.

Then if we lose doctors and nurses from the system then how does that help?

There are always people who take the piss. And those should be stopped (ie people saying they know a SAHM who has sent them in as partner is a key worker).

But people always take try and take the piss but it's a minority. For example, I know someone who has negotiated a wfh deal with their employer (no one else allowed) as they have a shielding relative. But they go out and about to the shops and to visit friends so no reason why they can't go to work like their other colleagues.

the scheme is intended for workers who are essential to the smooth running of the country AND work outside the home

No it's not, it doesn't differentiate between front line and back office. Because all are essential. If police or NHS IT systems go down, who do you think fixes it?

They are ‘permitted’, because the rules haven’t specifically made that clear, and give people and inch..they really do take the mile.
There are many non public sector jobs on the list, in fact the list is pretty comprehensive! Why should someone who works for a private bank, and is technically on that list.. be entitled to send their children into school? While their DH also works but not on the list..both wfh. Is their job considered more difficult than others?? It’s completely wrong, and it needs to be restricted better.

@NCstaythefuckathome - yes, completely agree. It’s a farce.

@AnneElliott

I disagree op. As pp have said, if the key worker is the lower earner, then the family will prioritise the higher paid job.

Then if we lose doctors and nurses from the system then how does that help?

There are always people who take the piss. And those should be stopped (ie people saying they know a SAHM who has sent them in as partner is a key worker).

But people always take try and take the piss but it's a minority. For example, I know someone who has negotiated a wfh deal with their employer (no one else allowed) as they have a shielding relative. But they go out and about to the shops and to visit friends so no reason why they can't go to work like their other colleagues.

Point is it’s not the minority if schools are reporting 30-60% of parents sending kids in when the policy is clearly simply to support the key worker in carrying on their job, not other parent or the general family income. It’s got to be a group sacrifice by all parents not just non key worker parents. Not all key workers are doctors and nurses, it’s a huge category.

The government need to take action fast. If classes have 50% of kids in them then covid rates will never lower. It is unsustainable and not fair on those kids who cannot attend, especially vulnerable kids with limited parental help/access to devices.

Ours only ever took a child with a single parent key worker or two key working parents and even at that its graded by your job and some people didnt get a space.. so nurses and doctors were first then other emergency services then carers then retail staff were last.

Our school had about ten pupils total first time around. For four months. Then this time around we have around 150 wanting to attend. Unless we think their parents all changed jobs during the pandemic, 140 of those sets of parents were able to care for their kids at home for months first time around, so I am going to assume they are sending them in because they want to not because they have to.

Sensible. Tough decisions for all parents. Our school framed it as basically if you’re a key worker AND no one is at home to care fo your child, of course school should support you in doing your work. But they haven’t put in checks so it has been sadly massively abused.

(To @Scbchl)....

I know a doctor working in ICU with 3 KS1 children. Her partner works from home but would not be able to work while looking after the 3 young children. They have no family or support. She would have to look after the children outside all her working hours alone, so he can catch up on work. She wouldn’t be able to manage this as she desperately needs some kind of rest after looking after Covid patients all day.

So that’s just one example where it is right to let a one key worker family continue to use school places.

MN is obsessed with this issue.

Everyone just has to do what is right for them and their kids, within the parameters of the way in which their school is operating. Anything else is no ones fucking business!

@NCstaythefuckathome

Our school had about ten pupils total first time around. For four months. Then this time around we have around 150 wanting to attend. Unless we think their parents all changed jobs during the pandemic, 140 of those sets of parents were able to care for their kids at home for months first time around, so I am going to assume they are sending them in because they want to not because they have to.

I think it's slightly different this time round though for a lot of pupils, from what I can gather on here. It seems proper structured remote learning is much more expected this time round than it was last time, and with that comes more need for supervision from parents in a lot of cases I'd imagine.

I mean last time, I could have quite easily gotten away with sticking the kids Infront of the TV all day. Not so much this time without being questioned by school (not saying it's a bad thing! But definitely feels like there are higher expectations this time round what with the curriculum being expected to continue when it wasn't before).

Plus those who didn't send them in last time maybe didn't really realise what they were letting themselves in for. This time they do and they know their work can't cope with it again.

Or NCstay many like us were eligible but didn’t take up places and realise they made a big mistake.

Mental health can be also push children into the vulnerable category. Mental health numbers have rocketed.

As far as I’m aware there aren’t limits this time so the op really is a non issue as parents aren’t competing for places.

@Scbchl

Ours only ever took a child with a single parent key worker or two key working parents and even at that its graded by your job and some people didnt get a space.. so nurses and doctors were first then other emergency services then carers then retail staff were last.

Same at ours. Last year, after the first few months they slightly relaxed their requirements and then plenty of people tookthepiss asked for places that probably could have managed without. We live in an area with a v high proportion of doctors and nurses, and teachers, and some of them couldn't get spaces because other people had put their name forward and the head acted in good faith. She's explicitly said this time she wants evidence of people's roles and that priority will be given to those families where both parents are both key workers.

Rest of us will just have to muddle through best we can.

Another issue seems to be that teachers will probably now be sending their kids to school as they will be doing live lessons or at least interacting with kids all day via Google classroom etc which didn't happen last time like it is this. I know the school I work at everyone with primary aged kids are sending them to school because they have to yet last time we all kept them home as we didn't need to work 9-3 online/ in school. I did all my work last time in the evenings on the days I wasn't on the rota. This time I'm expected in school on all of my normal working days.

We've also had a quarter of kids apply for places and have been told my the la that classes are 15 max again so that means we will be running with 50% of classes open needing teachers to run them.

Where i live loads of people with stay at home parents and one very tenuous key worker link (ie works for an investment bank in HR from home so counts as a key worker under financial services ) sent their kids in. so this time the school is saying 2 key workers only because by the end of it, over 50% of the school were in and they therefore could hardly offer anything for the kids at home. i am assuming if someone is genuinely a key worker who is out of the house like a nurse and the other parent is also working out of the house, the school would compromise.

Wow I am totally shocked by this. I am a keyworker that is WFH so to me it is easy... the kids stay home with me. Yes it’s tough, almost impossible but we are in a pandemic. I work very early and late into each evening then ‘stay afloat’ of email etc in working hours.

The only exception to a key worker WFH not having the kids with them is a GP type role where you couldn’t be juggling childcare and patients. XmasSkies2020 I am shocked you think that the Doctors partner who WFH is sending the kids in. Really bad form IMO.

@NCstaythefuckathome

Our school had about ten pupils total first time around. For four months. Then this time around we have around 150 wanting to attend. Unless we think their parents all changed jobs during the pandemic, 140 of those sets of parents were able to care for their kids at home for months first time around, so I am going to assume they are sending them in because they want to not because they have to.

Or maybe they’ve changed roles, or been told they’ll lose their jobs if they try to work with a child at home this time, or their child has SEN and regressed last time, or their relationship has broken down and now they are a single parent household... or any number of reasons! DH and I are both keyworkers and we didn’t request a place last time because I had been signed off work in early March due to a significant long term health issue, so I was available to look after DS. This time I’m not. You have no idea why people might be requesting a place this time but not last time.

@NaughtipussMaximus when the numbers go from 10 to 150 I’m going to go out on a limb and assume it’s not all change of circumstance.
When I see parents on WhatsApp groups saying they can’t face it this time around, so they’ll send their child in despite being at home I just don’t see that as fair. To school staff, to families who have no choice but to send into school, and to the community at large.
None of us want to bloody do this, but the key worker role isn’t there as a get out clause. It’s there so that doctors, nurses, teachers, delivery drivers, whoever else can go and do their job and their child still be cared for, because no one is at home.
Not so that people can do their zoom meetings in peace. Everyone saying their partner can’t wfh with kids there, do you think it’s easy for everyone else? Nope. But unless you job involves sensitive conversations you should muddle along like the rest of us.
Sorry but this has got to be about the greater good. I can’t believe head teachers have had to actually ask parents not to take the piss.

DH is a key worker (hospital dr) and I normally work from home (have a home based practice to be flexible around DHs inflexible job) and both schools (reception year and yr8) have offered us a place however we feel that as we can (not easily but will manage) to keep them home that will help keep the numbers down which is the whole point of this exercise.
Also felt that the secondary school provision was actually better online and from home (more resources / more support) than if he went in to the key worker hub. They also aren't doing school transport which makes it a whole other level of tricky.
The 4yo would be better in school but if he has to spend some time watching alphablocks whilst I sort out a specification or budget proposal it won't be the end of the world.
However I wouldn't judge somebody in a similar position who did send their kids in because they needed to. It's tricky there are no good answers just the best we can do for now and hope those hospital admissions start to fall as otherwise as DH joked last night they will be setting up the next ICU in the hospital Costa coffeeshop (they may be a bit tight for space)

Just seen a comment on another thread that because of so many key worker requests at the poster’s school, they are struggling to provide online learning for the tranche who are home schooling.