in being upset (pissed off) with parents who bring their obviuosly sick children to the nursery?

[QuintessentialShadowOfSnowball]

Shouldnt a child that is coughing his guts out be home? Or with rosy red feverish cheeks? Why do some parents think it is ok to lumber nursery staff with children so ill they need carrying around all the time? Why do they think it ok to keep passing on the germs to other peoples children?

I have been careful to talk of 'parents' who don't collect. FWIW, I agree. I am an employer of only women (at the moment) and get very P'd off when it is assumed that the mother should be the one who has to take time off to care for an ill child.

I havent read thro all of the op's but If my kids were ill they didn't go to nursery and I didn't go to work. Coughs & sneezes spread diseases. I feel sorry for the poor little mites feeling ill without their mummys/daddys and away from their cosy home.

I sent 3 home this week

2 dads & 1 mum - no complaint or delay form any of them

I have lovely considerate parents atm (see previous posts for comparison)

I noticed your language neutrality Bauble!

It seems to me that an awful lot of posters on here are completely unable to put themseles in someone else's shoes and appreciate that life may be different for others.

Not all parents can rush immediately from work to collect a sick child or take time off at the drop of a hat. Or would you all be happy if the surgeon wandered off in the middle of an operation to pick up his/her sick child? And I bet you all moan when you can't get an appointment at the doctors - has it occurred to you that the doctor might be at home looking after her sick kid?

Fortunately my nursery are very understanding. If my kids are ill and need to be collected they phone me and know I will do my best to get them collected as soon as is possible, but they also know that that may be several hours away. I have contingency plans in place, but those people are not always in a position to pick my children up themselves - they have lives to lead too.

I don't focus on mothers per se I say "parents " plural.

I'm sorry but if you are a working parent it goes with the territory that at some point your child will be ill & need time off.

If you go into a job where there is a problem with that then there will be times when you struggle. You need to have a strategy for supporting that whether through parental support or one of you taking time off work.Not enough working couples think that through BEFORE they put the child in nursery, therefore it is a big deal when it arises.

I think you are right Little bella that society doesn't value child-rearing whether by a nursery CM or parent.

Fathers' jobs must be much more important than mothers'.

FWIW mummytubb I agree with you- I don't expect a parent to rush back at the drop of a hat if they are miles away then that's Ok as long as they know & are making some contingency plans.

I wouldn't expect my dh to leave work to collect the dc from nursery-he earns more, is the main bread winner and the family depends on his salary. Thats life.

bauble of course they are...
they think!

Night All!

cheeset. As an employer it is very frustrating to always be the one who has to cover an absent parent, though.

I appreciate that there are single parents who may not have anyone else to stay at home with their child. But if there are two parents, why should only one have to use up their AL/take unpaid leave?

25% of children are being brougt up by lone parents as well. There just isn't a back up for many lone parents. When I think of all the times my children have been sick in the last 5 years, I've been able to simply juggle days, do a few hours from home while they're in bed, generally manage. If I'd had a standard ft job in an office, I would either have had to send them in sick to their CM/ nursery, or I would have had to give up work, simply because the amount of time off I would have taken would have been ridiculous. And my dc's don't get sick that often, just the standard average I think but the standard average is too much for many employers to cope with, particularly small ones with no other employees to take over. And I can't remember what percentage of workplaces in the UK are small employers, with number of employees under 15, but it's quite a few afaik. And then doubtless, I would have been slagged off for being a LP on benefits.

Anyway I'm off to bed, goodnight those still up!

Haven't read whole thread - but I'd send my child with a cough and a cold (these are so commonplace and not serious for the majority of people - one has to be pragmatic!)...however I do follow the 48 hours clear of symptoms principle for vomiting...

Ds was exposed to a child with vomiting bug at Pre-School 2 days before we flew to Dubai - if he had started vomiting during the 7 hour flight (which was frankly crap enough without that) I would have made a particular point of stringing up the parents of the vomiting bug child from the nearest overhanging tree branch upon my return to the UK.

Fortunately for them he was fine

As a manager it's always hard to discipline someone who has just had 3 weeks off sick and then another 3 days for their childs sickness, come back and gone of sick again paid. I just don't really know what to do. I feel horrible just talking to them about it.

Sorry the paid bit should have been deleted, it was meant to be at the beginning

Parental leave of up to 13 weeks is a legal right:

"Both male and female employees with at least 1 year's continuous service with an employer qualify for unpaid parental leave in respect of children born or adopted on or after the 15th December 1994. (A part-time worker's entitlement is pro rata). The period of leave is 13 weeks for each child up to the child's 5th birthday."

[[http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/monster/empf48.html Monster Employment Law"

sorry, link here Monster Employment Law

why is it only til they are 5? are children not sick when they are older

Maybe they get sick less often after 5? I dont know... Should be longer.

Yes but it's also unpaid. Think about it, if you work 20 days per month, 1 week off with your kids being sick is a quarter of your wages. If you earn 1000 then you will take home 750 and if your rent is 500 you are fucked. So most people do this, go sick when their kids are sick and then when they are sick end up in trouble unless they have very understanding employers or landlords.

and what I meant was quoting a companies attendance procedure when you know someone is ill/or off work because their children are sick.

Most companies have an attendance procedure.

So really, if parental leave was paid (reimbursed by inland revenue) people would not have any reason to claim financial losses as reason to take sick children to nursery, when clearly they should be home.

This should be changed. It would make a huge difference to working parents. It is a pity that you shall be financially "punished" for caring for your sick children.

I dunno, my kids naturally want their mummy, i'm the one they want when they are ill so I pick them up from school and nursery previously.

It's a mans world, always has been and always will be- I believe this but it's not fair.I don't think women like me make it easier for men, I just know what the crack is now i'm a little older, not gonna fight it anymore

The rule in our house is if the infants have physical symptoms (a temperature, sickness etc) then they stay at home.

They don't stay at home with a cough or a cold. That would be absurd, no?

Isn't that a normal sort of standard? I can't imagine there are many people keeping their children off school or nursery with colds?