What % of your income from work do you spend because of work?

[verdantverdure]

AIBU to ask you what percentage of your income from working you spend because you are working?

A younger family member has asked me to cast an eye over her sums and it looks to me like she can't afford to go back to work after maternity leave.

Once you add up nursery and the commute, she's already running at a loss even before she buys new work clothes to fit her post pregnancy figure and current norms at her workplace.

Not including convenience foods such as pre chopped veg or a bought in lasagne etc so she can get dinner on the table soon after she gets home, or takeaways for the nights she's too shattered to do that.

A cleaner do her weekends can be family time not housework time?

Treats to cheer her up because life is a bit of a grind?

Stuff like hair, make up and nails so she looks "groomed" at work?

What about you?

What percentage of your income from working do you spend because you are working?

Ha!

I work in a very corporate job and am client facing.

I don't wear make up or have my nails done. I have my hair trimmed once every 3/4 months.

I've got to admit, like pp have said, it is frustrating that there's an implied assumption that it's all the woman's salary that's going on childcare if she works. Wouldn't it be just as accurate to say that she will cover the mortgage and bills and her husband's salary is disappearing on childcare because he's choosing to keep working full time despite having two young children? In our case, my husband works part time around the kids and I work FT - so if he goes back to FT working, is it mine or his responsibility that we're incurring higher childcare costs? Would my wage be being frittered away on nursery hours because of his choice to work more or would it be his wage? 🤔

When doing your calculations you need to factor in opportunity costs ie pay increases over the years stay at home, income differential when she returns to work, lost pension contributions and cumulative impact of that.

Hair - she can continue with what she is doing and wear hair up in a polished roll, bun, braid. No need to blow dry. She could also learn to do blow outs herself.

Nails, it's very easy to do those yourself and costs very little. I do mine weekly.

Wardrobe, that will be an initial outlay. Purchasing quality pieces will last her the time she is requiring childcare.

Shoes she should already have. They don't require replacement frequently and if purchased thoughtfully match many outfits.

The rest is just cost of living. People buy convenience foods and all the other guff you mentioned regardless of whether they work or not.

I'm surprised she is just realising now that children cost and disposable family income drops when you have children. The value of working through early childhood years is that your earning potential actually increases, not drops. You should get payrises. Payments are made for your future pension.

It depends how you manage your household finances.

Personally, ours are pooled. However, when I increase my hours (or when my partner does) we look at what proportion of that increased income will become “work related expense” - despite the fact it comes out of our joint bank account.

For example, if i work 5 days and my partner works 3 days, we may spend £50/week on “work expenses” but if he increased his days to 5 days we’d have an extra £250 in the “pot” but £150 then needs to come out the “pot” for extra expenses, therefore he is only making, in effect, £50 for each of the extra days he works. And that £50 would go directly back into the “pot” which we both live off of. I don’t need to pay him a proportion of the childcare costs.

About 30pc of my income on travel costs. Take lunches into work. Batch cook.

it seems that you’re only factoring in short term costs. Incredibly short sighted. Her career trajectory, her pension and her independence are important to factor in. I went part time after children, then got divorced - I was so thankful to have my own money.

It's not the fact that she's working but the nature of her work. Out of the house 12+ hours with young kids would be prohibitively expensive for anyone, with regard to childcare costs.

Thats not typical for a corporate gig, either. I earn (low) six figures in a corporate, support-type role and I work 8-4, typically.

I too don't recognise anything you write as a work expense. Or rather they are not needed. I don't buy most of eggs you list. Your view of it is odd. 'New clothes to fit new figure', I mean come on! I have my hair cut through choice not work related and if I wasn't working I'd still choose to have it cut.

Your comment about nail bars and hair colour has made me cringe, wince. Most of my friends don't have their nails done. Weekly. Clean neat natural nails are fine. My friends are top lawyers in London. This thread has made me ashamed to even tell them that someone has written such a thing on mn. Shame on you. What a sad and sorry state of affairs, in 2023. This should be in the feminist section of mn, not!

That's true, it shouldn't be a suprise that if both parents are out of the house for 12hrs a day 5 days a week that childcare costs are going to be on the high side...

If they want to increase their left over income after childcare they need to either get better paying jobs, or more flexible roles, less hours, nearer home / shorter commute.

There's the hidden cost of working, then the hidden cost of working really long hours with a long and expensive commute...(and at a job that requires expensive 'grooming' treatments apparently) Two quite different things.

If I'm honest I'd be asking if the parents did any planning or thinking before having kids because it sounds like they didn't.

Now, having read through the thread - the fact that both parents according to the childcare schedule would be out the house for 12 hours a day makes me think there's actually a bigger issue here & should they have even had kids? If you don't see them for 5 days a week and put them in childcare for 12 hours... When are you actually parenting?

Noone is particularly looking great here, complaining they can't afford luxuries which aren't essential. No consideration to the kids needs and no actual planning before having extra kids - I've got little to no sympathy for the couple concerned.

@Jimboscott0115 many standard shifts in the nhs are >12hrs.

I kind of struggle to believe people who say going to work costs them nothing and they would have this car anyway, and never buy work clothes or convenience foods for dinner or a sandwich from Pret to save time and effort.
Why do you struggle to believe people?
I live 10 mins from work. I often cycle in. I have a car and get paid mileage when I use it.
My work clothes ate the sane as my casual clothes. I can wear what I like but it would be idd to dress up in my job. We usually eat at work but if there is anything specific we want to eat we take that in.
So what's it costing me and why wouldn't you believe me?

Oh, I don't doubt it but given these are essentially 9-5 jobs I was assuming they weren't NHS - the disparity the OP discussed in salary of a local role and one that requires an expensive commute also led me down this path.

But ultimately it's still something that should be factored in when having kids and the costs weren't unknown to them so I do think a lack of foresight is definitely at play here.

Yes, but they’re not five days a week, week in, week out. There’s a shift pattern/rota.

I can 100% swear I have never bought a sandwich from Pret. The only food retailer within walking distance from my work is an Aldi. 😁

Seriously though. If this is London, the only couple I know there who are both working corporate jobs with long commutes do in fact have a nanny, because they both earn over 100k. If they didn't earn that, one of them would have changed jobs. Nobody pays for nursery plus wraparound for preschoolers when nurseries can be 7am-6.30pm.

Where would she even be sourcing this wraparound care for children starting at home from 6am?

To be honest, I would judge someone in a professional role who had painted nails or lots of makeup on. It's tacky.

It's also illegal to impose onerous clothing and grooming standards in women that do not apply equally to men.

Your friend's problem is not a financial one. It is that the practical demands of her frankly bizarre-sounding job, which appears to be very far away from home, are not compatible with having two young children.

I am also curious over why the OP thinks they’d have to buy a potential nanny a car.

@Verylongtime we have them each week. You still have to organise childcare that exceeds these hours 7 days a week as nursery and childminders often won’t offer a service to match a rota that changes week by week; basic is 48 hours which even exceeds what a nanny can offer. I’m not saying you can’t have foresight but things change; support networks die, job plans change.

My only extra costs are commuting and childcare. Grooming I do anyway, clothes I buy anyway. Lunch as a work cost? Does she not eat lunch outside of work?

In a kind way, it sounds like you/she is overthinking it. It's not just about the bottom line, it's pension, national insurance, career progression, financial independance. Unless they are genuinely hundreds in the red every month because of commuting and childcare, going back to work is usually the sensible choice.

7.5% ish if I combine mine and DH's salary and split our work related costs 50:50- commuting costs, childcare, rough spend on clothes, work nights out, collections etc.

If we took the individual incomes and assumed 100% of the childcare for that person it would be about 15% for DH and 8ish for me. We only have wraparound care for DD5 though- and free holiday childcare from grandparents. I buy most of my work clothes on Vinted- good quality brands but a fraction of the price.

I’ve never had a cleaner despite always working full time with children. I’ve often wanted one however but just do a room each night instead.
I also love a blow dry on occasion especially when I don’t really need a hair cut but want nice hair. It’s cheaper too!

Our finances are pooled as well. Which is why i don't understand the notion that it is one parent's (generally the woman’s) responsibility/costs if childcare is required. In the scenario on this thread, the husband could just as easily be said to be working for peanuts to cover childcare but that's not how it's been worded. In fact, what is fairer would be to consider both of their career options when thinking about how to maximise income and minimise costs.

Have what each week? I work a shift job myself, with shifts being 12 hours or 10 or 8, including weekends and bank holidays, starting at 6am, or 4pm, or random hours between, and every week is different. Shift work with revolving rotas is extremely hard to deal with for parents needing childcare, harder than the OP’s problem of long hours, but the advantage of regular hours.

I believe, in the case of the OP, that it is because the mother is currently not in the workforce and she is rejoining the workforce.