Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Who are these people that the government want to get back to work?

156 replies

MissHoneysHappyEnding · 15/03/2023 08:10

As in, the workers who they hope will come back because of free childcare.
I don't know many mums that don't go back to work straight away.
The few I have met feel strongly about being at home and I don't think free hours would change that.
The ones (two) I have met who left jobs and would like to return but can't afford childcare are in healthcare and hospitality where regular shifts don't fit in with nursery opening times anyway.
Tbh and only in my opinion, a lot of the 'we can't afford childcare so I had to give up my job' crew are often told that by controlling DH/ DPs or don't really want to go back to work anyway. Happy to be proved wrong!

OP posts:
hotpotlover · 15/03/2023 09:02

I am one of these women that has returned to work with a 2 1/2 year old and a 1 year old.

There's plenty of women who want to return to work quickly (fairly normal in my circle) and will benefit from free childcare.

Figgygal · 15/03/2023 09:03

It's vote winning nonsense
Won't make a difference other than some people having more children that they can now afford because the government is funding their lifestyle choices.

They need to pay the providers enough to make it work or there will be less providers for these kids anyway.

Why isn't the money available for the NHS, Education, overhauling the immigration processing system?

Rachaelrachael · 15/03/2023 09:04

Me. I didn't go back to my professional job as had 2 under 2 and it wasn't worth it. I've been itching to get back to work and now I can!

Anotherturnipforthebooks · 15/03/2023 09:05

Londontoderby · 15/03/2023 08:33

Agreed! There should be funding for breakfast, after school clubs and term holidays instead, that would actually help working mums to keep a job

It sounds like they may scrap TFC for school aged children which means that wrap around and holiday care is going to
get more expensive for a lot of people.

Untitledsquatboulder · 15/03/2023 09:07

I know a couple of men who have come back into the workforce in their mid 50s. Nothing to do with the government or incentives - in both cases the parent they were caring for died.

Untitledsquatboulder · 15/03/2023 09:08

Separate to which I think that subsidising childcare so parents can get back to work is a good thing.

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 09:09

It's unbelievably short sighted for a woman to be saying it wasn't worth going back to work.

When will people wake up to this?

WeWereInParis · 15/03/2023 09:10

Our childcare costs about £1,400 a month for two DDs. Surely there are people who earn less than that who would want to be in work but can't afford to?

Not that this policy will actually help as it won't magic up any extra spaces, and won't be funded properly.

JustFrustrated · 15/03/2023 09:11

I don't think it's intended to cover the full cost of childcare. Just, reduce it.

So no, it won't apply to those only wanting school hours jobs, but more those in standard hours work.

So my colleagues, it will massively benefit them, only having to pay for 15 hours a week instead of 45, for example.

MajorCarolDanvers · 15/03/2023 09:12

This is the carrot.

The stick will be a reduction in the amount of benefits that can be claimed for being a SAHP.

WeWereInParis · 15/03/2023 09:14

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 09:09

It's unbelievably short sighted for a woman to be saying it wasn't worth going back to work.

When will people wake up to this?

I agree that long term it benefits a woman to stay in work (pension, career progression etc), but some families can't afford to look at it that way. If going back to work will earn you less than childcare will cost, you may not have enough in the family budget to take that hit.

Snowjokes · 15/03/2023 09:19

Childcare was why I had to take a couple of years out, but availability not cost. There were literally zero places available for a one year old within 5 miles at 6 months notice. Now I have a different issue - I’d like to move jobs but finding one that’s part time with flexibility is proving very hard.

So I think this will hugely benefit some people (assuming it’s coupled with an increase in the rates paid by gov), but it’s still only a small part of the puzzle.

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 09:22

@WeWereInParis

Maybe.

But more needs to be done to make people stop viewing it as the woman's cost.

Pre kids men and women earn the same. Yet its always the woman giving up work or reducing their hours

HamzasHairnet · 15/03/2023 09:24

cupofteaandabiccyplease · 15/03/2023 09:02

To those who retired early if they were able to do that and don't want to work anymore why shouldn't they, provided they can afford to use savings and not be living off benefits.

Exactly! I took my teacher pension last summer, aged 55. I have no intention going back to work. Enjoying having time to myself too much.

ShirleyPhallus · 15/03/2023 09:27

I just can’t really see how it will work. What will happen to ratios, places, staffing etc etc? Nurseries barely make anything as it is, how will they work out the finances for it

Sleepinatent · 15/03/2023 09:27

The people I know who don't work because they have children keep having more children so they don't have to work. I know lots of non working mum's and I don't think any of them will be included to find a job because of this.

Sleepinatent · 15/03/2023 09:28

Inclined*

BloodyHellKen · 15/03/2023 09:29

I could be wrong, but it did cross my mind that with the increase in pension allowance at the same time as the 'come back to work' initiative the government were trying to appeal to people like hospital consultants who can afford to retire early at often a great loss to their profession.

Colourinsidethelines · 15/03/2023 09:34

I left part time teaching because I had three children under two (twins) and one with disabilities for whom childcare was non-existent. So for us it was genuinely unaffordable to be paying for three. And no child care would have taken my daughter at that point with her medical issues. At that time it would have cost us £1700 a month and I earned £1200, DH about £2000 a month.

Now I work a few hours a week freelance and care for DD, DH works full time and the rest is made up from carers allowance, DLA and UC. So I’m one they would love to get back to work but with the care DD needs and lack of wrap around care for disabled children there is no chance.

Original poster
MissHoneysHappyEnding · 15/03/2023 09:35

Sorry, just to be clear I know it will be a massive bonus to those who are already working and crippled by childcare. To be honest there are other issues apart from just childcare costs which might prevent someone returning to the work place. Being a parent to a child with additional needs, having children already at school who need picking up, increase in fuel costs, longer hours expected by employers ... so many reasons.

OP posts:
Kabalagala · 15/03/2023 09:38

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 09:09

It's unbelievably short sighted for a woman to be saying it wasn't worth going back to work.

When will people wake up to this?

But it's not always that simple. I make less than childcare costs. DH doesn't earn enough to cover the shortfall if we want to eat as well as pay nursery. We literally can't afford for me to work currently.

HistoryFanatic · 15/03/2023 09:39

Sleepinatent · 15/03/2023 09:27

The people I know who don't work because they have children keep having more children so they don't have to work. I know lots of non working mum's and I don't think any of them will be included to find a job because of this.

Obviously will be going without due to the UC two child cap. They won't get extra money.

Aposterhasnoname · 15/03/2023 09:39

Well my DD for a start that couldn’t afford to go back to work but now can.

Only on mumsnet do you get people who cannot conceive that there are people outside their own circles that have different circumstances.

5foot5 · 15/03/2023 09:41

Dotjones · 15/03/2023 08:56

The problem is the gap between the type of people required and the type of people who choose not to work. The pandemic spurred a lot of people to retire early - by definition, people who had good salaries beforehand to be able to retire early. These aren't the sort of people there is a huge requirement for though - businesses aren't struggling to recruit in highly paid roles, they're struggling to recruit in minimum wage/zero hour contract roles. The 100K systems analyst isn't going to take a minimum wage job cleaning office toilets or fruit-picking.

Yes, this. And what@Teribus21 said about trying to divert attention from this situation being largely self inflicted because of Brexit.

DH and I retired in 2021. I was 59 and he was 63 and we could afford to because of 40 odd years paying in to pension schemes. Like hell am I going fruit picking!

CheersForThatEh · 15/03/2023 09:43

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 09:22

@WeWereInParis

Maybe.

But more needs to be done to make people stop viewing it as the woman's cost.

Pre kids men and women earn the same. Yet its always the woman giving up work or reducing their hours

This is tricky because regardless 9f what the law says, there is 6 months of a woman looking pregnant and 12 months maternity leave, which sometimes means that regardless of the law, some employers may be more likely to promote a male counterpart which is where the earnings gap starts.

But, I agree with your point, that there is a perception that childcare costs the same as a woman's salary so she might as well give up work instead of paying for childcare. But the childcare is only half her responsibility and if the man is earning more he should want to pay proportionately more as the woman staying in work increases her future earnings potential.

I appreciate the honesty of people that just say want to be a SAHP. It's fine. And finances may be part of the decision bit I dont like the framing that it is the equivalent of her salary because work is worth more longer term than just the cash in the bank at the end of the month.