Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

anyone else a bit suspicious about this nursery whistleblower doc?

247 replies

minouminou · 05/03/2008 20:31

she doesn't half seem to be good at getting jobs
unless the buttons and mark warner jobs were 2 out of many she applied for

OP posts:
mehdismummy · 05/03/2008 20:45

i think that is probably the case. Dont kid yourselves. This is happens and is happening. This world is sick

MotherFunk · 05/03/2008 20:57

Message withdrawn

mumofdjandp · 05/03/2008 21:02

scary biscuits

Original poster
minouminou · 05/03/2008 21:04

i've no doubt there are appalling nurseries etc out there, what i'm sus about is the way she got all those jobs with such ease....
i just feel there's something not 100% about this doc

OP posts:
Triathlete · 05/03/2008 21:14

They've probably been making it for a year and edited it down heavily.

Original poster
minouminou · 05/03/2008 21:17

oh yeah, deffo, that's why i was wondering if she'd applied for dozens of jobs and got the 3 she ended up with
parents are now, gonna be scared, but powerless to do anything about it

OP posts:
UnquietDad · 05/03/2008 21:18

She also has. A really deadpan. And emotionless. And annoying. Way of narrating. Making it sound. As if they are not her own. Words.

chelsygirl · 05/03/2008 21:20

she's not emotionally involved as she doesn't have kids in childcare

don't ignore what the ofsted inspector was saying, this is the real issue, not what the reporter sounded like

Original poster
minouminou · 05/03/2008 21:21

you don't think she's a daily mail stooge/robot, do you UQD?
she's out to cause droves of women to give up work and take their children out of nurseries???????????????
(joke, btw)

OP posts:
talky · 05/03/2008 21:23

there probably is some truth there but at the end of the day the film makers are out to make good telly. their aim is not to produce unbiased work that reflects the general picture of child care. I think the main story was meant to be about the corruption at Ofsted.

FairyMum · 05/03/2008 21:24

Actually I question what the ofsted inspector was saying. It is so exaaggerated it makes me think she or he does not actually agree with children in childcare. It is just too extreme so becomes uniteresting to me which is a shame. If they had presented a more balanced view I think it would have given them more credibility in my eyes anyway.

dinny · 05/03/2008 21:26

believe me, there are strict editorial guidelines governing programme making. and the BBC are especially careful when making investigative programmes such as this due to potential libel/slander.

talky · 05/03/2008 21:26

I agree with Fairy. not saying it's completely untrue but just that it's not a perhaps a true reflection what's going on generally. the childminder issue was just skimmed over and hardly madea thorgh case.

princessosyth · 05/03/2008 21:26

I'm not suspicious about the fact that she seemed to get jobs with relative ease. On paper she had the relevant skills, she was very articulate so would have interviewed well and nurseries are crying out for staff. I have no experience (other than being a mum) but I have told that I would have no problem in getting a job.

stuffitllama · 05/03/2008 21:27

The main point was really that Ofsted reports and registration can't be trusted, and some examples were given.

The Mark Warner thing seemed to be a tag on to give a bit of high-end balance.

This is not a conspiracy to end the era of the working mother.

RahRahRachel · 05/03/2008 21:27

I'm sure she applied for lots of jobs.

However, it's not hard to get nursery jobs without any experience/quals etc. A friend of mine who lost her secretarial job got a job in a nursery as a last resort - no childcare experience, no qualifications, didn't check her references etc. She absolutely HATES kids as well, the job was hellish for her.

Original poster
minouminou · 05/03/2008 21:27

there's also the bit with drills and other tools left near the children at Buttons
i was like...so what, they have a pool outside, filled with acid, and in the pool are sharks, with laser guns....
dunno....what was the agenda?

OP posts:
scottishmummy · 05/03/2008 21:27

never watch any of those programmes. VHAppy with my nursery provision. aware of course bad practice exists whether be CM or nursery.

Ags · 05/03/2008 21:28

Subject matter aside, it was really unprofessional in it's presentation and narrative. The journalist was 21 but seemed even younger and agree about the delivery of the narration.

PrincessPeaHead · 05/03/2008 21:28

there is another thread on this here.

I'm amazed that you think it is untrue. It matches everything I've ever heard about the majority of day nurseries (and I've heard it from the nannies who have worked in them and left in horror!)

Original poster
minouminou · 05/03/2008 21:29

ok...interesting about the jobs
were your chums CRB'd?

OP posts:
talky · 05/03/2008 21:30

not suggesting it's libel, they obviously were careful to pick extreme cases and then present the whole film in a hard hitting way.

talky · 05/03/2008 21:30

not suggesting it's libel, they obviously were careful to pick extreme cases and then present the whole film in a hard hitting way.

LynetteScavo · 05/03/2008 21:30

Childcare is usually very low paid, and there is a shortage of people wanting to work in this sector (so I'm told)

If she doesn't have a face that will scare small children, and can actually speak full sentences, and fill out an application form, she was pretty much guarenteed a job.

What we don't know was how many jobs she had during the course of her research, where she was CRB checked, and the nurseys followed good practice.

PrincessPeaHead · 05/03/2008 21:30

I think she got every job she applied for, she didn't say that she had applied to X and been caught out by her CV, and you can rest assured that the BBC would have put that in had it been the case.

And it was right that the journalist should be 21 - practically all the staff at those places are 21 or under - nobody any older would work for those wages.