To ask why they would reduce staff ?

[VioletSkies12]

I read an article about a nursery concerned about the new funding rules coming into place. One manager said that she would have to cut staff members hours down . Why would this be the case if they are expecting to get more kids ?

Ironically, childminders trying to claim universal credit are having an absolute nightmare. They are being told they don't charge enough per hour. So a government department are complaining that a government department aren't paying enough. And the result is that they are told to either charge more or get a new job.

But if the offer for some don't they have to offer for all?
When DD was little and it first came in it was effectively a discount on your existing nursery bill. But the nurseries able to say to parents just looking for the free hours that they didn't have part time places available...only full time.
So you got was it 3hrs a day funded but only if you paid for the rest of the day.

The gov decided that was unfair because people were being charged high fees for hours they didn't want....in some cases, or being refused a place because they couldn't pay the top up. But the other POV was the nursery could easily fill those places with full time paying families, and play groups offering just 3 hrs a day were available elsewhere.

Our nursery work it so you have 6 free hours a day but you have to book for 10 hours a day, so they charge extra for those 4 hours. They’re clear that it’s because the government don’t pay enough for the funded hours. I guess some nurseries can’t do it this way if most of their customers are on low incomes so couldn’t afford to pay the extra.

I don’t think anyone would complain if they changed the system to say you get x amount towards childcare costs which might buy you 10 hours at one nursery and 30 hours at another and you can top it up yourself, but then the government couldn’t claim they were giving 30 “free” hours.

But if the offer for some don't they have to offer for all?

Can't see how that would work. Capacity alone means they might not be able to. Even if money and staff were no problem, size of premises is going to be a limitation.

i work at a nursery and we are ALWAYS overstaffed on any day with a higher ratio than legally required - but it's getting difficult to afford to do this - so we possibly will have to just cut back some hours to make it work financially - which is terrible as we feel the actual legal ratio's are not good enough!

The last nursery I worked in had the bare minimum of qualified staff they could get away with... Bulk of the staff were under 22 and/or apprentices. No one had full time hours, and hokidays/sickness were not covered. I assume all of this was to keep the wage bill to a minimum. I was qualified to foundation degree level and on minimum wage. The minimum wage went up shortly after I left, and I know the management were struggling to work out where the extra money would come from as they were adament they did not want to put the fees up (majority were funded anyway).

I quite often see them advertising jobs but think they are having trouble recruiting /retaining.

They want nurseries to run at a loss.

Then guess what they will do ???? They will get rid of private nurseries and it will all be government run!

I am an EYFS teacher and we believe the government hope to control all nursery childcare .

Yes there are endless job adverts asking for qualified staff especially L3. I can imagine as I said before that the ones at risk of their hours being cut will be the unqualified or possibly the level 2’s

Then guess what they will do ???? They will get rid of private nurseries and it will all be government run!

I am an EYFS teacher and we believe the government hope to control all nursery childcare .
I cynically wonder which friends or family of current government figures have interests in this area.

Run the sector into the ground, then say that because there's a huge need for childcare they'll ask for private interests who can run chains of nurseries/childcare organisations, then huge amounts of money will be paid to these groups to provide childcare. Voila. More taxpayers' money nearly transferred to their mates, probably at a much higher rate than they're currently funding nurseries.

People have been saying this for years about the NHS. I don't think the government cares enough about either sector to do this.

People have been saying this for years about the NHS. I don't think the government cares enough about either sector to do this.
They've been contracting out NHS services for ages though.

Similar problems with the rail too. Run it into the ground and spend huge amounts of money propping up private interests.

I agree they don't care about either sector though. Their interests aren't in providing patients and families with high quality care. Their interests lie in maximising asset transfer from normal people to their contacts.

Rishi Sunak's wife has an interest in at least one company that stands to benefit from the proposed changes to childcare. I doubt she is the only one.

Doesn’t she own part of Koru kids? I guess more will use that service if they can’t get their kids into nursery

Yes she does.
He was shady on his declarations I believe. Declared the overall investment firm but conveniently missed out information about what sort of interests it has because it was all done within the rules. Aka it's very useful to declare one umbrella company and try to avoid people noticing which pies have fingers in.

The funding from the Government isn't as much as parents pay. I think it was £9 an hour for a child in a nursery near us but the LA only paid £5 an hour. Many settings can't manage to pay high staff wages as well as all the bills going up for utilities, food etc.

The nursery I work at still charges 10 ph on funded hours.
The funded hours are also term time only .