45k salary entirely eaten by childcare

[Sofiewoo]

Granted salaries aren’t what they were only a handful of years ago but aibu to be shocked that my 45k salary is now entirely eaten by childcare and getting to work??
I figured if you are earning in the 20s you would assume that but not mid 40s!

I’m trying to weigh up whether to just take the next year and a half off instead of working for nothing. I know, pension, career blah blah but it’s mentally very difficult to juggle drop offs, work schedules and sickness but be no better off financially at the end of the month.

Did anyone else not realise it was a bad as this?

I mean we’ve just had a decade of austerity, you can hardly use that as a metric for how successful public services can be!

I think a higher income family is hugely beneficial over their course of their entire childhood, and I don’t think it’s likely to take X number of years out and walk back into a mid 40s salary.

I’m very happy with my children’s structure and nursery routine and the youngest is a toddler not a baby.

Beneficial to who? More beneficial than having the memories of spending time with your kids during their childhood? Only happens once, soon gone. Its over in the blink of an eye. You ' ll never get it back. And nor will they.

I don’t think you answered my question though.

You say you’re very happy with it, but I wonder what you think the benefit for the children is in the 0-10 years, given your salary is just going on childcare?

Of course it’s sensible to think long term, but as a mum of teens I can tell you, you will never get those years back. Assuming you’re not in poverty, money really isn’t everything.

My career has been wiggly for sure, but I am far more successful and earn more now than when my kids were little and it was totally worth it.

Sorry, I thought you said the youngest was 1.

Some of Labour’s recent tax changes have hit nurseries / childcare particularly hard, as have general col rises over the past few years. The per hour rate paid by the government is ridiculously out of touch with the actual costs of providing care, which has meant providers have to find ways to make up the difference in a variety of ways. I don’t think many nurseries are raking it in, even with high fees and government funding- many are closing due to financial difficulties, which only compounds the childcare shortage.

@Kitte321 yes absolutely, we should offer tax free childcare and free hours. Oh yes, we actually do offer that don’t we 🤦🏼‍♀️

I completely understand where you are coming from. Those early years are so fleeting, and it’s natural to want to soak up every moment. For us though, continuing to work while our children were little actually helped us create the kind of life we’d always hoped to give them.

Staying in work gave me the opportunity to be involved in some really key projects, one of which led to a promotion and helped me become a specialist in a new area. Over time, that’s meant a big step forward in my career and financial stability. My partner was able to move into a better-paid, more flexible role, which gave us both more balance and time as the kids grew.

Because of those decisions, we have been able to buy a lovely home near the beach and great schools. Our children, now 8 and 10, have had a really happy, opportunity-filled start, with access to clubs, sports, and a brilliant education. We’re now in a position where one of us can be at the school gates every day for pick up; we can both go to every school event, and we have the flexibility to prioritise family time whenever we need to.

We have so many fond memories from their early years, both from the time we spent together and the experiences they had at nursery, which they genuinely loved. I know this approach isn’t right for everyone, but for us, it’s worked out in a way that’s given our children a stable, happy childhood and allowed us to be really present as they grow up. Not to mention that we have much more interesting work to do now with the progression we’ve made and our pensions are looking very healthy (I’m currently at a point where I will get 40% of my final salary and that’s only going up), which is reassuring.

You need to educate yourself on all of the issues with the ‘free’ hours. Many families have been left with soaring bills because of ‘extras’ applied. It’s not childcare providers fault - they simply can’t provide childcare for the hourly rate provided. Some are choosing not to offer the ‘free’ hours at all.
In addition, standards are in free fall. Go and have a look at the increase in incidents in nurseries.
Tax free childcare at 2k is a drop in a very large ocean for most.
But yes 🤦‍♀️

But part of that cost in many cases is funding the dividends for CEOs and shareholders, expensive mortgage or rent. Plus the nursery owner will want to take a hefty salary too.

Nurseries must be profitable or else you wouldn’t see multiple sites being created by the same owner.

Nurseries you see closing may be due to low birth rates in an area or people (usually women) taking a career break as they can’t afford childcare as it’s too expensive (even with the funded hours as fees have gone up to maintain profits).

Many nurseries are making it extremely difficult for parents to bring their child’s own lunches or providing nappies etc. For lunches, they are citing allergies as their insurance policy won’t cover it or that they haven’t got room for toddler lunch bags.
Schools seem to manage fine with allowing parents to provide own lunches.

The funding for babies and 2 year olds often exceeds the nurseries’ hourly rate.

When I went back to work after DS3 and had 2 children in full time care, I was earning £1550 after tax a month. Childcare was £1500 a month. I worked for 3 years for £50 a month. Now, 15 years later, my career has progressed and I earn £5300 after tax, so staying and working, progressing in my career has definitely made those struggles worth it. Plus I have a great pension.

@Kitte321 you assume I’m not already educated which is incorrect. I just have a different view which is that having children doesn’t give you entitlement. There are families a lot poorer than OP and in a lot worse situation, she needs to shut up or put up.

Having children doesn’t give you ‘entitlement’? Get a grip.
So you’re happy to discourage parents to such an extent that falling birth rates get worse?
You’re happy with the gender pay gap and under representation of females at leadership level because women are forced to leave the workplace?&
You are okay at creating over reliance on benefits because single parents simply can’t get back into work? And then the poverty that sometimes follows?
Adequate funding and access to good quality childcare benefits society as a whole. The system needs reform.

Tbh, I think it is a bit weird to view it as working for £50 a month. The logic of that is that childcare should be free, so anything you spend on it isn’t real money you earned. Do people think that way about all their expenses? Do they take the cost of clothing and feeding their children off their earnings when working out how much they are “working for” each month? Do people who send their children to private school take school fees off their overall salary before deciding how much they are working for each month?

Wouldn’t it be more honest and accurate to say that you recognise that you and your children are losing out on something of great value by having them in nursery for enough hours to enable both parents to work full time, and that you are really not convinced that the sacrifices are outweighed by the benefits?

@Kitte321 you realise you have just agreed with what I said right? OP isn’t being forced though is she, she is choosing to and has a partner to pick up the bills. Not everyone has that choice. And where did I say I agreed with that lack of fairness for women??!?

The NHS was running fine under Labour because they were spending money that they didn’t have, which is like building your house on sand; eventually it’ll all fall down. PFI crippled the NHS, but that was Labour’s “investment” in making things better. Borrowing money without actually growing the economy is not investing, it’s theft from future generations.

All countries have borrowed money to fund projects. Those which do so the least tend to be oil rich and therefore have humongous trade surpluses. What are stock markets and capitalism but ways of using the assets and wealth of others? To view securing health and education of the population of a country as nothing but an expense is to view the vast majority of the people in said country as a poor investment. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy, really - treat your assets like crap and you run them down to the point they are no longer a viable asset, but a drain on resources. No point then acting surprised when you end up with low productivity and poor health, when you had such a low opinion of the asset in the first place. Also, no point borrowing money to spend on projects that can’t be fulfilled because you don’t have people with the skills, ethics and resilience to carry them out.

This is an article on the state nursery provision that Labour is looking to implement (article is from 2022 but they are already starting the project)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/05/labour-plans-expansion-of-state-nursery-sector-in-england-to-ease-pressure-on-parents

And the kids?

Honestly, the focus of this thread is so depressing. It’s all about money and career progression.

Since when did we all believe these were the most important things in life? It’s so sad.

I think people see it this way because, unlike other bills, the childcare bill exists only to enable her to work. If she didn’t work, she wouldn’t have it.

So she’s right - she was basically putting her children in childcare with strangers for £50 a month.

Kids benefit from financial stability.

Money and career progression only doesn't seem to matter when we're talking about mothers who dare to want careers. Men who are fathers are heroes for progressing their careers and financially providing for their children.

The childcare bill would exist to enable them both to work. Childcare isn't just to enable women to work.

Kids benefit from a lot of things, and financial stability is one of those things, not all of them. If it can be achieved without causing stress elsewhere, then that’s great. The issue comes when prioritising career progression comes at the expense of enjoyment of life, the energy to maintain healthy relationships, and good physical and mental health. It is not a good thing that so many women on this thread agree that their children’s early years were a stressful, expensive slog that had to be endured and got through, but they think it was worth it once they’d got through it and missed out on enjoyment from having children during their early years. It’s not a good thing that some people are saying they’d be no good at caring for their kids anyway and a nursery was much better for their kids (especially since a growing number of children are getting to school age unable to brush their own teeth and still going round in nappies, because a growing number of parents don’t seem to think dealing with teeth and continence are within their skillset or their responsibility). It’s not a good thing that children don’t ever really seem to be the focus of these conversations, but rather what is fair for the mother or father, how expensive it is to have children, and why women shouldn’t have to be the ones to compromise.

Children have two parents. Of course women shouldn't have to be the ones to compromise, especially if it leaves them in a vulnerable position financially which isn't good for children either should the relationship or marriage not end well.

Of course parents have to be considered too. Ask any one who has grown up with a SAHM who doesn't want to be a SAHM, it certainly doesn't benefit the children.