Childcare is not a dumping ground for the unemployable

[UnsolvedMysteriesRobertStack]

AIBU to feel frustrated with the new staff in childcare?

I don’t want to sound harsh, but I’m seeing more and more new staff who are simply not suited for childcare, and I’m wondering if they're being sent here because the job centre is forcing them into work. I'm talking about staff with complex ASD needs, and some who haven’t worked since their early 20s but are now being placed into jobs. There are staff who can't read or write, and they expect to just sit or tidy up all day. My colleagues and I are picking up the slack, feeling understaffed, and having to tiptoe around these situations. It’s never been this bad before.

Some staff won’t touch certain fruits due to sensory issues, can’t read a book, can’t communicate effectively, can’t lift, can’t change nappies, and struggle to talk to parents. And they’re all getting paid the same as the rest of us. I’m just wondering where these people are coming from, as it feels like there’s no industry standard anymore. It makes me feel like my qualifications and experience are being devalued. We’ve been patient, but the burden feels heavier each day.

I totally agree (and a huge part of why I've never sent my children to childcare.

However, I do see it from the other point of view.

Universal Credit and the powers that control that are hell bent on getting everyone into work, whether they can or not. People are sanctioned if they don't look for work, so many will apply for jobs that they're absolutely not suitable for. Most employers will take one look at their application, or get them into interview and then realise they're completely unsuitable for that job, whatever the reason.

Nursery staff are so underpaid for the important job they do, so don't attract the people that they need. This means they're short staffed, and lose money when they can't take children on, or have to close. So the bosses will take on any person they can to be a body in the room, keep their ratios and let them stay open. This means they end up with people who don't trally want to be there or shouldn't be there because they're not suitable for the job.

Not every unemployed person wants or needs to be unemployed. After taking years out of the work place for the kids thank god the jobcentre helped me find a job I think they have a deal with certain workplaces.
Otherwise most employers look at a "CV gap" and just disregard you straight away.

Maybe some of the people in ops workplace shouldn't be there but I'd bet a lot of them would just learn on the job given time

In a nutshell.

And 'twas ever thus.

I've been on MN more than 15 years, during Osborne's austerity and more, and it never changes.

"It could be argued that if it isn’t being claimed then it maybe it isn’t needed."

In many cases it isn't being claimed because of what people have to go through to get it and keep it. It's often better to have a level of poverty but not have every level of pride knocked out of you.

For others it's simply too complicated or damaging, or they have withdrawn from it because they are scared of the repercussions of being made to do things they are unsuited to.

I know two autistic young women with BPD funneled into child care, via agencies offering training that they were mandatorily referred to by the job center. Both are worryingly unsuited to the work, but also scared about it.

One is simply unable to understand needs or see the children as more than bottoms and noses to be wiped and to be told off when breaking rules.
She finds the first two tasks disgusting and tells the children thoroughly.
She has relayed the idea that making sure they follow the rules is what she sees as central to her role, and has been accused of repeatedly picking on specific children and making their daycare miserable.

The other has been flagged up to her agency as having far too high a record of dramatic incidents related to children by several placements who don't want her back.
She is being diverted to disabled and elderly care as a high ratio of dramas involving them is considered to be more normal so will raise less concerns.

It’s a feminist issue too. That girls (and it is mostly girls) who attain poor gcses are directed to childcare, cookery or beauty as career paths on leaving school.
Yet men who attain good gcses are encouraged to take up trades which will have excellent earning potential (plumbing , construction and so on).

Sorry don’t know how to edit , boys with poor gcses!

In the OPs case a review of task allocation would also be helpful. The person who can't lift can probably read. The person who can't read can probably clean and tidy toys. If employers want a diverse workforce they need to recognise that a one size fits all role isn't going to work and start seeing their staff as individuals, using each to their abilities. However, this takes significant work on an ongoing basis and many employers lack the skills or motivation to do it properly.

Yep. Some people refuse to understand that their belief that a person should be working doesn't automatically create a job where that person can be productive enough to cover the cost of their wage to the organisation.

Perfectly put.

PIP has a fraud rate of... 0%

This is quite patently untrue. It simply shows that no effort went into detecting fraud. Any time money is available there will be those who will seek to obtain it fraudulently. It is beyond naive to think otherwise.

You think people are putting their children into childcare because they don’t value SAHP? You don’t think many working parents would rather be at home with their children rather than having to go out and earn enough money to just about scrape by? How fortunate you are to be able to do this. Don’t be a dick about it.

I agree with this, but if someone is just cleaning toys for eg and not having to do paperwork or deal with difficult parents etc, should they be on the same wage as someone who does? The trouble is most staff who work in childcare are on minimum wage anyway.

I think there is a lot of expectation of what a min wage worker is expected to do, their responsibilities and how they should do their job.
My friend worked in a nursery, she has a level 3 qualification. She was paid pennies above min wage and expected to do observations, write reports etc. If she had moved to retail, she would have had better pay and less stress. Having said that all staff that were employed by the nursery had to either be qualified or had to be doing an apprenticeship so I can’t imagine that any would be illiterate. Many doing apprenticeships left as the money is even less for a full on job.

I have another friend who works in a medical centre (non clinical) and the amount they are expected to know and what they are expected to do for min wage is crazy imo. Patients will huff and puff and sometimes be abusive to them but I sometimes wonder if they realise that they are all on min wage, work 10 hour shifts with 1/2 hour break and would get paid more if they worked in McDonald’s!
Where I live, I often see min wage jobs asking for a range of qualifications and sometimes even additional languages and unfortunately there are far more applicants than jobs.

BTW, as a disabled person myself, I've absolutely had to solve the challenge of finding meaningful activity that gives some sort structure to my life and value to my existence.

I do try to do things which have a value to other people and wider society.

None of this involves paid employment.

I just can't do nearly enough, or be anywhere near reliable enough, to fulfill a contractual obligation for anything. On bad days I can't even write an MN post.

I love this way of putting it. Having enough value to an employer to consistently cover NMW plus any NI, pensions, supervision etc is not the sole way of having value to wider society.

Yes - I thought the same so I am not surprised it has spilled over to childcare. I would imagine with childcare there are less places to hide as the ratios higher and for example, there’s no lone working unlike care.

I just find it so saddening that we place such little value on these roles. The majority of the staff at the nursery I sent my DC to were amazing and I truly valued them and the care they provided.

But there was an obvious mismatch between them, several of whom had second jobs at supermarkets etc and the owner who was turning up in a Ferrari. Meanwhile I was paying 2/3 of my salary.

I don’t know what the answer is but I don’t think the problem is the lack of money, a bit like the NHS theres structural issues there that go beyond just throwing more money at at. Unless we value the service though there’s no impetus for change. Problem is when we are at the receiving end we are vulnerable and not in a position to advocate for change.

The only real ways of claiming PIP fraudulently would be to do so in someone else's name, for a person who has died, or by an extremely complex and skilled procress of falsification of medical records. What you are no doubt referring to are decisions you disagree with because you feel the claimant has been treated too generously or they have exaggerated symptoms and the verification process has been lax. These things are incredibly rare. The process almost always errs on the side of refusal of claims, which is the reason 70% of tribunal appeals when the case is properly scrutinised decide in the claimants favour. It would seem odd that the same process that makes so many erroneous decisions against claimants is at the same time so lax it allows all these mythical liars and exaggerators to claim without supporting evidence.

It's an awful situation. If we as a society can't support these people who are often unemployable through no fault of their own, then we will just have to accept substandard and potentiallly dangerous care for our children, elderly and disabled adults.

Sex offenders should also be found work. Do you think they should work in nurseries too? Or do you think that it is actually appropriate to have some requirements in place for specific roles involving very vulnerable people?

Someone up thread was suggesting shop work would be too difficult as it included ad hoc cleaning or picking things off shelves. This suggest some poster really don’t have a clue about childcare. Of course retail would be much more suitable. Of course childcare should be recognised as a role that requires skill, knowledge and, above all, a requirement to safeguard children.

@Elleherd: (quoted with slight edits)

I know two autistic young women with BPD funnelled into child care, via agencies offering training that they were mandatorily referred to by the job centre.

One is simply unable to understand needs or see the children as more than bottoms and noses to be wiped and to be told off. She finds the first two tasks disgusting and tells the children so. She sees making sure children follow rules as central to her role, and has been accused of repeatedly picking on specific children.

The other has been flagged up to her agency as having far too high a record of dramatic incidents related to children by several placements who don't want her back.

She is being diverted to disabled and elderly care.

I read your post with the same facial expression as when watching a thriller that's taken a relentlessly dark turn. This is awful. I feel sorry for everyone involved, actually - but why are these concerns not making it up to the government and its think tanks?

You're describing a chain of misery, starting with the two girls and multiplying as ever more children and vulnerable adults get hurt (plus, I'm sure, collateral damage all the way along). It's like dysfunction dominoes - the net outcomes will generate even greater support requirements, which will still be unavailable.

Please do respond to the consultation! https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pathways-to-work-reforming-benefits-and-support-to-get-britain-working-green-paper

This I think, starts even earlier. The school I worked at offer Health and Sicial Care GCSE. Lots of students genuinely see this as part of their career path-nursing, psychology at A level, uniformed services and yes, care and Early Years. Done properly, it’s as demanding as other GCSEs. But, every year there’s a cohort of students who don’t want to do any of the other options, or frankly, aren’t up to them (and are definitely not suited to a job in either early years, senior or disability care)So they get shunted into HSC (and Art.) They come out with 3 and 4 if they are lucky. They don’t want to do it, the teacher is unhappy that her subject is seen as a dumping ground and that the validity and worth of the course is diminished.

Precisely. Yet because you've got qualifications, many people would assume that means you could do an entry level job, because surely "getting qualifications is harder than working in a supermarket". People don't understand the reality of disability nor the realities of entry level jobs these days.

Well you have just identified one way - by claiming for someone who has died. You could also claim for someone who has moved into a care home, or left the country. You could also exaggerate your disability/claim a non-existing disability to your GP - especially for conditions that are diagnosis of exclusion (eg FND). Or, as you mention, you could submit falsified medical records. People certainly manage to falsify conditions for insurance claims including obtaining false medical records. Why wouldn’t they for PIP? What a lovely innocent world you live in.

I think you're referring to me.

I wasn't trying to say that shop work would be unsuitable for some disabled people, therefore they should work in childcare. I was saying that shop work these days is not the simple job it used to be.

Picking for online orders isn't as easy as it sounds either. It involved extremely high speed targets and the use of difficult and temperamental handsets (I know, i've recently supported someone in the job).

Haven't read the whole thread but I think this is very likely. I live in Germany and about 10 years ago Schlecker went into bankruptcy (think a kind of Boots the Chemist). The inemployment office promptly sent all the female employees on a course to become childminders in their own homes. At the time I was doing the same course but I had (1) paid for it and (2) had to finance my own time off to accommodate the schedule. They were receiving full unemployment benefits. It may not have happened in a wide spread way but even the idea is mind blowing!