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.

The point is picking the wrong stock leads to annoyed customers and loss of profits. In childcare, mistakes or negligence can lead to death.

Well quite. Once again, I wasn't making some sort of "it's childcare or shop work" kind of point.

My point is that if someone is unable to work, a shop job isn't going to be some sort of easy back up failsafe option. Businesses these days cannot employ people who can literally only put items on shelves. I supported someone who was employed on a disability employment scheme in a major supermarket, but the job has evolved to the point at which he had to be managed out. He couldn't do any of the extra work that the entry level employees now have to do. So what are those people meant to do? They can get up out of bed and show up at a job, but these days businesses are cutting costs to the bone and won't facilitate an employee who can't keep up.

And to be abundantly clear I am NOT saying that childcare is a suitable option for such people either.

I agree with this (though I presume you mean boys who obtain poor GCSEs). But the push towards these careers happens earlier than GCSE choices - it happens from nursery where specific things are seen as ‘for girls’. Made worse by this gender obsession that says girls who like football are really boys, or that boys who like pink and sparkles must really be girls; reinforcing sexist stereotypes. It is also one thing I find curious about the poor in America - women often seem to do construction roles in contrast to the UK.

You don't make your argument any more compelling by trying to discredit my comments as being based in my 'innocence'. I'd be extremely surprised if your knowledge and experience of the benefit system and claimants was greater than mine. And yes indeed, people could well attempt all of the things you suggest. The point is, the number who successfully do will certainly be tiny. There are checks in place to make such things impossible for the vast majority of people, even if they were minded to try. If your brother in law and the woman in the chip shop and your neighbours cousins partners friend are all in your opinion fraudulently claiming PIP, then you must know some fairly competent criminals. Because the idea the average lay person is able to get away with complex disability benefit fraud is nonsense.

Yes, and supermarkets aren't as desperate for staff as care and nurseries. The reason those sectors get used as a 'dumping ground' isn't because it's better that way, it's about which employers have more choices. I agree with the poster upthread who talked of cases that sounded like a horror film.

One of the unfortunate consequences of having a relatively high NMW. Which there's been good reason to raise, since our COL is spiralling and we've done fuck all to stop propping up property prices. People have to live. But what it has done is made some of the more simple and repetitive jobs unviable, without any corresponding societal agreement on what's to be done with and for people who 30 years ago might have been capable of them.

It's interesting this is childcare because it is usually "anyone can do care work" whereas in my opinion it is easier to care for a healthy child than an adult with complex needs.

Yes, the state ends up subsidising big businesses who won't pay higher than NMW, and won't employ more than the bare minimum. The whole system is a mess.

But if you work in childcare you are not 'just' caring for healthy children. We have children with diabetes in our setting for example, and life threatening allergies. Also, childcare involves setting targets so each child meets their goals, writing reports, keeping records, dealing with parents, etc. It's not literally just 'caring' as in changing nappies, comforting them and wiping noses etc.

Why do you think competent criminals would not be interested in PIP fraud? Remember you were arguing that there is absolutely zero fraud.

Well you couldn’t really direct boys into childcare. You get threads on here when a parent encounters a male nursery staff member and they get worried in case they change their child’s nappy (both male and female children) and a lot of the comments agree and say no male should be changing a non family member child’s nappy.

So even if you got more men into childcare the women would likely still be doing the changing/loo supervision because the parents wouldn’t allow the men to do it.

This sounds awful - and shit for the children too!

Surely the employer also bears a share of responsibility though, for employing them?

I agree forcing people off benefits into unsuitable work is not acceptable though- this should be considered highly skilled work!

That would likely change though with time if it became more usual for men to be in early years.

Not all parents feel that way either, All my DC's have/had a male keyworker and he has changed/changes their nappies.

I think this is only the case if you think of care of a small child as being restricted to their physical requirements of food, cleaning, toileting etc. It is not true as soon as you make proper consideration of a child’s developmental needs.

OP there is indeed a shortage of childcare workers/early years. I am not sure if you are aware but very recently the government changed the criteria for Apprenticeships in some subject areas including care of young and elderly. The apprentices no long have to pass functional skill in English and Maths. 16 to 19 year old still have to do English and Maths but not pass, those starting older, don't even have to do it, so the bar is getting lower. The thinking behind it apparently is so that learners are not disadvantaged and it gets more people into work!
A separate theory I have is that SOME young ppl have not experienced good child care themselves so not had stories read, been played with, encouraged to learn and we are left with young ppl who have few soft skills.
I can see how it could be very frustrating for you, and parents are so desperate to have their kids looked after(understandably) to work they are having to put up with this too.

No, I'm not. I'm not the poster who said that. I'm aware there have been benefit frauds committed on a larger scale and in an organised way by criminals, including landlords and employers for example. The point I'm making is that it's highly unlikely individual lay people are receiving PIP via fraudulent means. The examples you give as to how this might happen are not realistic. Brenda down the road isn't going to have stolen hospital stationary and forged a consultants signature to support her claim. When Bernard went into a care home, they will not have neglected to do the financial assessment that revealed his PIP, enabling his son to continue to recieve it fraudulently. The average person isn't going to invent a complex health condition, lie convincingly to doctors, go through tests and treatments they don't need for £79 a week.

I kind of object to calling people with those various circumstances 'unemployable'. They may not be suited to childcare but it doesn't mean they're not suited to another kind of job. Plus some of the things listed are things that you can develop through training.

Apart from that, in my experience a lot of people bounce around several low paid sectors and I see it all the time in work histories in my current job - childcare, social care, retail and call centres. The most common qualifications are hairdressing/beauty and minor childcare qualifications. People are funneled and shoehorned in to those types of courses and jobs for some reason - despite childcare and social care being highly regulated.

In that sense not much has changed since I was at school where people from certain areas and circumstances never receive any guidance on the potential of their lives and low paid jobs catch them.

Gosh, it is almost like some people are not fit to work... But Mumsnet tends to go apeshit when it comes to supporting these people because you seem to assume that everyone on benefits is a lazy workshy grifter

I was a teacher for many years in a girls comprehensive and later a further education college. For any girls struggling with learning or with attendance issues amongst other difficulties they would often be steered towards hairdressing, beauty or child development. This always troubled me because the early years are the most important in a person’s learning and development. If you meet a duff teacher at thirteen in your English class for example, it won’t cause you the same damage as spending a year with somebody not able to meet your learning needs when you are three or five years old for example.

I am not talking about the average person. I am saying it is naive to think no one commits PIP fraud. People go to huge lengths to commit fraud of all sorts. PIP is not exempt from that. And you hardly need to go to the effort of stealing hospital stationary - it is easy enough to print it off yourself. Fraudsters create all sorts of false documents to back up claims. Indeed, it would not surprise me if there were criminal organisations creating a whole range of identities to claim PIP through.

Yeah I know what you mean. "They haven't worked since their early twenties" could easily be a mum that took time out to be with the kids. Some of the other stuff listed could be worked on and they could learn on the job. Sure some of them probably shouldn't be there though.

Also the idea that they're forced to be there by the jobcentre and a nuisance to everyone. Not every unemployed person wants or needs to be unemployed. I suppose the jobcentre probably forced my employer to hire me but I'm glad they did. Otherwise they'd never hire anyone with a "CV gap"

When I was in high school and the work experience lists went up, it was ALL retail and childcare. Very few kids had the opportunity to arrange their own work experience so the girls were all funneled into nurseries in the area for a fortnight. Including me, which wasn't suitable at all.

My sibling though has worked in early years for almost two decades and I think it's pretty shameful how undervalued the sector is. As you say, it's an important time in a child's life and they need more than an endless procession of 17 year olds trying to find their feet.

Yep, I posted a couple of months ago around the benefit changes about how there will be more and more threads about people moaning about their colleagues and having to pick up the slack and work extra hours and it hasn't even started yet but it's coming. I'm currently on pip and work part time but I'm a terrible employee I'm hardly ever there due to appointments, treatments, recovering from surgeries and flare ups. I'm of sick as we speak. My shifts still have to be covered so it means my colleagues doing overtime and coming in on there days off

I think it's fine to object to someone being called unemployable if you know for a fact there's a job they could viably and sustainably perform within our current employment parameters. But unfortunately, those aren't very accommodating towards people who aren't capable of consistently generating at least the cost of NMW plus employers NI plus any pension costs plus whatever supervision they need.

"I think this is only the case if you think of care of a small child as being restricted to their physical requirements of food, cleaning, toileting etc. It is not true as soon as you make proper consideration of a child’s developmental needs."

I think you don't understand the work involved in supporting an adult with complex needs. Eg being able to understand and communicate with someone who is non verbal. Being able to understand often very subtle body language with missing it meaning distressed behaviour. Monitoring and doing necessary intervention to avoid behaviours that challenge including out in the community. Being able to manage challenging behaviour in someone who is bigger and stronger than you. Knowing how to get the person to co operate with personal care. Providing education in some cases. Some people will require complex medical care. And more including keeping a record of all of this.

Absolutely. And transversely, my friend with cerebral palsy can do a professional job, and does, but cannot shower or dress herself. How will that work if they have 1 assessment for life AND work?