to be so peeved that we spend approx £1400 a month on childcare

[couture1]

I know I have to pay for the service but it leaves me with little left over each month and we need to salaries to get by. I dont want to give up work as 1 cant afford to and 2 Im hoping that when 3dc are at school in 3 years time we will be better off each month - but how do we manage until then?

Rant rant rant

Oooh, that's the first time I've ever managed a double post!

Point being, there needs to be a better balance between quality and price because it's crazy how many people can't afford childcare.

A friend of mine went back part time, i.e. 3 days a week and her DH does 4 days a week, so they only have to pay for 2 days at the child minder which makes it cheaper.

Could you do 4 days a week and your DH do the same?

Loving the idea that childminders are cheaper - they're more expensive than nurseries around here!

Couture would you consider checking childminder prices in your area? (to save us arguing about what might or might not be cheaper) Or do you feel it HAS to be nursery?

Do you think there needs to be a full range of childcare at all price points, which will obviously include some childcare that is not of as high quality as others?

This is the situation with schooling in the UK and it is politically and socially very divisive.

Well, it's also socially devisive when only top-paid mothers, ie, those in the 'better' classes, can afford childcare at all before their children are at school.

But if some childcare is cheaper-do the workers get paid less, or should the government make up the difference?

It's socially divisive when childcare is subsidised for lower earners to the point when lower earning families are much better off having two parents work full time and there don't have a choice of being a SAHP but must leave their children in substandard childcare.

I was talking to the gardienne of my building about this yesterday. She (just) manages to work (cleaning the building) while keeping her baby with her, because she has got him in a routine whereby he sleeps in the morning in his cot while she hoovers (up to eight floors away!). She is quite a simple soul, but she shudders at the thought of the crèche...

I agree Bonsoir Anna, you cant set different price points for such care as it just further widens the poverty gap... but what there should be is some more assitance which consdirs the proper cost of living in different areas.

I do not earn a massive amount of money, but it is fairly decent when you set it against national averages. I cannot afford to go back to work and put my DS in full time childcare, as by the time I have paid the fees and travel costs to work I would be out of pocket. Maybe if I loved my job it might be worth it but.... I am now pregnant with DC2 and I won't be able to afford to go back to work full time.

I dont see how it can be right - OK, it is a choice you make when you have Children, but it's a bit of a rock and a hard place situation. How can there be so much complaint about the gender gap in the workplace when it seems like improving help with childcare costs might go some way to improvingn this.

Why don't you look after your children and maybe work evenings or weekends to supplement your income? There's no point working full time if you're not making much money from it.

Or is this a choice about not giving up your career? Not that I'm judging-some people need to work full time to keep them sane

But it isn't expensive really. If you pay £60/day for a nursery place (I think that's about average?) and do a full day at work, plus commute, then you're only paying around £6 per hour for childcare. That's barely over minimum wage. Where I live cleaners charge £9 per hour, basic gardeners £15 per hour, even the dog walkers charge more than £6 per hour.

Most staff in nurseries are very low paid. Ditto childminders.

The only way childcare can be more affordable is for it to be heavily subsidised by the Government.

Which I guess is what op thinks should happen.

But then if people who go back to work are given help with childcare, where´s the equivalent "help" for those who chose not to?

diddl - I agree. While I understand the government's economic arguments for extending financial assistance to parents who use childcare when both parents are working, I think that morally it is very dodgy indeed not to extend the same financial concessions to families where one parent gives up work to care for the children. Governments should be neutral when it comes to whether institutions or parents care for their children.

diddl - I agree. While I understand the government's economic arguments for extending financial assistance to parents who use childcare when both parents are working, I think that morally it is very dodgy indeed not to extend the same financial concessions to families where one parent gives up work to care for the children. Governments should be neutral when it comes to whether institutions or parents care for their children.

Whilst I accept some of the comments on here, I too feel your pain. I worked for years for about £15 a week once I had paid the childcare. Then I had my third child and was in negative numbers. I kept it up so that we had my job to fall back on should the worst happen and dh lost his job. We now 'relay parent' where we work around each other and only pay for nursery a couple of times a week. Nightmare for the family as we dont see each other. But financially its better. And we dont get any tax credits or help at all. And no, we are not rich, and have nothing left once all the bills are paid. Whats really frightening is that I would be better off being single as we worked it out and I would not be in the negative at the end of each month like we are now. However, I do think we expect more now. We own a home and run two cars. If we moved to a town so I could walk to school and shops, got rid of one car, never had wine or treats, then I am sure we could afford to live on one wage and I wouldnt be resentful about childcare costs or feel like I was working for nothing like the op.

I am not at all surprised that some people have taken offence at my post.

The OP posted in AIBU and I answered that imo she was being unreasonable.

My husband and I have chosen for me to be a full time mum staying at home and we go without plenty of things as we only have 1 salary coming in but me being at home is worth far more than money in the bank to us.

People quite often seem to resent paying a fair price to have child care but I wonder if they begrudge things that could be classed as luxuries in the same way.

PrincessToadstool -

AnnieL - accountants don't always earn loads you know.

That is assuming that the OP spends money on luxuries....

Well, my knowledge of economics is woefully inadequate, but surely it's better for the economy for a women who wants to work to be given help from the government with childcare? Then at least she's paying taxes and making a contribution to the economy rather than sitting at home contributing nothing? Please note this is in no way saying anything about SAHMs who choose to be SAHM. But there are lots of SAHM who would rather be working, and I can't see how it wouldn't be beneficial to the economy to enable them to do so.

Perhaps I'm just hopelessly naive...

The luxuries I meant are things like cigarettes, wine, take aways, holidays, fancy electrical equipment. All things that people want but don't need.

Annie - an MP has said in the recent past that stay at home mum's are nuisances and I am sure that they would rather have the working mum's tax from working and then the child care providers tax too.

OK, let's look at the facts here. You are paying 1400 a month for childcare, how much do you spend travelling to work? How much on dry-cleaning/work clothes? How much on lunches?

How much do you need after all of this?

The reason I'm asking is that right now I see that you must have a net pay of ~1900 a month just to break even by "going to work".

Now, if you're in the sort of role where you're pulling in 1900 a month after tax then you must have a skill which you could sell working from home/consulting.

I'm not sure how you're benefiting from working right now.

My dd pays less than £500 a month for a wonderful childminder

I wonder how they figure that a SAHM is a nuisance?
Or do they mean SAHM on benefits?

Because they are not getting tax from them working.

Is there anyone who choses to be at home getting benefits? I would have thought they were at home as the father earns a fairly decent wage and that would mean they don't qualify for benefits.