to ask employer for childcare costs?

[starkadder]

Just about to start a new job - part time. There's a conference I'd like to go to (would be good for my employers if I did) but I spent half the day every day looking after DS. DH works 8-2 so I start work when he gets in.

Anyway, I've suggested it to them but have said I'd need to pay out an extra 50quid/day to get a childminder for each day I'd be gone. I'd obviously be at the conference full time, so to speak, so they'd be getting more for their money in terms of salary anyway.

Now I am not sure if this is reasonable or not. I was thinking of it as a travel expense - just like the airline ticket/sandwich in the airport, etc. But AIBU? Has anyone else ever asked their employer for something like this?

edgeofreason - my DC have both, from very early ages, paced with 'phones, or tapped away on their 'pooters', whilst telling their cuddly toys "shush, I'm working"

Mine too stealth. I tell myself it is good that they see women doing what I only ever used to see my dad doing ...

I do try not to be as grumpy on the weekends as he was too

starkeadder - I really don't think anyone was suggesting that you should be ashamed. And actually no one has said you ought to be working for no pay. All people are saying is that childcare is an expense -much more so when your children are pre-school age. Just as you pay a mortgage or rent because having a roof over your head is a necessity, and for food because eating is a necessity, transport to get to work etc etc. Childcare is just an extension of that.

You chose to drop from 60 hours a week to 25 when you had a child, which again, is fine - your choice because it's what suits you and your family. Many other people do something similar, only they would be paying for childcare for those 25 hours because they wouldn't have a partner who is able to fit their hours around them.

That's what I meant about the big divide between people who are used to paying for childcare, and see it as part and parcel of working. and those who don't. If you pay for all your childcare,You just deal with it, pay up, and accept that you have a hell of a lot less money at the end of the month than before you had kids. And that applies whether you work full or part time.

If you work shifts around your partner, maybe working evenings, or both doing part time jobs as in the OPs situation, you have very little idea of the day to day reality of paying for childcare, so it seems a big shock when you suddenly have a day that needs covering and you're parting with £50!

OP - I think you should be paid for the hours you work. I don't think you should expect your employer to pay for your child to be looked after while you work - that's yours and your husband's expense.

P.S - I think the thing some people are finding a little odd is the feeling that somehow it's 'not fair' if you do a day's work and find that you don't have much money left at the end. I don't see how that is the employer's responsibility! As long as they are paying you the agreed rate for the hours you work, they're being totally fair. If someone earns £80 a day, and with their husband they have a mortgage which costs £80 a day, no one would dream of saying that the employer should contribute to their mortgage because it's taking all one person's earnings. if you earn £80 a day and have one child in care which costs £40, you get to keep just £40. And if you have two children in childcare, you get to keep £0 of one person's earnings. (Although of course you should regard it as a joint expense with the other parent).

As long as the employer is paying the agreed rate, plus of course travel to get to the conference etc, then any other costs are down to the employee.

See what you mean, violet - but the mortgage wouldn't be a direct expense resulting specifically from the travel I had been asked to undertake.

In my situation, no travel = no childcare costs. Travel = significant (because one off) childcare costs. Therefore, if I am asked to travel too much, I won't be able to afford to keep the job. I am the main breadwinner so it would not be possible for me to do the job at a loss. Don't think this is going to happen, unless they randomly start asking me to travel every month - but do you see what I mean?

Some people did say that I should be ashamed - really - ! They said it in a nice way..but they basically said that I should hang my head and just work as hard as possible to get past the terrible sin I had committed of mentioning childcare. It was advice well meant and I take it as such but I still stand by my belief that it is sad and wrong that as parents (and I mean fathers too - actually, especially fathers) - it seems to be the done thing to pretend that we don't have children. Men, historically, have been able to do this because they have a woman whose job it is to worry about the family. It seems to me - from my amateur standpoint of having done absolutely no research - that working women are feeling that they can't mention childcare issues because it would hinder them from effectively compete with men in a work environment. I think that this is wrong and sad. And very, very sad for me too - who seem to be laughed out of the room if they mention any childcare responsibilities at all, according to some of the posters on this thread.

I think we probably need a revolution.

Anyway, I have to go and deal with some weetabix now...

very very sad for meN. Not "me".

starkadder, I don't know if you're referring to my reply, but I did say if I were you, I'd be mortified if they called me in to discuss this, and that I'd recommend keeping your head down and working really hard to prove yourself. What I might not have said there (I was trying to be tactful), is that you went about this the wrong way. It was handled unprofessionally. Bringing in personal issues before you've even started is wrong.

Anyway, I'll leave it now. People were just trying to be helpful, and the general feeling was yes, everyone could understand the issue, but there are better ways to handle it. Still, your choice, obviously.

I can see your point OP but YABU.

Your domestic situation is not your employer's concern. If you cannot go because of childcare issues they are not allowed to mind.

If you are asked to work extra hours then TOIL is reasonable. Travel expenses are a direct result of being sent elsewhere to work. Childcare is not.

It would be the same as saying that you normally clean the house on the day you don't work so will they pay a cleaner.

This is not a feminist issue.

You should definitely get paid for the extra hours you work. But I think the fact that you happen not to have to pay for childcare during your normal working hours is colouring things a bit.

Your average person who works 25 hours a week will also be paying for childcare 25 hours a week. So if one week they work 40 hours, they will pay for 40 hours childcare, no difference. Who provides your childcare and how much it costs you at different times of day or week isn't your employer's concern.

Aside from the interesting debate on whether you should be entitled to ask/whether your employer should pay, I agree that raising this kind of issue in a new job especially before you've even started isn't the smartest move. They obviously think very highly of you, if they're prepared to give you more holiday than everyone else and to deal with potential fall-out from that. But everything you do and say at the moment is contributing to the impression they are forming of you and you're not able to be balancing this with doing fabulous successful work because you haven't started yet.

On another note, perhaps it's my voluntary sector background, but it wouldn't occur to me to claim for a sandwich at the airport or similar assuming it was for lunch because I normally provide my own lunch anyway... Interesting to read what other people would do. Different cultures I guess.

That is the point I am making,if staff with children get time off,so should those without children get the same.Its a bone of contention in the office where my daughter works, the ones with childen seem to get more time off,leave early, arrive late, have to listen to some kid "playing " the flute etc etc and yet those children are expected to pick up the slack.

forgot to say, those without children...

Thanks guys. Missal - I guess I did kind of mean your replies, among others, but I didn't mean to sound rude or ungrateful. Your replies were really helpful because it literally hadn't occurred to me to be embarrassed about asking for childcare help or that this would be seen as unprofessional. This is because I was basically ignorant of how a lot of employers view the issue. So your replies were really helpful...but I STILL think that it is a shame that it seems to be, for a lot of people (and now me included) unwise to mention the restrictions on travel etc caused by having children - if one wants to compete in the workplace. I think it is an issue that is v complicated but which doubtless contributes both to the gender pay gap AND contributes to a lot of fathers travelling more than they'd like to. Seems to me that the workplace is set up along lines which favour an old-fashioned system - one where the employee can happily commit 40-60 hours to their employer without worrying about the homestead...

flowerybeanbag - thanks for your reply too. I see what you're saying...also re: the sandwich thing - I agree that it's weird. After all, I still eat food when I am not travelling for work. But ...when I'm not travelling for work, I don't pay for childcare..! SO it kind of brings me back to the same question - I still don't think it is unreasonable to ask - but I'm glad I posted this here because what I now realise is that a lot of intelligent and professional women DO think it's unreasonable, and have some good arguments to back this up. I might not agree but I can see the other point of view now, which is helpful.

"Seems to me that the workplace is set up along lines which favour an old-fashioned system - one where the employee can happily commit 40-60 hours to their employer without worrying about the homestead..." SO TRUE! tehre;'s no logical reason why jobs should be chopped into 40+ hour chunks - it's purely historical/cultural, premised on the existence of supportive home-based wife. which not many people have these days.

re the sandwiches thing - I thought you couldn't claim that as an expense - expenses being un-taxed. if you're travelling overnight and/or have no option but to eat out I believe you can, but the tax man limits how much you can claim - using a "per diem" rate which varies from country to country

fallon8 - but I was never asking for any extra time off. I don't really understand your post. I'd never ask for any bonuses or extras just because I have a child. I would also never ask for childcare expenses for my normal working hours - just like I wouldn't ask my employer to pay for my cup of tea in the morning or my mortgage. But I did expect that an employer would pay ALL the direct expenses resulting from a specific work related trip.

hatwoman - exactly! And I also think it is very unfair on men, who have less choice than us, and who are often expected to work long hours without complaining. The other thread here at the moment (about a documentary on BBC - it has "feminist" and "sickened" in the title) makes some really good points.

Per diem - yep, that is how it works.

fallon8 I think that the real reason it becomes a bone of contention is lack of commmunication. in 99 per cent of cases parents who leave early/go and see a flute recital etc are making up for it - by working late other times and/or working at home. In some cases parents have negotiated contracts with less hours (allowing them, for example, to drop kids off and arrive at 10) and subsequently get less pay - but their colleagues don;t know this - they just see someone breezing in at 10 every morning, and it's no wonder they feel miffed. I think it's very important that employees are sufficiently informed on policies (if not, necessarily the details of every individual's contract) that they can feel confident the system is fair. managers who don't do this aren't doing anyone (inc. themselves) any favours. [I also think employers should look at offering flexibility for reasons other than being a parent...again, I believe, it can be in everyone's interest - parent/non-parent employee/employer]

PMSL at the idea that people who pay for childcare must be loaded! FGS - I pay for childcare, and have almost zero take home pay every month as a result. And I have a fairly good job. However, I live in a 3-bed ex-council semi, whereas most of my staff (who obviously earn less than me) have their parents looking after their kids and as a result have much more disposable income and bigger houses. But I can't complain, because I knew the situation before I had kids, and I did it anyway ! But I am certainly not rolling in it!

Also, I work in the public sector and the very thought of asking for childcare costs is a joke. Our expenses systems are so highly regulated, there is no discretion at all.

And on a final note, if employers start paying p/t staff's childcare costs for extra working hours, then will they have to pay ALL parents who work extra hours, or only those who have to PAY for childcare. There may be an equality situation.

Really, hatwoman? If my work means that I am away from home / my usual place of work (and since I am categorised by the taxman as a mobile worker, I have no 'usual place of work' other than home) then I claim meals. End of. There are limits, obviously, but those (as far as I am concerned) are imposed by my employer and what they are prepared to pay for - not by the taxman. So there may well be tax limits (thinking about it, I would be surprised if there weren't) but they must be above our corporate limits, I think.

Personally, now well established in a job, I make it entirely clear that the reason that I can't instantly agree to a lot of things is that I have to check if I can make the childcare logistics work first - 8 times out of 10 (thanks, often, to my parents who are prepared to pick up the pieces for us) I can do it, but I don't ever say yes first and then worry about it afterwards - at least in part because I don't want to set the expectation that I will always be able to do stuff. DH, by contrast, does just that and feels that he has no choice and wouldn't be taken serisously if he had to check with nursery before he agreed to a meeting, so his sudden diary changes end up having a knock-on impact on my diary - a situation which I only tolerate because he earns twice what I do.

hatwoman...in this case,it doesnt work like that.They reckoned up,at the end of the last fortnight,one person had worked 3 hours less than the rest of them, including the men,how can that be fair.
FAO, the original poster,,your child, you pay, as I said at the start.This one conference cold have a long term effect on your position with this company, anyway, you must be using their time right now!

Are you sure they are getting paid the same as you though fallon8. I take time off when my DC are ill but I lose a day's pay. It's not something I do lightly. And I never, never come in late or leave early unless I make the time up. Most parents I know err massively on the side of doing more time than their non-parent colleagues because they know how sniffy they get when we have to leave on time or the nursery whacks us with a late payment charge.

I regularly work evenings to finish stuff off because I can't stay late in the office. But then I'm a parent, I don't have a social life

Hi fallon - haven't started for the new employer so was using old employer's time yesterday!! But felt so guilty that I swore off MN today till I had finished work

hatwoman - it is true - people are always telling me how lucky I am to be p.t. I don't think they always remember that I get PAID part time too...!

Sorry totally unreasonable request unless perhaps they are forcing you to go to the conference. Especially in a new job, am shocked that you asked.

Also unlike travel costs, any childcare costs are a taxable benefit - do you expect them to pay the PAYE on the childcare benefit you are asking for as well?

there is actually a special HMRC rule for childcare when on business travel

not sure if that course would have qualified but for future reference, there is a special rule for exceptional childcare (i.e. childcare incurred while someone has to travel for work)

so normally any amount an employer pays out for childcare would be fully taxable (essentially treated as earnings in your hands) but childcare while an employee is on bus travel is subject to NI and not PAYE (from memory)

tis the only exception

and I imagine it would only apply to childcare over and above what you'd normally have in place iyswim

I wasn't going to reply and keep bumping this because I thought it had lived its life but - foxinsocks - thank you! That is not only useful but also really interesting because it kind of agrees with me - exceptional childcare costs incurred due to travel are just that - exceptional expenses - and the employer refunding them would NOT be the same as the employer giving you an additional benefit.

Too late for me as I hastily backed down after the earlier replies and am now getting TOIL instead And it was probably good that I backed down as it emerged that they did have a policy - or if not policy, at least precedent - of giving TOIL and nothing more. Not great but OK.

yes, it is always worth checking this sort of thing starkadder

I would need to look up for you the definition of 'business travel' (i.e. whether they mean it would need to involve an overnight stay or a trip abroad). Normally with any sort of HMRC leeway on a benefit, there'll be a catch ;-) but personally, I do not think it is out of order to ask for additional expenses to be funded when you have to work hours that are not your normal hours (whether you be full time or part time, male/female, parent/non parent etc.)