Our childcare is the second most expensive in the world

[BlodynFioled]

Our childcare sector is the second most expensive in the world and is forcing many women out of the workforce. This is definitely worth the read:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/graziadaily.co.uk/amp/life/parenting/childcare-campaign/?fbclid=IwAR3hf7N4vZs--PQpvL89dP7PHcyryGzxcRWgREeQn5RkbMMBGlIQjQDB7bI

If anybody wants to sign the petition or share with friends and family then here is the link:

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/586700?fbclid=IwAR05Yaa0o0b4l4fB7P-kgCzFmsz6LBnzfZU9OVoXCaMDM3CUS-_9hHbA3pE

The article you’ve posted is very one sided. It makes childcare costs a women’s issue, when childcare costs should be shared between BOTH parents. After all, it takes two to make a baby! I don’t disagree that childcare is a huge expense, often costs more than a mortgage payment, and often comes at a time when parents are generally trying to juggle moving up the career ladder and upsizing housing. However, any woman who has a baby with a man, knowing costs won’t be shared and that she personally is expected to take the hit, needs to think twice. I didn’t work when mine were tiny (primary age now) but all costs were shared and family finances paid into my pension in the meantime. It’s also very shortsighted to quit work thinking you barely cover costs - what about a pension? Career opportunities? Length of service?

I earn a decent wage part time
but my full-time wage falls into the funny tax band where you have to return child benefit. If I was to work full time instead of four days a week, my take home pay would be the same as now as half my day rate would go to taxes and half to childcare.

This choice does effect my pension, but I value my time off more than putting an extra 20% into a pension at this point in my life.

Lettuceforlunch I agree that it’s not a woman’s responsibility to pay for childcare. Ours is split between myself and my husband just like all our other bills.

The cost of childcare is the problem here. Somebody earning minimum wage can not possibly cover the cost of childcare for them to return to work.

Those working in the early years are paid a very low wage and the sector is undervalued.

Who else will pay the childcare providers wages? Their building costs? Their bills? The cost of equipment?
The Government certainly don’t. Childcare workers wages are already bloody abysmal.

People don't want to pay more money to subsidise this, too.

In most countries the government seriously subsidise the childcare cost as they realise this actually is a gain to the economy. In England (I don't know about other devolved nations) the government pay childcare providers a pittance for the 15 and 30 hour funded places. Most childcare workers are on minimum wage or just above if more qualified. The most I have seen is £10 an hour. Parents don't want to be anymore here, government don't want to pay anymore here so nothing will ever change.

Osbertthesyrianhamster

The idea is that the government provides funding to the childcare sector. This would allow many to return to work, benefiting the economy and reducing unemployment and the need for benefits.

I agree that the pay is appalling for those working in childcare and many underestimate what they do. The early years are extremely important to a child’s development. During these years, children learn important skills that they will need for the rest of their lives.

Those working in childcare have a role with a lot of responsibility and often work alongside many other professionals. The general assumption seems to be that they just sit and play all day.

@EugeniaGrace

I earn a decent wage part time but my full-time wage falls into the funny tax band where you have to return child benefit. If I was to work full time instead of four days a week, my take home pay would be the same as now as half my day rate would go to taxes and half to childcare.

This choice does effect my pension, but I value my time off more than putting an extra 20% into a pension at this point in my life.

It's not hard to avoid the child benefit issue though, you can either work PT to take you below the limit or you can work FT and pay into your pension anything above £50K to take you below the child benefit cutoff. You've made the choice which suits you at the moment but as your DC get older you can do what I've done and move to the other choice (DH still works PT).

The cost of childcare is the problem here. Somebody earning minimum wage can not possibly cover the cost of childcare for them to return to work.

I don’t know if I agree. I’d say the minimum wage is way too low to afford people in large areas of the country a decent standard of living. Bizarrely the government are happy to top up employers who pay peanuts with WTCs but not fund better early years options. Makes no sense to me!

One thing I really don’t think we should do is try to make childcare providers cut any more corners than they already do to save money. We should be aiming for a quality system and unfortunately that costs. Many parents pay their cleaners more per hour than they pay for childcare. Says a lot about the value we place on these things as a society.

My dog Walker gets paid more per hour than the staff who look after my baby.

I'm having a cross over of child care next year my 3 year old with receive 30 hours and I still have to pay £40 a day and the cost of a 9 month old will being my bill to £1040 per month.

That's my whole wage on childcare just so I can attempt to carry on climbing up the ladder in my career.

I can't work more hours as I'd have to pay for more childcare.

All those in the health and care are paid crappy those in the nursery field aren't any different.

@wingingit987 - it’s not just you who has to pay though. What about their dad?

I left childminding in April as I could no longer make it work as an income for my family and got fed up being treated as less than human and not entitled to earn an decent income. I was changing £4.50 an hour which was average / on low side in my area, I provided everything expect food. Parents just don’t want to pay for childcare and expect to pay rock bottom prices (under £3 an hour) . I charged £1 per funded hour parents used with me as I lost that offering the funding. I would have parents refusing to pay their child’s sickness , and when I am interviewing families for care some very rude families would tell me how much they will pay me for 10 hours a day and not a penny more so what should have been £45 they were willing to pay be £25, Then they wonder why I turn them away when they call back wanting a space. I am now employed and loving having a reliable income, I get get paid on time. In January year 888 childminders left the profession with an average of 300 a month since.

@Lettuceforlunch

Our money is all joint but it takes an entire wage which means we are relying on all one wage where we are a 2 wage family. If I was a single one wage parent I would probably receive financial help from the government.

“ The idea is that the government provides funding to the childcare sector. This would allow many to return to work, benefiting the economy and reducing unemployment and the need for benefits.”

That’s a Blairite policy. We spent over a decade doing exactly that.
It isn’t popular with voters who don’t have children. Even some parents claim they prefer not to rely on Government intervention.

It’s also odd that the government steps in when dads disappear and leave mums to cope alone. Why not pursue the dads? And by that I mean properly, like in the US, not through the CSA or whichever other failed entity is supposed to do this. If everyone was made to pay for the children they created, there would be more money to go round overall.

The 30 hours when they reach three is very welcome but wouldn't it make more sense to do 10 hours funded for the first three years? If that makes sense :)

It’s often women who end up giving up their career because they can’t afford childcare so yes it is mostly a woman’s concern. It’s extremely sexist actually. I have a German friend who gets maternity leave for two years in her country, that’s the way it should be- we should not be penalised for wanting be a good mother but also wanting to have a career.

@Lettuceforlunch

The article you’ve posted is very one sided. It makes childcare costs a women’s issue, when childcare costs should be shared between BOTH parents. After all, it takes two to make a baby! I don’t disagree that childcare is a huge expense, often costs more than a mortgage payment, and often comes at a time when parents are generally trying to juggle moving up the career ladder and upsizing housing. However, any woman who has a baby with a man, knowing costs won’t be shared and that she personally is expected to take the hit, needs to think twice. I didn’t work when mine were tiny (primary age now) but all costs were shared and family finances paid into my pension in the meantime. It’s also very shortsighted to quit work thinking you barely cover costs - what about a pension? Career opportunities? Length of service?

This is such a wealthy couple answer.

When we had DC we were both on low wages. Mine was about minimum wage and odd hours. If I had gone back to work I wouldn't just have been breaking even but substantially losing money every month I worked. DH was not making enough that taking chunks out of his paycheck each month covered the shortfall. We would have seriously struggled to pay the rent and bills.

So I took nearly 10 years off work, as kids went to preschool etc I used that time to volunteer and then as soon as the finances made sense I was straight back into work.

It was by far the best thing to do financially, because without me taking that time off we would have become financially destitute.

If would be fantastic if posters on MN recognised that not every childcare situation is the same, and that low earning parents, especially young mums, could be massively supported in keeping in work with better support with childcare costs. (Also driving lessons, but that's another topic)

I find the cost of childcare a weird one. Nursery costs us £50 for a full day. Over the month that's obviously a huge whack out of our salaries, and we are not entitled to tax free childcare. But then DD is in nursery 8-5, with all meals and nappies and wipes etc included. That means I pay far less than minimum wage for someone to care for her all day? Which doesn't seem bad to me to be honest. She's one of two babies in the baby room so gets lots of attention!

I wouldn't mind paying ££££ for childcare if the standards were uniformly excellent and the staff paid well, respected and valued.

I wouldn't mind a patchy sort-it-out-yourself system if the costs were similarly flexible.

Magically in England we've managed to achieve the worst of both worlds, where (I'm in London) you pay £80-100 / day for your child to be cared for by a 19yo apprentice on around £4 an hour.

Flip this around, why should I as a tax payer subsidise your childcare? Some countries do but is it in the interest of children because it means they are less likely to have a stay at home parent or parents who work part time.

Like many I stayed at home until my kids were at school, deliberately close together, we lived (rented) in a small house and had one old car, no gym and a payg mobile, we didn't eat out much etc. You can't have life of two incomes once you have children, they are a choice

@motogogo - agreed.

To @SushiGo’s point, is it? Or is it the answer of someone who waited until they could afford it to have children? You’re having a laugh thinking anyone should subsidise driving lessons 🤣 There is a certain level of entitlement from some younger parents - not all. But we waited until we’d worked for long enough to be able to afford a child. And have a small family - because that’s what we can afford.