Childcare - more, shorter days or fewer, longer ones?

[Hardbackwriter]

This isn't a TAAT but the couple of threads bouncing around AIBU about long nursery hours have made me think again about this dilemma, and wanted to gain opinions. I'm currently on mat leave with DC2, going back in January. I work 32 hours a week and work them as four days where I work 8.30-5.30 (I have a one hour lunch break that I wasn't allowed to shorten when compressing my hours). DH also works four days a week and my parents and in-laws (very kindly) have the children one day a week (between them; they do one day a fortnight each) so it's two days of nursery - but it works out as two long days. I need to drop them off at about 8, and DH or I pick up just before 6. DS1 (who's three) has seemed so much happier while I've been on mat leave and he's still going to nursery but I'm dropping him at 9 and picking up at 4.30. I could change my hours to five shorter days instead - but then I don't have a day off with them any more and they have to go to nursery an extra day a week (which will also cost us quite a bit of extra money). But is it better than they're happy after nursery 3 days a week than shattered after 2 days a week? Wisdom welcomed!

I would personally stick with two longer days as I think the most important thing is having the day off with them if you can.

Stick with the longer days, although if you and/or DH could shift your hours slightly to start earlier, allowing an earlier pickup it would make a big difference. Collecting at 5 rather than 6 made for a much smoother evening (DH started at 7.30, which was "interesting" when I wasnt around and he needed to do both nursery runs!)

Longer days while at nursery. Then u can do days out on day off. When at school
Shorter days then can be around more for clubs/drop offs ect

I'm in a similar position to you (not on mat leave yet, but on WFH due to being a teacher in the third trimester) and have found my son is much happier/less tired being picked up at 1600 rather than 1730. It means he can come home, relax, ear dinner with us without rushing and we have far less of the 'witching hour' we had when picking him up at 1730. If I were you (and you can afford it) I'd consider the 5 shorter days and then enjoy the evening time (I imagine you'll gain a similar amount of time to having them home for a whole day)

Hmm, interesting - thanks for the thoughts! @T0rt0ise you're right that it works out as the same time at home for them either way (I guess very slightly less if I go for the shorter days as they'd spend an extra half hour a week on the nursery run, but that's pretty negligible) but for me that evening time doesn't feel as good as having a whole day, because the time doesn't feel as 'usable'. But that's where I'm not sure if I'm being selfish because having a whole day with them is definitely nicer for me, but perhaps they'd just rather be less tired.

Unfortunately neither DH or I can start earlier - he's a teacher with quite a long commute so leaves the house at 7. He can sometimes get the train that gets him in at 4.30 but that means running out of school as the bell goes so not all that often - and if he gets the next train it gets in at 5.30 so he's not at nursery any earlier than I can manage it.

The other thing I found with the longer days was that my son often needed the weekend to catch up on sleep etc so we were more tied by naps/making sure he had plenty of time to sleep at home (sleeping in the car/pram just didn't seem to cut it) but he is only 19mo so yours may cope better if they're older?

The three year old doesn't nap any more - which might be part of why he finds nursery so tiring, I think he's on the go literally all day there - but the baby obviously does and will continue to for a long time (I hope!) so that's a good point, thank you