I want to work but my dd said it’s not worth

[sk3270]

Hi all,

I am recently on an accounting course and got all distinctions. I have found myself that I love it. So I felt now I should look for a job.

When I have realised that normal working hours for any accounting role is 9-5 and I could get between 16- 20k a year(full time), monthly £1,333-£1,666 (weekely £333.25-£416.50 before tax).

But then again, I will have to put my son for breakfast club and after school club costing £17.60 per day equivalent £352 per month (£88 per week) during the term time. Alright. I will have to sacrifice. However, during school holidays, average childminder offered £10-£12 an hour, will cost £90-£108 a day(9 hours a day include take and pick up), will end up paying £450-£540 per WEEK. This is way more than I could possibly earn.

I asked my husband what he thinks and he said “it’s not worth, why don’t you get a job at a restaurant or a shop at the weekend? and I don’t want anyone looks after our son. I will look after our son while you work”. I slammed “you’d better earn enough then!” with anger. I have no family here. My in-laws won’t help us with a full commitment. I am more than sad, cried so much that night I spoke with him that I have to give up my opportunities. I have paid course fees and willing to study further for NOT WORTH?(not cheap either).

Should I get a job that I don’t want?
Should I change my career to a teaching assistant which I can work during the term time only? (This is not what I want to do either)

How are you guys manage working and childcare cost?

Accounting is a good career, some public sector jobs offer part-time, term time, and flexible working, and a good pension and salary. It might take a bit longer to find a suitable job but please don't give up.

Too often, childcare is seen as the mother's bill

Mum earns £x and childcare costs £y:

£x > £y means the family has more money from mum working and is making a profit

£x < £y means the family has less money from mum working and is making a loss

It makes not one jot of difference whether you consider it as a family bill or an individual bill.

I'm sure you could get a job paying more than the slave wages you've mentioned.

On the other hand, having a lower paid job for a couple of years would give you experience and look good on your cv.

Do you live in London?
How old is your child?
I hear a lot about your earnings but what matters is your joint earnings. How much is left after you BOTH contribute to childcare?

Also think of it more as investment in your career. If you don't work, you're going to waste the time you spent studying tbh. Accountants can earn A LOT once qualified.

Lots of childminders offer more affordable day rates - mine is £45 per day.

And I'm in London

That would only be the case if the current income only covered outgoings with sufficient money to put into a private pension for the SAHP. Too often, childcare is seen as the mother's bill when the other parent is bringing in a significantly higher salary. So the sums cancel out the mother's salary rather than accounted as a household cost.

But if it cancels out the change in family income then it cancels out the change in income, regardless of who’s paying it.

Of course there may be other benefits to both parents working, but if money is very tight already and childcare would cost the same or more than the additional income, it’s unafforable no matter how you share the costs.

Of course in reality both parents should share the cost of any necessary childcare, doesn’t magically make it more affordable for the household, it only affects how much money the individual has in their own bank account.

I really don’t understand why people can’t get their heads around this. If we both earn £1k each and childcare costs £500, we have £1500 left whichever way you look at it.

If we both pay £250 and each have £750 left, we have a total of £1500.

If I pay £500 and have £500 left, and DH pays nothing and has £1000 left - we still have a total of £1500.

But together, you're still £500 better off than if only one of you was earning £1000 and the other nothing. And that's how it should work.

Where it is more tricky is if the woman earns £400 and the man £3000, but he does not consider it a joint cost, doesn't allow access to his earnings, and expects the woman to find £500 out of her own earnings or not work, while not recognising or caring that work is not only about paying bills, but also about personal fulfillment, having an identity that is not solely wife and mother, and a load of other reasons. And there are unfortunately plenty of men who think like this.

I get that childcare is a shared expense , but even as a shared expense if it totals a wage then one of you is working for nothing, however you look at it.
He sounds like a right arse though, tell him to sah with the kids.

Iget that childcare is a shared expense , but even as a shared expense if it totals a wage then one of you is working for nothing, however you look at it

Short term, yes.

Long term childcare costs reduce over time. School wraparound is cheaper than nursery, secondary school they reduce to almost nil.

You’ve also lost several years pension contribution.

If you want to work, 4 or 5 years working for a net loss will still be balanced out by the net gain over time. Especially when stepping of the working ladder means it’s harder to get back on, and if you do you’ll likely be on a starting salary rather than back to where you were.

How much is left after you BOTH contribute to childcare?
The exact same amount that would be left if one partner paid for all of the childcare and the other partner paid nothing.

Where it is more tricky is if the woman earns £400 and the man £3000, but he does not consider it a joint cost
They earn £3400 jointly. If childcare costs £500 they jointly have £2900 left. If the woman SAH they jointly have £3000 left. There’s no way around that - the maths is the same regardless.

Which accounting course was it and what qualification do you have?

I get that childcare is a shared expense , but even as a shared expense if it totals a wage then one of you is working for nothing, however you look at it

In the short term. And often a family can afford it but the 'you'll be working for nothing' argument is used against a woman to keep her at home when she could be working. That's why people always bring it up on these kind of threads.

School holidays are 13 weeks. You and your DH should get 10 weeks between you. So only three weeks (in theory) to cover!

Do you have a spare bedroom? You could get an au pair for the summer holidays-very easy to find.

Lonny

That's wrong, a couple can just as easily both work pt, cover each other for childcare and have no expense.
I wasn't suggesting mothers shouldn't work, I was stating how a couple can end up losing a full wage through childcare and it not being worth it from a financial pov

How old is ds, holiday clubs run by council or based in private schools may be cheaper than ft cm. You can both take leave in school holidays so there is less than 13 weeks to cover. Are there any friends or family who could assist occasionally?

As you qualify further your wages should increase quite rapidly. By the time your childcare costs start to reduce you will be much better placed financially.

Did you study AAT? I would definitely say to take the job, your wage will increase with your experience and you can eventually get a practice license to take on clients privately. A PP pretty much summed up my situation, but I have two in nursery still

I could get between 16- 20k a year(full time), monthly £1,333-£1,666 (weekely £333.25-£416.50 before tax).

If you want to get into accountancy you should really know that calculating a weekly figure can’t be done by dividing a month by 4. £20k is £384 per week, not £416.

Teatime only if you never have a family holiday. And many couples are both forced to take around 3 days of that at Christmas, if their office closes, which mine and DH’s does.

But you will be entitled to annual leave, 28 days minimum, so will your dh. If you split it so you each take some separately then you won’t be paying childcare all school holidays. Tbh once kids are in school it’s a hell of a lot cheaper because you’re only having to pay the wraparound care most of the time. I assume you didn’t work while he was pre school as this seems to be a shock to you?

Do the sums. If you take your annual leave wisely, even if you end up forking out more than your take home pay in August, you will definitely be better off over the year. And of course there are so many other benefits to working as described above

Have you looked at educational settings like schools, colleges, universities and councils for term time ,or flexible jobs? Mumsnet also has a jobs board and seem to advertise flexi roles. You can make this work, you just need to approach the problem from a different angle. Could you look for home working finance roles, that would be another option.

Try Sainsbury's active kids holiday clubs, they're £7.50 daily rate including lunch and snacks. Also as pp said, check the after school clubs for wrap around care.

activekids.sainsburys.co.uk/

www.ten2two.org/candidates/

Check schools, colleges & universities for flexi or term time finance/accounting roles.

28 days? I don’t get 28 days, nothing like that. ( I’m assuming your not including bank holidays in that as that would be rather pointless, as the schools are shut then anyway).

If your kids are young and in nursery it is tough. I barely broke even as I had 2 in nursery for a few years.

I only worked part time and, as a teacher, (although not a school teacher so not quite the holiday they get but 37 days a year which is pretty good) I knew that I wanted to stay in the profession and as jobs like mine are like gold dust, I plodded on.

It IS worth it and like others have said on here, there are jobs out there that are flexible.