Childcare is bloody expensive!

Savvy_Sue

It looks as if the government response was to tell Ofsted to back off and to say that they would change the law to make it explicit that friends could do reciprocal childcare. I'm afraid this is the only link I can find.

Kim_kim

Comms69 wrote: »

Your daughter and her partner did have a choice, in fact they had several.
1: not have kids (yet)
2: get better paid jobs
3: move to a cheaper area
4: save up before having kids
5: etc.

Surrey - none of the above are really an option for them. By the time they paid the mortgage their child rearing days would be over.

My mum worked, my grandmother worked, I worked, my daughter comes from a long line of grafters. It won’t do my grandchildren any harm to witness their parents & grandparents work ethic.

sheramber

Kim_kim wrote: »

Surrey - none of the above are really an option for them. By the time they paid the mortgage their child rearing days would be over.

My mum worked, my grandmother worked, I worked, my daughter comes from a long line of grafters. It won’t do my grandchildren any harm to witness their parents & grandparents work ethic.

Is raising your own children not a worthwhile job?
I decided to stay at home to look after my children until the youngest went to high school. I then went back to work,
My children didn't grow up to be work shy.
My children have a strong work ethic and have well paid responsible jobs.

Spendless

Kim_kim wrote: »

House prices are high, that’s a fact.
What do you suggest people do when one wage won’t get or pay a mortgage? Never have children?
My daughter & her partner don’t have a choice, they need both wages to pay the mortgage & live.

This is the position we went into BUT I couldn't do my day-time, return from maternity job in order to achieve a second income, because the childcare bill was the same as my take home pay. It doesn't matter if we deducted the amount from my wages, my husbands wages or the household income. The maths remains the same. When all or most of the lower paid earners income equates to the childcare bill, it becomes not an option. This is the position the OP is in.

Those that are able to do their job for next to nothing, in order to 'hold' their job for the next few years can AFFORD to do that, either because their household bills are low enough to survive the mainly one income coming in, or their costs are low for whatever reason (family helping out, reduced childcare through government schemes) or they have enough in savings to pay for the expensive childcare years.

CapricornLass

I think that if you have children work and have to pay for childcare for below school age children, you are always going to be in the situation when you will work for very little left at the end of the month.

I had to go back to work after my second son was born, simply because I earnt more, got a subsidised mortgage from my employers, and we would have been on the street if I hadn't. I calculated that after I had paid all the bills, petrol and the childcare bills, I was left with £20 a month I could call my own, and I had to pay for my clothes, presents, Christmas and holidays from that - and this was in 1989. Ok, £20 went a lot further then than it did now, but it still was very little when you think that I was working full time.

Its tough, and seems never-ending at the time, but it is only a stage in life, and it will pass.

Kim_kim

Spendless wrote: »

This is the position we went into BUT I couldn't do my day-time, return from maternity job in order to achieve a second income, because the childcare bill was the same as my take home pay. It doesn't matter if we deducted the amount from my wages, my husbands wages or the household income. The maths remains the same. When all or most of the lower paid earners income equates to the childcare bill, it becomes not an option. This is the position the OP is in.

Those that are able to do their job for next to nothing, in order to 'hold' their job for the next few years can AFFORD to do that, either because their household bills are low enough to survive the mainly one income coming in, or their costs are low for whatever reason (family helping out, reduced childcare through government schemes) or they have enough in savings to pay for the expensive childcare years.

My daughter is the lower earner, but it’s worth her while working - she has to do full time to make it worthwhile.
She has Saturday & Sunday off, her partner Monday & Tuesday. She works really long days mon & tue so she can finish in time to collect them from school/nursery wed, thur & fri, her partner drops them.

The 30 hours of free funded childcare for working families made a huge difference to them.

She’s lucky her boss is happy to accommodate working parents work patterns - me :-)

jackieblack

CapricornLass wrote: »

I think that if you have children work and have to pay for childcare for below school age children, you are always going to be in the situation when you will work for very little left at the end of the month.

I had to go back to work after my second son was born, simply because I earnt more, got a subsidised mortgage from my employers, and we would have been on the street if I hadn't. I calculated that after I had paid all the bills, petrol and the childcare bills, I was left with £20 a month I could call my own, and I had to pay for my clothes, presents, Christmas and holidays from that - and this was in 1989. Ok, £20 went a lot further then than it did now, but it still was very little when you think that I was working full time.

Its tough, and seems never-ending at the time, but it is only a stage in life, and it will pass.

And in 1989 you wouldn't have had the benefit of any free hours at nursery or tax-free/salary sacrifice voucher schemes either!

Kim_kim

jackieblack wrote: »

And in 1989 you wouldn't have had the benefit of any free hours at nursery or tax-free/salary sacrifice voucher schemes either!

There was none of that in the late 80s!!!
I was a single divorced working mum. On a pretty low wage.

Spendless

Kim_kim wrote: »

My daughter is the lower earner, but it’s worth her while working - she has to do full time to make it worthwhile.
She has Saturday & Sunday off, her partner Monday & Tuesday. She works really long days mon & tue so she can finish in time to collect them from school/nursery wed, thur & fri, her partner drops them.

The 30 hours of free funded childcare for working families made a huge difference to them.

She’s lucky her boss is happy to accommodate working parents work patterns - me :-)

Does her partner have the kids Monday and Tuesday? Flexibility in what days/hours you can work makes a difference. That wasn't available to me, it was work f-time Monday-Friday 8.30-5.30 no other options. Husband's workplace was the same. My employer didn't have p-time workers. Ironically if they had, I could have afforded to work, because I could have kept my hours below where I'd have to pay tax and NI and come out with a little of wages rather than none. Said child isn't even 18 yet, so I'm not talking a very long time ago.

Kim_kim

Spendless wrote: »

Does her partner have the kids Monday and Tuesday? Flexibility in what days/hours you can work makes a difference. That wasn't available to me, it was work f-time Monday-Friday 8.30-5.30 no other options. Husband's workplace was the same. My employer didn't have p-time workers. Ironically if they had, I could have afforded to work, because I could have kept my hours below where I'd have to pay tax and NI and come out with a little of wages rather than none. Said child isn't even 18 yet, so I'm not talking a very long time ago.

They are at school & nursery on Monday & Tuesday, her partner does she school run both ends those days. She does 7-4.30 (mom & tue).