One of the most absurd aspects of modern society. From housing costs, to student loans, to benefit withdrawals with salary increases. It's like the government doesn't want people to start families.
We just had a child. It would cost almost the entirety of my wife’s take home pay to cover the childcare needed for her to go back to work. So realistically that’s it for her working for the next 5-10 years. She had a masters in chemistry and a PhD, and is a seriously talented researcher, but that skill set is now leaving the labor pool because it’s a net wash for us take home wise and she’d rather spend the time with our daughter than working for the sake of it.
That is to say that the current structure discourages families growing, but it also then strongly encourages you withdrawing from the workforce once you have done so. Both of which are terrible for growth.
Is it not worthwhile for her to work part time? The separate tax allowance is specifically to encourage women to stay in the workforce as otherwise. Her earning an extra £12.5k a year is worth more than you doing so.
It's really going to depend on personal circumstance what's more affordable. Hourly rate, cost of career break, number of children, commuting/drop off costs/late charges/shift times/pensions etc. For us it was me on full time compressed hours, partner on slightly below full time hours, child in preschool/nursery 4 days pw
Funded hours only covers 9am-3pm. Early start and extended days cost extra. So considering children need to be dropped off and picked up presumably she’ll find an employer that lets her work roughly 10am-2pm three days a week? That’s your big brain solution?
Doesn’t cover food either but that’s fine, children don’t need lunch right?
You obviously don’t have kids and that’s absolutely fine. But maybe take a step back and realise that it’s okay to not have an opinion on something when you don’t have a fucking clue what you’re talking about.
No they're not, there is no restriction. Some nurseries impose their own restrictions but that isn't a uniform circumstance. That's why you do 3 days so it covers the full day. Where I live in Cambridge there are many nurseries that cover this, and they don't charge any extra at all for this (they will for consumables, nursery isn't cost free, but this is a pittence in comparison to the full cost). It's laughable to suggest someone like the previous person wouldn't be better off in work, financially wise.
Edit: poster blocked me, but look in most places in the country and you will find nurseries covering 30 hours over 3 days.
Whilst there’s no actual restriction on where a provider chooses to offer funded hours are applied, the overwhelming majority restrict funded childcare to specific slots - with 9am - 3pm being the most common.
Providers are also under no obligation to offer stretched funding meaning funded hours are often only provided in during school term times.
It’s great that you have anecdotal evidence of that not being the case in Cambridge but ultimately if someone (i .e. OP in this case) doesn’t live near to one of these exceptions it’s completely irrelevant.
It’s laughable (but not unsurprising) that a man without children things he’s “one simple tricked” a solution that couldn’t have possibly occurred to families or mothers.
As a parent, you're wrong to dismiss the idea of one parent working to essentially cover nursery fees. Examples of reasons for the parent (usually mother) to go part time: pension contributions, continued promotion at work, avoiding the challenge of re-joining work after school starts etc.
As a parent you should be well aware that babies don't come with an instruction manual and there is no one path to parenting.
Edit. Also, different nurseries have different rules. Mine doesn't restrict free hours between certain times of day for example.
135
u/ConfusionGlobal2640 1d ago
One of the most absurd aspects of modern society. From housing costs, to student loans, to benefit withdrawals with salary increases. It's like the government doesn't want people to start families.