Childcare costs

Pawwed Rig

I just started looking at creche for my little boy. The cost is astronomical (€1,000 per month). It is a real disincentive to go back to work.

fits

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

How do you expect the men reading this thread to do that? Shouldn't women get involved as well?

fits

Of course! But childcare is often seen as a womens issue when In fact the lack of affordable childcare has negative consequences for both women and men.

Pawwed Rig

fits wrote: »

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

It is seen as a women's issue because men are prevented by legislation from playing an active role in the parenting and development of their children unless they are very wealthy. The government won't deal with this as it only effects the professional classes which the govt seem to think have unlimited reserves to pay for everything. Blaming men for this seems a little strange.

fits

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

It is seen as a women's issue because men are prevented by legislation from playing an active role in the parenting and development of their children unless they are very wealthy. The government won't deal with this as it only effects the professional classes which the govt seem to think have unlimited reserves to pay for everything. Blaming men for this seems a little strange.

Who is blaming men for anything? I am just asking that men recognise it as an important issue for men as well as women. It is in everyones interests that women stay in the workforce and men take more parenting duties eg. Paternity leave.

Also how are men prevented by legislation in taking an active role and what has that got to do with my point? I honestly cannot follow your logic at all.

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

Who is blaming men for anything? I am just asking that men recognise it as an important issue for men as well as women. It is in everyones interests that women stay in the workforce and men take more parenting duties eg. Paternity leave.

Also how are men prevented by legislation in taking an active role and what has that got to do with my point? I honestly cannot follow your logic at all.

I was chatted to some of my former colleagues and what they said about the costs of childcare was shocking to say the least.

Most Dads I would think recognise that it's an issue that needs examining. Your post specifically said that men should be looking to get it sorted without mentioning women. Traditionally, women are seen as the primary caregivers regarding children which I suppose is the reason most courts prefer to side with Mum in custody settlements and the like.

K-9

No statutory paternity leave makes it financially difficult for more men to take more time off.

I do agree it is an area both sexes would benefit from. I don't think it is good for fathers, mothers and indeed children that women take the most time off by far to look after children.

K-9

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I was chatted to some of my former colleagues and what they said about the costs of childcare was shocking to say the least.

Most Dads I would think recognise that it's an issue that needs examining. Your post specifically said that men should be looking to get it sorted without mentioning women. Traditionally, women are seen as the primary caregivers regarding children which I suppose is the reason most courts prefer to side with Mum in custody settlements and the like.

Indeed, just look at the thread about a father not getting custody on the main page. As long as men take so little time off for children, courts will give main custody to the mother. I think that has to be recognised and step made to address that, as well as fathers getting more rights.

fits

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

. Your post specifically said that men should be looking to get it sorted without mentioning women.

Because this is the gentlemens club and while there are lots of threads about fathers rights, there are few enough about childcare, paternity leave etc. Greater opportunities for women in workforce and financially, and better fathers rights and family law are two sides of the same coin.

Pawwed Rig

fits wrote: »

Also how are men prevented by legislation in taking an active role and what has that got to do with my point? I honestly cannot follow your logic at all.

There is no paternity leave whereas the woman gets 6 months maternity. This forces a woman to be the primary carer in the early formative stage so makes the decisions on feeding, nap times, play, routines, solid food introduction. This time also gets the baby used to seeing the mother as its primary carer as when Daddy gets in from work it is already bed time for a baby. Hence the myth about a mothers bond being most important to the child (a myth that gets wide credence in legal circles).

The only option a man has is to take unpaid leave. Couple the expense of this with the recent reductions in maternity benefit and rising tax burden you can see that men are being prevented from having anything but a peripheral presence in a childs life.

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

Because this is the gentlemens club and while there are lots of threads about fathers rights, there are few enough about childcare, paternity leave etc. Greater opportunities for women in workforce and financially, and better fathers rights and family law are two sides of the same coin.

Oh, I completely agree with you regarding childcare and women's rights. I just inferred that you thought it should be just men fighting for better childcare. Oops!

Pawwed Rig

fits wrote: »

Because this is the gentlemens club and while there are lots of threads about fathers rights, there are few enough about childcare, paternity leave etc. Greater opportunities for women in workforce and financially, and better fathers rights and family law are two sides of the same coin.

Feel free to start one. Looking at a creche for junior at the moment facing a monthly bill of €1,000. The dole is €814 per month so to make it worth my while going back to work I need to earn a net monthly income of €1,814 (round up to €2,000 when you consider travel and lunches etc). I can see why a parent decides to stay at home.

fits

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

There is no paternity leave whereas the woman gets 6 months maternity. This forces a woman to be the primary carer in the early formative stage so makes the decisions on feeding, nap times, play, routines, solid food introduction. This time also gets the baby used to seeing the mother as its primary carer as when Daddy gets in from work it is already bed time for a baby. Hence the myth about a mothers bond being most important to the child (a myth that gets wide credence in legal circles).

The only option a man has is to take unpaid leave. Couple the expense of this with the recent reductions in maternity benefit and rising tax burden you can see that men are being prevented from having anything but a peripheral presence in a childs life.

That's what I said! No argument there.

Btw I live and work in Finland. Three of my male colleagues have taken paternity leave in last 18 months. One six months, the others two months. I know it works and I know it even things out. The men can actually take close to 50% duties. Childcare there is max 300 euro a month also and is extremely high quality. All of the mums I know work full time, why wouldn't they. Some difference to Ireland.
Don't know how fathers rights are but probably more even as a result.

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

That's what I said! No argument there.

Btw I live and work in Finland. Three of my male colleagues have taken paternity leave in last 18 months. One six months, the others two months. I know it works and I know it even things out. The men can actually take close to 50% duties. Childcare there is max 300 euro a month also and is extremely high quality. All of the mums I know work full time, why wouldn't they. Some difference to Ireland.
Don't know how fathers rights are but probably more even as a result.

Scandinavia is a world leader in gender equality from what I know so it makes sense that they've thought it through. In the UK and Ireland, the traditional model is still semi-prevalent but it is being thankfully eroded.

Out of curiosity, what's it like working there? I'd be a bit worried by what some Swedish politicians have been saying regarding "man taxes" and the like but that's another thread.

fits

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Scandinavia is a world leader in gender equality from what I know so it makes sense that they've thought it through. In the UK and Ireland, the traditional model is still semi-prevalent but it is being thankfully eroded.

As a result of a very strong feminist movement ��

But anyway we should all work on this together its in everyone's interests.

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

As a result of a very strong feminist movement ��

But anyway we should all work on this together its in everyone's interests.

Feminism tend to focus solely on women's issues is fair enough given the fact that's it's a mono-gendered term. It's probably at least part of the reason though there's a high rate of Scandinavians who get educated to third level if I'm right.

fits

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Out of curiosity, what's it like working there? I'd be a bit worried by what some Swedish politicians have been saying regarding "man taxes" and the like but that's another thread.

Its great. I work in Finland and live in Ireland (as much as I can) In just need to get myself some sort of machine that'll beam me over and back.
never heard of man taxes. Sweden is quite different to Finland though. Very different.
"Sweden talk like socialists and act like capitalists. Finland talk like capitalists and act like socialists"

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

Its great. I work in Finland and live in Ireland. In just need to get myself some sort of machine that'll beam me over and back.
never heard of man taxes. Sweden is quite different to Finland though. Very different.
"Sweden talk like socialists and act like capitalists. Finland talk like capitalists and act like socialists"

Never heard that one.

The "man tax" thing appeared on the sexism thread here a while ago. Probably a vocal minority.

Pawwed Rig

Ireland comes close to the top in this article

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/21/child-care-costs-compared-britain

We had to be good at something :pac:

RainyDay

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Feel free to start one. Looking at a creche for junior at the moment facing a monthly bill of €1,000. The dole is €814 per month so to make it worth my while going back to work I need to earn a net monthly income of €1,814 (round up to €2,000 when you consider travel and lunches etc). I can see why a parent decides to stay at home.

You don't get the dole to mind children.

LordNorbury

RainyDay wrote: »

You don't get the dole to mind children.

The figures don't lie either though.

Sleepy

And you can easily get it whilst looking for a job that pays €2500 a month or more.

RainyDay

LordNorbury wrote: »

The figures don't lie either though.

They do if you include the social welfare fraud of claiming the dole while looking after children.

LordNorbury

RainyDay wrote: »

They do if you include the social welfare fraud of claiming the dole while looking after children.

I don't get the point you are making. Are you saying that it is fraud if you are unemployed and minding your kids at home while claiming social welfare?

Pawwed Rig

RainyDay wrote: »

They do if you include the social welfare fraud of claiming the dole while looking after children.

It is only fraud if you are on jobseekers and not actively seeking work. Anyway it is beside the point. The figures were the relevant part.

RainyDay

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

It is only fraud if you are on jobseekers and not actively seeking work. Anyway it is beside the point. The figures were the relevant part.

It is fraud if you are not available for work.

Building the dole into your childminding cost calculations is planning for fraud.

Sleepy

Or realism.

When childcare costs so much and welfare is so high, it's very understandable for people to be on jobseekers yet unavailable for work that pays beneath what they need to replace that welfare level.

Pawwed Rig

RainyDay wrote: »

It is fraud if you are not available for work.

Building the dole into your childminding cost calculations is planning for fraud.

Fair enough but as a comparison of 2 months, one where I work and the other where I am available for work but unable to find any despite numerous applications the point holds.
Lets take it as a general point and assume that everyone is not as honest as you or me.

RainyDay

Sleepy wrote: »

Or realism.

When childcare costs so much and welfare is so high, it's very understandable for people to be on jobseekers yet unavailable for work that pays beneath what they need to replace that welfare level.

It's not 'OR' anything. It's not a choice. It is fraud to plan to mind your kids while claiming the 'available for work' dole.

LordNorbury wrote: »

I don't get the point you are making. Are you saying that it is fraud if you are unemployed and minding your kids at home while claiming social welfare?

It is fraud to plan to claim the dole while minding your kids, as you are clearly not available for work if you are minding your kids.

Gael23

He could argue that he is seeking more suitable employment I suppose.

Pawwed Rig

Mod note - moved from the 'single life as a guy' thread as we have strayed off topic but it is a worthwhile conversation.

jackofalltrades

fits wrote: »

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

IMHO this comes across as very patronising.

fits

This was copied in from another thread and I can't edit it. I agree it sounds very blunt now out of context. I would phrase much differently as an OP.

pwurple

Good affordable childcare, and the ability to split/share leave would be our two ideals as parents. There was some vague movement towards the second one last year in govt, but it went nowhere. The first one I won't see in my lifetime I'd say. Political hot potato. No political party wants to be seen to be 'forcing' women to work outside the home.

Even a measly tax credit for it would be something.

K-9

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Scandinavia is a world leader in gender equality from what I know so it makes sense that they've thought it through. In the UK and Ireland, the traditional model is still semi-prevalent but it is being thankfully eroded.

Out of curiosity, what's it like working there? I'd be a bit worried by what some Swedish politicians have been saying regarding "man taxes" and the like but that's another thread.

I read that when they introduced shared parental leave it didn't really work that much in getting men to take paternity leave so they introduced specific paternity leave and that helped big time. I can't see the politicians doing that here!

ted1

fits wrote: »

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

I don't think the tax payer should subsidise child care, it's the same as contributing to someone's wages. If the job isn't paying enough, then don't do it.

In our case the misses stays at home to mind our two kids. Because it's not worth her while. Should the tax payer give her the subsidy that you expect hem to give to working people?

Chattastrophe!

I do think that childcare should definitely be part of tax relief. But it's not. This isn't going to change anytime soon.

Our creche costs €1,049 a month - we are both in full-time professional jobs. Would we be better off if one of us quit and minded him at home - yeah, we'd at least break even, in the short-term. In the long-term, who's going to employ someone who took years out of their career just because of an addition to the family? Who's to say it won't happen again?

I'm a mother, I'm a full-time professional, I'm also a student (currently on my way to qualifications in both accountancy - ACA - and insurance - CIP, although I'm nearly a QFA.)

Your OP nearly suggests dole rather than work. Personally, it's not a lifestyle choice that I'd make. I assume you knew the costs involved when you decided to have kids. For me, my son inspires me and encourages me to do my best in life. Because that's what I want for him.

Yes, creches are expensive. Because the workers need to be paid - my sister is quite qualified, and working in a creche on minimum wage. I'd rather pay more to ensure my kid isn't left crying and upset, while another child is fed. I fully trust our creche. I could have gone for the local Giraffe place - closer to us, and cheaper - but the trust wouldn't be there.

If you're going to invest in one thing, shouldn't it be your children?

RedXIV

ted1 wrote: »

I don't think the tax payer should subsidise child care, it's the same as contributing to someone's wages. If the job isn't paying enough, then don't do it.

In our case the misses stays at home to mind our two kids. Because it's not worth her while. Should the tax payer give her the subsidy that you expect hem to give to working people?

If there's anything the tax payer should want to subsidise, it's childcare. It benefits everyone. If you've kids, you have access to reasonable childcare, if you don't have kids, you really want to encourage others to have them, your state pension isn't going to magically appear without future generations of tax payer

vibe666

everyone pays into the system, we don't get to pick and choose what our tax money is spent on based on our own current needs, we pay collectively as a society for the benefit of all of that society as a whole because a better society benefits us all.

you don't object to paying for a healthcare system if you're not sick, just like you don't object to paying for the transport infrastructure if you don't have a car, or paying for schools if you don't have kids, so why would you object to contributing to reasonable childcare costs if you don't have children?

the results of which are going to be more people choosing to have kids as they know they will be able to support them more easily, more parents going back to work as they will be more able to afford it and (in the longer term) a larger, stronger younger generation of people to join that society and contribute to it when they are older, which (as was already mentioned) will benefit the previous generations who are going into retirement.

Chattastrophe!

vibe666 wrote: »

everyone pays into the system, we don't get to pick and choose what our tax money is spent on based on our own current needs, we pay collectively as a society for the benefit of all of that society as a whole because a better society benefits us all.

you don't object to paying for a healthcare system if you're not sick, just like you don't object to paying for the transport infrastructure if you don't have a car, or paying for schools if you don't have kids, so why would you object to contributing to reasonable childcare costs if you don't have children?

the results of which are going to be more people choosing to have kids as they know they will be able to support them more easily, more parents going back to work as they will be more able to afford it and (in the longer term) a larger, stronger younger generation of people to join that society and contribute to it when they are older, which (as was already mentioned) will benefit the previous generations who are going into retirement.

I don't argue with this; but if tax relief was available that made it more affordable to work rather than staying at home, more parents would work and more tax income would be received by the state.

At the moment, I can't see how it's affordable for the average parent to work while having one child - never mind when they have two or more!

ted1

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

Your OP nearly suggests dole rather than work.

Stay at home parents don't get the dole. Well my wife doesn't as she had her own shop but closed it when pregnant. The only thing that she receives is the Child benefits.

vibe666

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

I don't argue with this; but if tax relief was available that made it more affordable to work rather than staying at home, more parents would work and more tax income would be received by the state.

At the moment, I can't see how it's affordable for the average parent to work while having one child - never mind when they have two or more!

this is pretty much the situation we're in at the minute.

my wife is just about to finish her maternity leave after having our second child and we're in a position where if she works more than 3 days a week, after tax she barely comes out with anything (probably less than €10 for a full days work) after expenses when you include travel costs, lunch & childcare, but you can't get reasonable childcare for 3 days a week for 2 kids as everyone wants a weeks money out of you and you can hardly blame them if they could fill a 5 day place with someone else.

we've managed to negotiate a 4 day week as it's for our two kids as we have an existing relationship with them, but as I say, she's a professional working in the city basically working for nothing on that 4th day.

RainyDay

RedXIV wrote: »

If there's anything the tax payer should want to subsidise, it's childcare. It benefits everyone. If you've kids, you have access to reasonable childcare, if you don't have kids, you really want to encourage others to have them, your state pension isn't going to magically appear without future generations of tax payer

As soon as the State starts subsidising childcare, the prices will rise to absorb the subsidy -basic laws of supply and demand. We need more childcare, not subsidies.

Pawwed Rig

They already subsidise childcare to the extent that it is exempt from VAT. They also introduces a universal payment a few years ago which was subsequently scrapped. My main issue is the difference between the costs in Ireland and the rest of Europe. Why are Irish people being disadvantaged relative to their peers? It is not a small difference either.

ancapailldorcha

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

They already subsidise childcare to the extent that it is exempt from VAT. They also introduces a universal payment a few years ago which was subsequently scrapped. My main issue is the difference between the costs in Ireland and the rest of Europe. Why are Irish people being disadvantaged relative to their peers? It is not a small difference either.

Could it have something to do with the child abuse scandals? I imagine that it is a lot more difficult nowadays to get clearance to work with children than it used to be.

Pawwed Rig

Clearance is very easy to get. It is just a case of contacting the Gardai, they do a search and say yes or no.

ancapailldorcha

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Clearance is very easy to get. It is just a case of contacting the Gardai, they do a search and say yes or no.

Maybe there are a lot of standards in place. Do you need qualifications to work with children? There's also the simplistic notion that they're all money-grabbing thieves who have a product they know people won't refuse to buy.

Pawwed Rig

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Maybe there are a lot of standards in place. Do you need qualifications to work with children? There's also the simplistic notion that they're all money-grabbing thieves who have a product they know people won't refuse to buy.

You need a level 5 qualification which is not that hard to get. I don't think it is a case of money grabbing at all. For example for a baby the ratio is 3 babies to 1 adult. At €1,000 a month that means the creche makes €3,000 gross. Taking wages alone (even at minimum wage) you are talking €1,400-€1,500 per month. Add in emplyers PRSI, rates, rent, food, bills, covering breaks etc and I can't see there be too much margin in here.
There are standards but they would be pretty consistant across Western European nations.

kippy

I don't really think Creche fees are extortionate in most of the country to be honest.
30-40 quid a day in Galway in most places seems good enough value to have your child minded, fed and entertained for most of the day. Once you are getting a good service, like anything else.
Things are a lot more expensive in other areas, it has to be said.
I'd assume the costs for the provider are pretty high. The've a legal requirement to have so many staff per child (depending on childs age). Most of them have some kind of cook/chef and cleaners. I'd assume the staff costs can be high due to the numbers invovled although the wages I beleive are not that high. Then theres insurance (can't imagine that to be cheap), premises rental, rates (not sure whether they pay rates), and all the other bills that go with keeping a building at a certain temperature and light level all day. On top of that I'd assume there are setup costs etc etc.

Not saying there aren't people making money from it, but I dont see the actual prices for having your kids minded, in the places I am familiar with, to be extortionate.

There are always other options also.

Whether the cost is affordable depends entirely on all of your arrangements.

I think personally if you make the effort to work and have kids in a creche you should get some kind of assistance from the state as the state to make this a bit easier on you. Not saying it should be much - but there has to be something to incentiveise people to work and contribute to the wages of a childcare worker.

neris

RainyDay wrote: »

As soon as the State starts subsidising childcare, the prices will rise to absorb the subsidy -basic laws of supply and demand. We need more childcare, not subsidies.

Not necesarilly if the Govt go the right way about stopping over/extra charges just like they have done with the ECCE scheme. The problem for the Govt to give tax relief or tax credits to parents is that it will cost the tax man in either paying out subsidies or loosing tax income. Take it say 35 kids in a creche and the govt having to pay a subsidy to the creche of €62.50 every week for every kid then multiply that by every creche across the country. The govt and their agencies dont really give a **** about the childcare sector or parents. While Vat isnt charged for childcare the creche operators get charged Vat on purchases and one of the biggest Vat payments especially for Creches opened in purpose built buildings during the celtic tiger is vat on rent. Some creches in Dublin could be paying close to €100k a year in rent alone + vat