Fee for holding place in creche

casey80

Hi all, could you please advise if this is normal that the creche wants us to pay 50% of the normal fee to hold the place for a child over summer. ( I am taking the child out for 3 months and they make me pay for 1.5 months to hold the place). Thanks

Big Bag of Chips

As a private business they are entitled to ask what they please. If you don't want to pay it, then take your child out and hope the place will still be there in September, or try a different creche.

casey80

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

As a private business they are entitled to ask what they please. If you don't want to pay it, then take your child out and hope the place will still be there in September, or try a different creche.

So, in your opinion, is charging 50% for holding a place reasonable/fair request?
In your experience, do many creches impose holdings fees of this magnitude?
I understand the "private business" argument and shouldn't probably take their demand personally, but I almost inclined now to switch my son to other crèche,which are in abundance in the area...

Big Bag of Chips

Well what's their alternative? Hold a place for your child for 3 months, not allow another child in to that place, yet not be paid for 3 months? A quarter of the year?

I think it is very reasonable to ask for 1/2 of the payment. You want the place for your child, but it is your decision to not use the place for 3 months, and still want it to be available when you decide to use it again.

casey80

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

Well what's their alternative? Hold a place for your child for 3 months, not allow another child in to that place, yet not be paid for 3 months? A quarter of the year?

I think it is very reasonable to ask for 1/2 of the payment. You want the place for your child, but it is your decision to not use the place for 3 months, and still want it to be available when you decide to use it again.

I don't think it is as simple as that. There is a turnover of kids in crèche, i.e some kids are leaving and some kids are coming in - it is a process and I don't think it is reasonable to expect next child to come in the next day after previous child had left a crèche. The risk in this respect or at least large chunk of it should be absorbed by crèche.

I was talking to friend of mine yesterday and they were charged EUR 100 for holding a place for their toddler for 5 weeks, which is less than 10% of what they would pay if he was attending...
I am not saying creche should hold a place for free, but 50% seems a bit on a high side and perhaps not reasonable?

iwillhtfu

Don't pay the fee and if there is no place available for you when you need it don't complain.

Very odd to assume a place will be held for you which you may decide you don't want when the time comes.

I hate paying creche fees for when the kids aren't there etc but I understand the reasons behind it.

uck51js9zml2yt

iwillhtfu wrote: »

Don't pay the fee and if there is no place available for you when you need it don't complain.

Very odd to assume a place will be held for you which you may decide you don't want when the time comes.

I hate paying creche fees for when the kids aren't there etc but I understand the reasons behind it.

You hit the Nail on the head!

SteM

Seems reasonable to me. Remember, you're not the only parent thinking of doing this. Another 3 or 4 parents doing it would mean less staff are needed who would have to go out and find other jobs. Then the crèche will have to rehire people after the summer which might not be easy.

If you feel there is an issue don't pay and hope for the best in September.

mirrorwall14

Are they asking you for half fees for you to never send your child or that half time is the least they will allow to hold the place? The latter makes sense to me. Like you are allowed reduce hours but not leave completely. The former is a bit much though

casey80

iwillhtfu wrote: »

Don't pay the fee and if there is no place available for you when you need it don't complain.

Very odd to assume a place will be held for you which you may decide you don't want when the time comes.

I hate paying creche fees for when the kids aren't there etc but I understand the reasons behind it.

If I decide I don't want a place when the time comes there is a punishment in a form of losing my initial deposit, so the creche will not be out of pocket in this case

casey80

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Are they asking you for half fees for you to never send your child or that half time is the least they will allow to hold the place? The latter makes sense to me. Like you are allowed reduce hours but not leave completely. The former is a bit much though

No, half fees for never sending my child

salmocab

Your a nightmare for the crèche you want to save money by not sending your child for the summer but their overheads don’t change so they lose money so the best they can hope for is a child similar age to replace yours with, but you want the place held so you should pay for it. Plenty of crèches would just have said no and let you just leave.
Crèche fees are high because the overheads are high and your just killing their margin.

Moonbeam

I think that is an excellent deal for you,they are loosing out on 3 months fees.

neris

you take your child out for 3 months the creche still has to pay staff, rent, food etc and is down your fees. Weve gladly given away peoples places over the summer coz they wont pay any sort of fee while we still have bills to pay and places to fill.

casey80

Many thanks to all who responded.

I suggest looking at it not from creche's, but from parent's perspective.

As I mentioned earlier, there are other creches in the area with September places available.

In these circumstance, would it make much sense to pay 1.5K for the privilege of bringing child to the same creche after the summer (if you aren't a millionaire)?

It's a rhetoric question

Big Bag of Chips

(I would imagine that most, if not all of the people who replied to you are parents!)

It all depends on how happy you are with the creche in question. If you want to ensure that your child retains their place then you have to expect to pay for it. You are choosing to not send your child. The creche aren't stopping you from sending them.

If you're not bothered about that particular creche then take them out. Enjoy your summer holidays and then put them back in if available/move creche in September.

As a parent you don't want to pay for a service you are choosing not to use, even though you want the service to still be available to you. As a business they are losing out on 3 months fees (a quarter of their year) and unable to bring another child in to that place yet will still have the same expenses.

SteM

casey80 wrote: »

I suggest looking at it not from creche's, but from parent's perspective.

As I mentioned earlier, there are other creches in the area with September places available.

Then I don't see your issue, leave your current crèche and go to another one in September. You're looking for an issue where there is none, let the crèche owners run their business how they please.

casey80

SteM wrote: »

Then I don't see your issue, leave your current crèche and go to another one in September. You're looking for an issue where there is none, let the crèche owners run their business how they please.

No issue apart from the fact that it is not ideal for small child to switch creches. I guess I also question the wisdom of crèche's position.
Creche tries to maximise their profit but the effect is going to be quite the opposite. As many parents in my situation will simply switch. That will leave crèche in question with even bigger gap in numbers for the summer they won't be able to bridge.

Think about the bigger picture. It is a different game during the summer, more kids leave creches than are coming in.

Anyways you are right, let crèche owners do whatever they like to their business

casey80

casey80 wrote: »

No issue apart from the fact that it is not ideal for small child to switch creches. I guess I also question the wisdom of crèche's position.
Creche tries to maximise their profit but the effect is going to be quite the opposite. As many parents in my situation will simply switch. That will leave crèche in question with even bigger gap in numbers for the summer they won't be able to bridge.

Think about the bigger picture. It is a different game during the summer, more kids leave creches than are coming in.

Anyways you are right, let crèche owners do whatever they like to their business

Nonsense. You clearly have a bee in your bonnet as the above is not at all rational. Plenty of people can and will pay to ensure continuity for their child. You cannot afford that option but that is not the fault of the crèche. As you said, in a bitter fashion, let them do whatever they like with their business. Move on and enjoy your summer with your child. The crèche will be fine don’t worry about them!

salmocab

casey80 wrote: »

No issue apart from the fact that it is not ideal for small child to switch creches. I guess I also question the wisdom of crèche's position.
Creche tries to maximise their profit but the effect is going to be quite the opposite. As many parents in my situation will simply switch. That will leave crèche in question with even bigger gap in numbers for the summer they won't be able to bridge.

Think about the bigger picture. It is a different game during the summer, more kids leave creches than are coming in.

Anyways you are right, let crèche owners do whatever they like to their business

Well it won’t be the opposite even if they lose your child for the summer they will hope that someone will book in for September who won’t do the same next summer, as I said early on your a nightmare for the crèche. Nobody wants to pay the high prices of crèches But they aren’t coining it. As you say it’s not ideal for the child to change crèche but if you think local crèches aren’t talking to each other you could be in for a surprise next year when you do it again.

casey80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Nonsense. You clearly have a bee in your bonnet as the above is not at all rational. Plenty of people can and will pay to ensure continuity for their child. You cannot afford that option but that is not the fault of the crèche. As you said, in a bitter fashion, let them do whatever they like with their business. Move on and enjoy your summer with your child. The crèche will be fine don’t worry about them!

I am all for continuity and can afford but don't think the price is reasonable given options available.
Where exactly am I not being rational?

casey80

salmocab wrote: »

Well it won’t be the opposite even if they lose your child for the summer they will hope that someone will book in for September who won’t do the same next summer, as I said early on your a nightmare for the crèche. Nobody wants to pay the high prices of crèches But they aren’t coining it. As you say it’s not ideal for the child to change crèche but if you think local crèches aren’t talking to each other you could be in for a surprise next year when you do it again.

It will. Because I was prepared to pay something (not 1.5k of course) for them to hold the place. But now they will have nothing.

Big Bag of Chips

Why do you think they will have nothing? Children don't all start childcare in September, if you remove your child, and don't pay the €1500 then that frees up your child's space to a fulltime child for which they will receive the full fee. Plenty of children available to start at all times of the year. And the child that starts during the summer is more likely to be a child who will use the creche for the full year. Not every parent gets 3 months of the summer off.

You really didn't get the answers you were expecting, did you?

salmocab

casey80 wrote: »

It will. Because I was prepared to pay something (not 1.5k of course) for them to hold the place. But now they will have nothing.

I think your missing that they don’t want you, they are charging a high amount because they don’t want you back. So either you pay and they hold the place for a high fee or you leave and they replace you, maybe not too quickly but next year they won’t have you doing the same.
You seem to have decided they are making the mistake so just do what you want and don’t worry about it.

casey80

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

Why do you think they will have nothing? Children don't all start childcare in September, if you remove your child, and don't pay the €1500 then that frees up your child's space to a fulltime child for which they will receive the full fee. Plenty of children available to start at all times of the year. And the child that starts during the summer is more likely to be a child who will use the creche for the full year. Not every parent gets 3 months of the summer off.

You really didn't get the answers you were expecting, did you?

They will have nothing because the outflow of kids during summer is higher than inflow. Look at the bigger picture rather than concentrating on one child and his place.

Yes, you are right I am surprised at so many people having so much sympathy for creches in light of recent scandals and their astronomical fees.

I also didn't get the answers I was expecting as I was looking for facts and examples, i.e "I was charged % holding fees for 5 weeks during the summer...", rather than opinions.
So far noone provided any such facts apart from myself about my friend who was charged circa 10%

peteb2

casey80 wrote:

They will have nothing because the outflow of kids during summer is higher than inflow. Look at the bigger picture rather than concentrating on one child and his place.

Why is the outflow higher in the summer? Where's your evidence of this? I've never known any one that pulls their kids out for the summer.

And this isn't like a situation where you are asking them to hold a place for a first time starter and merely give a deposit. You are asking not to give your existing place away whilst you believe a payment holiday would be nice.

December2012

You are holding a place. Why wouldn't they charge you a fee? Lots of creches would not give you any reduction at all

Pawwed Rig

There is a waiting list in our creche and has been for at least the last 3 years. There was recently a notice given to all parents that if they have any babies or babies due that spaces are running out for 2019. If we suggested taking jnr out for the summer and holding his place we would be laughed at.

mrslancaster

casey80 wrote: »

I also didn't get the answers I was expecting as I was looking for facts and examples, i.e "I was charged % holding fees for 5 weeks during the summer...", rather than opinions.
So far noone provided any such facts apart from myself about my friend who was charged circa 10%

Things have obviously changed in the past few years. When we were using creche services we had to pay fees for 50 weeks.
If our kids didn't attend for any reason we still paid full fees. That's what we signed up to but at that time it was a nightmare trying to find a creche so it could be different now. Maybe there is more choice and more available creche places now.
As others have said, the creche still has to pay rent, staff and all the other costs.
If you don't need the place in the summer can you just leave and then sign up again in September?
The child's place could be gone then but as others said, the creche probably can't run their business by keeping vacant places for 3 months.

Big Bag of Chips

Not all parents are secondary teachers. Not all secondary teachers use creches. You posted on a general forum asking a question that you wanted aimed at a very niche section. The reason you didn't get the answers you wanted is because you are speaking to parents who work fulltime hours. Who have children in fulltime childcare. And who believe that if you want the use of a service then you of course should be expected to pay for it.

If there is, as you say a large outflow of kids during the summer, then of course the creche are going to charge to hold places. Their running costs will be much the same. Do you expect the staff to take a cut in wages for the summer? Or are you suggesting because lots of kids leave over the summer, that they let most of the staff go, and operate at reduced hours to suit a handful who aren't even there? Does the creche owner tell the workers they're not wanted for the summer, to sign on but not look for another job because they'll need them back again in September when all the teachers decide they want their places back?

Your friend got a better deal off her creche, why not move to that one? Although I'd imagine, if that creche have a few who want a 90% reduction in fees but their place held, you might see they also need to increase what they charge.

casey80 wrote: »

I am surprised at so many people having so much sympathy for creches in light of recent scandals and their astronomical fees.

And on this point, if you really have such a low opinion of creches I'm surprised you allow them to take your child at all! I would not give my child to a service that I didn't trust. They spend a huge part of their day there. You have to be confident in the service. If you're not happy, obviously the right thing to do is take him out and find a better service that suits you better. There are options.

joey1111

I think Big Bag of Chips is giving you a very fair assessment of how childcare in 2018 operates.

Older people have memories of the 80s and 90s when childcare wasn't such big business and you easily found even a local neighbour to mind your child for half nothing.

The best thing people could do is not have children, they're expensive.

I can totally understand you being peeved about paying money for a service you're not currently receiving and unless my child was gleefully happy there I would cut my losses. Try them in September and if they're not available find another.

You need to weigh up as well how social and adoptable your child is, will they fit in easily elsewhere.

Peregrinus

casey80 wrote: »

It will. Because I was prepared to pay something (not 1.5k of course) for them to hold the place. But now they will have nothing.

Not necessarily. I appreciate that there are other creches in the area, and plenty of availability of places, but if this particular creche commands a high degree of loyalty from its patrons they may be prepared to pay a signficant cost in order to retain a place in this creche. And, if some of the patrons are not prepared to pay that, then it's likely that a creche with such a reputation will have no difficulty in filling the place with a parent who actually needs a 12-month place, and will pay full fees.

Basically, if this particular creche is in high demand, they they can afford to let parents withdraw if they don't want to pay the 50% hold-a-place-for-summer fee. If they succeed in filling more than half of the places vacated by parents who withdraw, they are better off.

This strategy only makes sense if the creche is in fact at the upper end of the market; if its the creche which parents would choose, given a choice among several creches. In this case, either it is at that end of the market, or its owners fondly believe that it is.

casey80

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

If there is, as you say a large outflow of kids during the summer, then of course the creche are going to charge to hold places. Their running costs will be much the same. Do you expect the staff to take a cut in wages for the summer? Or are you suggesting because lots of kids leave over the summer, that they let most of the staff go, and operate at reduced hours to suit a handful who aren't even there? Does the creche owner tell the workers they're not wanted for the summer, to sign on but not look for another job because they'll need them back again in September when all the teachers decide they want their places back.

No, I certainly wouldn't expect staff to take a cut in wages for the summer. It is the situation that any crèche owner need to manage well (like any other business that have some degree of seasonality). I think it could be managed successfully by inviting staff to take annual leaves during the summer. Given that labour cost form largest part of crèche's overall expenses, managing the issue well would allow maintaining profitability even during the summer.
In addition, seasonality aspect is already baked into the crèche's monthly fees (which is one of the reasons they are so high). Therefore, charging high holding fees for long duration absence during the summer is effectively double charge.

Many thanks again to all who responded.
I have made up my mind on the issue so no more advice is needed.

December2012

joey1111 wrote: »

I can totally understand you being peeved about paying money for a service you're not currently receiving.

Holding a place is receiving a service.

joey1111

December2012 wrote: »

Holding a place is receiving a service.

No its not a service, its a payment to secure a future service. Big difference and its a huge rip off.

I'd refuse blind to pay it, move on!

Peregrinus

casey80 wrote: »

No, I certainly wouldn't expect staff to take a cut in wages for the summer. It is the situation that any crèche owner need to manage well (like any other business that have some degree of seasonality). I think it could be managed successfully by inviting staff to take annual leaves during the summer. Given that labour cost form largest part of crèche's overall expenses, managing the issue well would allow maintaining profitability even during the summer.

Staff do have to be paid while on annual leave, so inviting them to take annual leave in the summer doesn't reduce the overheads of the business during the summer.

casey80 wrote: »

In addition, seasonality aspect is already baked into the crèche's monthly fees (which is one of the reasons they are so high). Therefore, charging high holding fees for long duration absence during the summer is effectively double charge.

Well, I don't know how seasonal the creche business is, really. Teachers aside, most working parents who require creche services require them throughout the year. The creche's pricing model may well be that seasonality is not "baked into" the fee structure, and that places are price on on the assumption that they will be filled for 48 or 50 weeks in the year.

joey1111

Peregrinus wrote: »

Staff do have to be paid while on annual leave, so inviting them to take annual leave in the summer doesn't reduce the overheads of the business during the summer.


Well, I don't know how seasonal the creche business is, really. Teachers aside, most working parents who require creche services require them throughout the year. The creche's pricing model may well be that seasonality is not "baked into" the fee structure, and that places are price on on the assumption that they will be filled for 48 or 50 weeks in the year.

They are actually good points there, plenty of people all over Ireland are on zero hours contracts. I'd love to know if the staff are on this kind of contract.

You'd be well entitled to know exactly what your ''holding fee'' is paying for.
I've never heard of a well off creche worker, only creche owners.

peteb2

joey1111 wrote:

You'd be well entitled to know exactly what your ''holding fee'' is paying for. I've never heard of a well off creche worker, only creche owners.

The "holding fee' as you put it is because the crèche don't want the OP. There is plenty of other people who probably want that full time spot. Everyone knows if you are putting your child in a crèche it's not sessional child care.

If you don't want to have your child in for two weeks because you are going on holidays you can't simply hold your place and expect not to pay for those two weeks. In the same breath you can't expect to not pay for 3 months because you don't need the spot for this months and think it should be there when you return.

I know in the crèche we are in there is a waiting list for certain rooms and no parent is going to agree to just put their kids in for those 3 months the OP doesn't want to use. So why shouldn't the OP pay ? Personally I think they are getting a good deal with what they are being offered.

neris

joey1111 wrote: »

You'd be well entitled to know exactly what your ''holding fee'' is paying for.
I've never heard of a well off creche worker, only creche owners.

have you got an issue with business owners who take the risks, deal with problems, take the heat finacially when needed, create employment and provide a decent servicing doing well? Do you complain about the other local business owners in your area who do well for themselves or just the creche?

Hoboo

neris wrote: »

have you got an issue with business owners who take the risks, deal with problems, take the heat finacially when needed, create employment and provide a decent servicing doing well? Do you complain about the other local business owners in your area who do well for themselves or just the creche?

Definitely wouldn't be sending my kids to your creche anyhow

I doubt anyone begrudges anyones success, however, the sharing of that success amongst employees within the sector is rarely equitable.

Big Bag of Chips

If I'm an employee who turns up to my job 9-5 (or whatever) and goes home and doesn't have to think about work until the next time I go in, then no I certainly wouldn't expect my boss to "share their success" with me outside of my wages. If my wages are lower than I would like for myself, I would try to renegotiate them or find a better paying job.

I find people who speak about "sharing the success" aren't so quick to step forward to accept to "share the responsibility".

Edit: I also don't know too many childcare providers who are minted!!

salmocab

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

Edit: I also don't know too many childcare providers who are minted!!

I’d imagine some owners of chains are doing very well out of it and good luck to them but most crèches are smaller places with the owner working there as a manager and I doubt they are minted alright.
Staff are notoriously badly paid but that’s industry wide as there just isn’t money to pay better, fees are high because overheads are high and increasing all the time.

Hoboo

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

If I'm an employee who turns up to my job 9-5 (or whatever) and goes home and doesn't have to think about work until the next time I go in, then no I certainly wouldn't expect my boss to "share their success" with me outside of my wages. If my wages are lower than I would like for myself, I would try to renegotiate them or find a better paying job.

I find people who speak about "sharing the success" aren't so quick to step forward to accept to "share the responsibility".

Edit: I also don't know too many childcare providers who are minted!!

So you'd try to renegotiate your wages, in the same breath as not expecting your boss to share their success? How does that work?

An increase in wages IS (one example) of sharing success.

Edit: Any creche that isn't making good money at the moment isn't the fault of the industry, its the fault of the proprietor. Too many people haven't the skills to run a business properly, but like to think they have.

Big Bag of Chips

Well if I'm happy with the wages I've been offered, then I wouldn't feel the need to renegotiate. If I felt my work was worth more than I was being paid, then I would discuss that with the boss. But I would expect the boss of any business to be paid more than the employees to reflect the level of responsibility they have in contrast to the level of responsibilty an average worker has.

I live rurally so don't know many owners of creche chains, but I do know/know of a number of owners of smaller independent creches and they are by no means minted. They are comfortable (from what I can see from the outside) but there's very few shiny new cars, big fancy houses and foreign holidays. And as mentioned above, they work in their creche as staff as well as handle all the management of the business. I honestly don't begrudge them being paid a decent salary for the service they pour many hours into.

joey1111

neris wrote: »

have you got an issue with business owners who take the risks, deal with problems, take the heat finacially when needed, create employment and provide a decent servicing doing well? Do you complain about the other local business owners in your area who do well for themselves or just the creche?

I have no issue with anyone, I'm simply stating my opinion and that is that I wouldn't pay for a holding place in a creche and that I'm against any employers success if they are handing out zero hour contracts.

I havnt named or shamed anyone and if you think holding fees are fair enough then thats fine too. Thats your opinion.

Balmed Out

Check if there is a minimum number of hours for a child to attend to keep their place. That's how the creche where my kids go operates. You might find you have the free time to do housework etc without kids in tow and better quality time with the kids while paying the same amount to hold your place.
As an aside completely on creche's side in this.

salmocab

joey1111 wrote: »

I have no issue with anyone, I'm simply stating my opinion and that is that I wouldn't pay for a holding place in a creche and that I'm against any employers success if they are handing out zero hour contracts.

I havnt named or shamed anyone and if you think holding fees are fair enough then thats fine too. Thats your opinion.

Your the only person who mentioned zero hours contracts, any crèche workers I know are on a 40 hour week contract apart from some who do shorter days to suit their own circumstances.
Crèches are struggling for staff as it is without dicking around the staff they have with zero hour contracts.

joey1111

salmocab wrote: »

Your the only person who mentioned zero hours contracts, any crèche workers I know are on a 40 hour week contract apart from some who do shorter days to suit their own circumstances.
Crèches are struggling for staff as it is without dicking around the staff they have with zero hour contracts.

You'd be surprised, most Creche workers (not owners) earn pittance.

salmocab

joey1111 wrote: »

You'd be surprised, most Creche workers (not owners) earn pittance.

Yeah I’m aware the pay is rubbish, in fact I stated that earlier in this thread.
All the crèche workers I know are on full time contracts apart from the few who do shorter hours to suit themselves regards their own circumstances.