I don't want to get in the way of a good old govt bash if that's the core objective here, but legitimately curious, what exactly are "they" supposed to do about that particular childcare conundrum? The mrs and I are in just this scenario (with no grandparents to lean on), and in trying to figure out how to manage school and work days together ourselves, and in discussing it with friends in the same situation, can't see any magic wand that could have been waved over it by any government.
Unless I'm missing something that isn't an issue due to covid, school days have always been shorter than work days (on average).
Mainly this, but (and not sure about other schools here), weird start/finish times (to stagger classes), fewer before/after school classes being on, and on-site childcare often being a bit faster and looser with guidelines (ours is anyway, so she's not going), it's been trickier this time around. If one did lean on grandparents for childcare, and said grandparents were shielding, that could be tricky too. Though I only know a few families that rely on grandparents for regular childcare - unscientifically, more than 10%, less than 25%. But generally, balancing childcare and work has never been easy, and continues to be not easy. Easier than balancing actual home-school with work like the end of last academic year though.
No idea, it is one of the many reasons I would never have kids. Basically there are four options: 1: One of the parents doesn't work. 2: Pay for childcare (thus deleting the income of one parent). 3: Rely on school / council / gov provided things like after school clubs. 4: Rely on friends and family (anyone who isn't a pensioner won't be available due to having to work themselves). Option 3 is pretty cut down due to covid. Option 4 is basically ruled out as pensioners are the high risk of death group. What should have been done by the Gov to help with that mess? Restart this: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/employer-supported-childcare-480-appendix-11
So which is it, "no idea", or 'this is how it is'? I would expect most parents find themselves using option 5 - "any and all of the above, as and when needed" Aside from single parents, I have literally no idea how they make it all work. Especially with more than one. Actual superheroes. There are still tax-efficient childcare schemes available, the particular voucher scheme you linked was discontinued, though anyone can keep it up if they were already signed up. I've found that half the time the issue with that particular scheme is that an after-school club is unable to accept the voucher because they're not a registered childcare provider (or something like that) - i.e. it's one or two people that teach a thing to kids after school at the school, as opposed to a formally registered and organised "after school club". AFAIK the new scheme covers this particular scenario better.
Both. "this is how it is" for the range of options, "no idea" for how to choose the correct one (especially once you throw fun stuff like inflexible working hours into the mix).
At the risk of further derailment, I'll throw my hat into the childcare ring as a parent of two: we do Option 1. I pull in a wage, my wife does the majority of the childcare. Note my phraseology, there: it's not that she "doesn't work," 'cos in my opinion she works considerably harder than I do; it's that she doesn't receive a wage. It wouldn't work for everyone, I'm sure. It helps that there was an earnings disparity in my favour back when she did pull in a wage; if it were the other way around, it would have made more sense for her to remain salaried and me to move to being the full-time carer. It also helps that I live Oop North, so living costs are considerably lower; if we lived in That There Lodnon, I'm not so sure my income would be enough to keep the wolves at bay. (Well, some months it would, some months it wouldn't - the joys of freelance life!) Option 2 wouldn't be a goer, as it would literally cancel out the wage she would earn. Option 3 would have been great, back in the day, but a decade of Tory cuts means there's knob-all running around here these days. Option 4 isn't really an option, either: no nearby family, and you can't impose on friends on a daily basis.
Dettol advertises the glorious new Work from Home practice: Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date (except those are supposed to be "go back to the office adverts".. oops)
Winner winner catfish dinner. We staggered our working hours so there was mostly one of us available to take to school and one to pick up from school in the early days, I mean not the really early days for those we relied on the nursery during the working day. On the odd occasion either of us had to be away or work weird hours we used the breakfast club at school, we used our parents, we used an after school nanny. As they get older it get's easier, they can walk themselves to school and back again. Long story short, only have kids if you can afford them and look after them, personally I'd prefer it if government kept out of my child care.
More to the point, who can seriously make an accurate prediction of their health and income for the next 16 to 25 years?
That was kinda my point - the huge cost coupled with uncertainty would have us all running for the hills.
Roll of the dice in there somewhere for sure, helps that the other half has been in the same employ for 25+ years and me 20+ years. But I'm an old bugger, old of body and thought, I haven't had an unpaid day off work (except for a month I wanted to take) since I left school at 16, never claimed the dole etc. and I'm 46 or 47 now, if my current job had gone boobies up I'd have found another, if I couldn't find another quickly I'd have sold assets to support my child. There used to be a think called personal responsibility, and whilst nobody can predict the future, it's not rocket surgery to take an educated guess.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ings-of-more-than-six-to-be-banned-in-england Gatherings of no more than 6... ...except schools ...and universities ...and workplaces ...and public transport ...and Boris' weekly circle jerk ...and...
You're assuming there's 3. The US is at 190k deaths, and that's with reduced testing and fudging of the numbers...
They just had to go and say it, didn't they? They just had to say this wasn't a second wave, therefore guaranteeing they would be warning of a second wave within a week. I haven't had a haircut since before lockdown.
