The provision of a free at the point of use public childcare service has been a demand of the trade union movement for over a hundred years. Investment in the provision of quality childcare is therefore very welcome. But the service model must be one that closes rather than widens the attainment gap. There is a very real risk that done the wrong way we could make inequality worse rather than better. There is growing evidence that this has been the case following the move to 30 “free” hours per week in England . UNISON’s full response to the consultation is available here.
To be fully effective the proposed expansion of “free hours” in ELC will also require investment in a range of public services not just nurseries. The services also need to work together. This is why it important that all education services including early years are embedded in local authorities where links to social work, libraries, youth work, leisure and cultural services as well as social work, welfare rights, educational psychologists and housing can be best coordinated.
The government consistently state that they are focused on the provision of a quality service. The quality of an ELC services is entirely based on the quality of the staff. Stating that the Living Wage is the minimum pay for the sector contradicts that ambition. It should be shocking that that around 80 per cent of practitioners and 50 per cent of supervisors in partner settings are paid less than the Living Wage . So while the commitment will bring a welcome pay rise for many it is much less than is being paid in the public sector.
UNISON believes that the government has substantial underestimated the number of extra staff needed to meet their ambition but even accepting their figures it will be very difficult to attract sufficient people at that rate of pay. Why would anyone undertake the training (in-work or at college) needed to become an early years practitioner with all the responsibilities, the demands of maintaining professional registration and required ongoing professional development to earn the same rate of pay you could cleaning or in a supermarket?
In the short term the better rates of pay and pensions in the local authorities mean that authorities will be able to fill their current vacancies by attracting qualified staff from other sectors and lower paying authorities. The average earnings for practitioners across the sectors are
• public £28,000
• private £15,000
• voluntary £16,000
A practitioner moving from the private to the public sector is looking at an average wage rise of £13,000 per year plus a final salary pension. A recent report from the National Day Nurseries Association (Scotland ) states that private nurseries currently lose 3 staff per year to the public sector. Lower payers are going to struggle to keep and recruit staff during such a massive expansion According to the Skills Development Scotland report the current vacancy rate is 19% and 35% report problems filling vacancies. This will only get worse without proper pay. Low pay puts the whole expansion at risk.
The evidence is clear that an anti-poverty early learning and childcare service (ELC) needs to follow a supply side model rather than the “funding follows the child” “provider neutral” model laid out by the Scottish government.
As the Joseph Rowntree Foundation state
“international evidence and the best examples of high quality provision in the UK suggest that the most effective approach to funding pre-school childcare is supply side funding, where investment is made directly in services. This approach provides the means to offer universal access to services and effectively shape quality, affordability and flexibility. .....demand side subsidies do not offer the same means to achieve integration and deliver improvements in services. The case for supply-funded childcare is simple. It is the most effective means of delivering reliable access to affordable, flexible and high quality childcare regardless of parents’ ability to pay”
We really want this expansion to work. This could be a life changing investment in public services. There's still time for the Scottish government listen and make the right choices.
Showing posts with label childcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label childcare. Show all posts
Thursday, 21 June 2018
Wednesday, 3 February 2016
A Way to Build an Anti-poverty Childcare Service
We are a long way from Scottish and UK governments being able to actually deliver on their promises of a 30 hour childcare service free at the point of use so it’s great to see Joseph Rowntree Foundation publishing a plan to enable actual delivery.
The cost of childcare is a substantial barrier to work for many parents and the lack of availability and complexity of both finding childcare and funding support make it even more difficult. For many families childcare is their single biggest monthly bill.
The new report calls for a simplified childcare system which focuses on tackling poverty. Currently childcare subsidies are extremely complex: supply side via “free hours” alongside the childcare element of tax credits, employer supported childcare vouchers and the tax free childcare scheme. Finding and accessing care is equally complex. There is no one place to go to even find out what’s available far less to apply for a place. Many parents struggle to access the current “free hours” entitlement never mind childcare that matches their working hours even if they can afford to pay.
The Rowntree report calls for a move to a “supply side” funding. Evidence suggests that this is the most effective way to fund a childcare service and means we can ensure quality, affordability and flexibility for all children regardless of their parents’ ability to pay. In terms of Scotland this could also mean more childcare funding could be devolved to the Scottish Government to invest in delivering on their promise.
If childcare is to be effective in reducing poverty and the impact of poverty on children then the focus has to be about more than reducing just the cost. The evidence is clear: childcare delivered by qualified staff working in a degree led setting is the most effective way to improve children’s outcomes.
Quality childcare requires:
• well qualified and experienced staff able to identify and respond to children’s needs
• An active approach to home learning
• A good social mix of children
• Strong links with local family and child support services (which again need to be well funded and high quality)
High quality childcare cannot be delivered without tackling low pay in the sector.
Some key recommendations from the report
Funding a decisive shift towards high quality childcare by:
• Moving to a qualified, graduate-led workforce and equalising wages across the private, voluntary and maintained settings in line with a national pay scale to support the professionalisation of the workforce
• Setting up a properly funded entitlement to full day childcare from age one to pre-school 48 weeks a year.
• Removing the parental contribution to childcare fees altogether for families with an income below the relative poverty threshold.
UNISON has long campaigned for a universal childcare service delivered in the public sector by a well qualified and appropriately paid workforce. This report is a very useful contribution to this campaign. Our Childcare Charter is available here.
The cost of childcare is a substantial barrier to work for many parents and the lack of availability and complexity of both finding childcare and funding support make it even more difficult. For many families childcare is their single biggest monthly bill.
The new report calls for a simplified childcare system which focuses on tackling poverty. Currently childcare subsidies are extremely complex: supply side via “free hours” alongside the childcare element of tax credits, employer supported childcare vouchers and the tax free childcare scheme. Finding and accessing care is equally complex. There is no one place to go to even find out what’s available far less to apply for a place. Many parents struggle to access the current “free hours” entitlement never mind childcare that matches their working hours even if they can afford to pay.
The Rowntree report calls for a move to a “supply side” funding. Evidence suggests that this is the most effective way to fund a childcare service and means we can ensure quality, affordability and flexibility for all children regardless of their parents’ ability to pay. In terms of Scotland this could also mean more childcare funding could be devolved to the Scottish Government to invest in delivering on their promise.
If childcare is to be effective in reducing poverty and the impact of poverty on children then the focus has to be about more than reducing just the cost. The evidence is clear: childcare delivered by qualified staff working in a degree led setting is the most effective way to improve children’s outcomes.
Quality childcare requires:
• well qualified and experienced staff able to identify and respond to children’s needs
• An active approach to home learning
• A good social mix of children
• Strong links with local family and child support services (which again need to be well funded and high quality)
High quality childcare cannot be delivered without tackling low pay in the sector.
Some key recommendations from the report
Funding a decisive shift towards high quality childcare by:
• Moving to a qualified, graduate-led workforce and equalising wages across the private, voluntary and maintained settings in line with a national pay scale to support the professionalisation of the workforce
• Setting up a properly funded entitlement to full day childcare from age one to pre-school 48 weeks a year.
• Removing the parental contribution to childcare fees altogether for families with an income below the relative poverty threshold.
UNISON has long campaigned for a universal childcare service delivered in the public sector by a well qualified and appropriately paid workforce. This report is a very useful contribution to this campaign. Our Childcare Charter is available here.
Thursday, 30 April 2015
Work and Poverty
"Children are not private luxuries: they are a joy in themselves and a social good." CPAG
UNISON has launched a Childcare Charter calling for the provision of high quality childcare in this we also point out that Getting it Right For Every Child cannot be separated from improving how work fits into family life. As in work poverty continues to grow we need to look at the balance between hours worked, rates of pay and the need to undertake caring responsibilities in order
Almost two thirds of children living in poverty have at least one working parent we need to look at how make sure that work does indeed guarantee freedom from poverty. Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG)have published a new paper Round the Clock: in work poverty and the hours question. They pose the question “How many hours should parent work (in order not to be poor)? The research is not just about how much you can earn but how you balance working hours with looking after children. The research involves an evidence review on attitudes to parental employment, a poll asking how many hours it was reasonable for parents to work and when those hours should be, taking the polling results to focus groups and also asking more about working hours expectations for lower paid parents and finally taking the results to employers to hear their views. The report also considers the policy implications of the findings.
Choices about how and when to work are made in an economic and social context. Most people think that once you have children you will have to reduce spending in some areas because you have higher costs in others. An EHRC study on working preferences in 2009 found that 57% of high income households had a stay at home parent in contrast to only 25% of those on low incomes. As the recession has progresses average earnings have decreased and so those on low pay to work longer hours to make ends meet.
One and a half to two earner households have a very low risk of poverty, part-time work does not protect couple families or lone parents from poverty.
Children in lone parent families still have a substantial risk of poverty even if their parent works full time. Almost one third of children whose parents are self employed (a growing sector of the workforce) live in poverty
Changes to the benefits and tax system (including universal credit) incentivise those on low incomes to increase working hours while endorsing the traditional breadwinner role for the better off.
Poverty reduction strategies seem to be focused in encouraging all parents to work full time. The planned and recent expansion of childcare provision is increasingly linked to parental employment rather than child development. At the same time governments are also promoting programmes encouraging positive parenting and parents spending “quality time” with children. Running across the debate is an increasing confusion between the constraints that low incomes place on peoples’ parenting choices and actual neglect/harmful activities by parents.
Only 25% of parents were content with the balance between their home and working lives, 77% reported that work cut into the time they had available to helping children with homework, taking them to clubs and putting them to bed.
When asked how they would like to strike a better balance 27% would work less hours, more than a quarter saying they would take a pay cut to do so. 22% would give up work altogether, 22% would like to work from home some of the time and 21% would like flexible hours.
The survey went on to ask what working hours were thought to be reasonable for parents per week. Interestingly there was no clear gender social class or political persuasion link to responses. For many the one full time one part time working parent is now deemed the norm. participants thought it was reasonable for a lone parent to work more hours than “the carer” parent in a two parent household. Respondents also felt it was more reasonable for lone parents to work longer hours and by the time children were 3 very few felt it was reasonable for lone parents not be in work. They did though not expect both parents in a two parent family to be in full time work at this stage.
In focus groups it was clear that most think the balance of work/childcare is deeply personal, it was also felt that debates about working parents don’t focus enough on the needs of the child which it was widely believed should be put back in the picture. Parents frequently asked why parenting was not valued despite its “societal importance and manifold rewards” As UNISON’s charter states “While childcare should enable parents to work its focus must be on what’s best for children and their development”.
Key points from the CPAG report
Affordable quality childcare is essential, this means not just nurseries but also around school hours and summer break for older children.
Children also need relaxed quality time with parents: expanded childcare is not a substitute for this.
Vital role for tax credits in supporting those working less than full time but those in full-time work should have a living wage and not require benefits to live.
Flexible working can be a double edged sword: flexibility can be good but zero hours and short notice demands for extra or just insecure weekly hours difficult when childcare has to be booked and paid for regularly and in advance. It doesn’t mean the same thing for those at the top and bottom of the wage scale. Parents need predictable hours.
Wage progression is an essential part of a poverty reduction strategy so we need more childcare support for those undertaking training.
Working more hours helps people earn more money but cannot forget the importance of decent pay rates
Value of benefits must be restored to pre 2010 levels.
In work poverty is produced by three things: levels of pay, hours worked and level of in work benefits. Need to tackle all three and ensure that parents have the time levels of income to allow them to spend time with their own children.
UNISON’s Childcare Charter is available here
UNISON has launched a Childcare Charter calling for the provision of high quality childcare in this we also point out that Getting it Right For Every Child cannot be separated from improving how work fits into family life. As in work poverty continues to grow we need to look at the balance between hours worked, rates of pay and the need to undertake caring responsibilities in order
Almost two thirds of children living in poverty have at least one working parent we need to look at how make sure that work does indeed guarantee freedom from poverty. Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG)have published a new paper Round the Clock: in work poverty and the hours question. They pose the question “How many hours should parent work (in order not to be poor)? The research is not just about how much you can earn but how you balance working hours with looking after children. The research involves an evidence review on attitudes to parental employment, a poll asking how many hours it was reasonable for parents to work and when those hours should be, taking the polling results to focus groups and also asking more about working hours expectations for lower paid parents and finally taking the results to employers to hear their views. The report also considers the policy implications of the findings.
Choices about how and when to work are made in an economic and social context. Most people think that once you have children you will have to reduce spending in some areas because you have higher costs in others. An EHRC study on working preferences in 2009 found that 57% of high income households had a stay at home parent in contrast to only 25% of those on low incomes. As the recession has progresses average earnings have decreased and so those on low pay to work longer hours to make ends meet.
One and a half to two earner households have a very low risk of poverty, part-time work does not protect couple families or lone parents from poverty.
Children in lone parent families still have a substantial risk of poverty even if their parent works full time. Almost one third of children whose parents are self employed (a growing sector of the workforce) live in poverty
Changes to the benefits and tax system (including universal credit) incentivise those on low incomes to increase working hours while endorsing the traditional breadwinner role for the better off.
Poverty reduction strategies seem to be focused in encouraging all parents to work full time. The planned and recent expansion of childcare provision is increasingly linked to parental employment rather than child development. At the same time governments are also promoting programmes encouraging positive parenting and parents spending “quality time” with children. Running across the debate is an increasing confusion between the constraints that low incomes place on peoples’ parenting choices and actual neglect/harmful activities by parents.
Only 25% of parents were content with the balance between their home and working lives, 77% reported that work cut into the time they had available to helping children with homework, taking them to clubs and putting them to bed.
When asked how they would like to strike a better balance 27% would work less hours, more than a quarter saying they would take a pay cut to do so. 22% would give up work altogether, 22% would like to work from home some of the time and 21% would like flexible hours.
The survey went on to ask what working hours were thought to be reasonable for parents per week. Interestingly there was no clear gender social class or political persuasion link to responses. For many the one full time one part time working parent is now deemed the norm. participants thought it was reasonable for a lone parent to work more hours than “the carer” parent in a two parent household. Respondents also felt it was more reasonable for lone parents to work longer hours and by the time children were 3 very few felt it was reasonable for lone parents not be in work. They did though not expect both parents in a two parent family to be in full time work at this stage.
In focus groups it was clear that most think the balance of work/childcare is deeply personal, it was also felt that debates about working parents don’t focus enough on the needs of the child which it was widely believed should be put back in the picture. Parents frequently asked why parenting was not valued despite its “societal importance and manifold rewards” As UNISON’s charter states “While childcare should enable parents to work its focus must be on what’s best for children and their development”.
Key points from the CPAG report
Affordable quality childcare is essential, this means not just nurseries but also around school hours and summer break for older children.
Children also need relaxed quality time with parents: expanded childcare is not a substitute for this.
Vital role for tax credits in supporting those working less than full time but those in full-time work should have a living wage and not require benefits to live.
Flexible working can be a double edged sword: flexibility can be good but zero hours and short notice demands for extra or just insecure weekly hours difficult when childcare has to be booked and paid for regularly and in advance. It doesn’t mean the same thing for those at the top and bottom of the wage scale. Parents need predictable hours.
Wage progression is an essential part of a poverty reduction strategy so we need more childcare support for those undertaking training.
Working more hours helps people earn more money but cannot forget the importance of decent pay rates
Value of benefits must be restored to pre 2010 levels.
In work poverty is produced by three things: levels of pay, hours worked and level of in work benefits. Need to tackle all three and ensure that parents have the time levels of income to allow them to spend time with their own children.
UNISON’s Childcare Charter is available here
Monday, 12 January 2015
Scottish Government 'must do better' on preventative spending
The Scottish Parliament Finance Committee today
warned that nothing like enough is being done in Scotland on preventative
spending.
It is widely agreed that in key areas of public services the
focus needs to shift from tackling symptoms of disadvantage and inequality to
addressing root causes, with what the Committee described as a “decisive shift
to prevention.”
However, today’s report
from the Committee on the Scottish Government’s Draft Budget 2015-16 makes
clear that “there is little evidence of the essential shift in resources taking
place to support a preventative approach.”
This is damning, but UNISON welcomes the Committee
recognising the reality of the situation.
As the report shows, radical changes in shifting resources
to prevention are hampered by the scale of the financial challenges facing
public services.
We are urging politicians from all parties to act now to put
fairness and tackling inequality at the heart of economic policy and to look at
the vast amount of evidence in favour of this.
Tuesday, 20 May 2014
Making childcare a priority
In today's Scotsman we set out the case for making childcare a priority for Scotland.
Research shows low-cost quality childcare benefits women, children, family budgets, in-work rates and economic growth. It’s one of the few policies that contributes to both growing the economy and redistributing that growth more fairly. It is undeniably a good thing.
Good progress was made in the early years of devolution, but that pace was not maintained. However, childcare is rightly back on the political agenda and we should welcome that. Childcare is too expensive for many families and that is driving a race to the bottom with poor quality provision. It is local authorities who employ the best-qualified and most experienced childcare workers and are best placed to expand their workforce while maintaining a high standard.
Transforming childcare will cost money, we can’t pretend otherwise, and without doing the preparatory work at this stage it is anyone’s guess as to how much. But we do know it will generate more tax by creating jobs and by supporting women to return to work after maternity leave. And we know there will be a return on our investment. We will also make savings if we invest in getting it right in the first place, as opposed to the high costs we currently pay to overcome the effects of poverty and inequality.
Also in today's Scotsman, there is a helpful piece on child protection social work from the ADSW President, Sandy Riddell. He makes the point that social workers seem to be the default group to blame when a child is harmed. He says: "We shouldn’t risk paralysing a profession in order to give the public the comfort of having someone to blame quickly. No social worker killed any of these children and if we didn’t have good committed social workers, how many more children would be at risk of harm?"
Research shows low-cost quality childcare benefits women, children, family budgets, in-work rates and economic growth. It’s one of the few policies that contributes to both growing the economy and redistributing that growth more fairly. It is undeniably a good thing.
Good progress was made in the early years of devolution, but that pace was not maintained. However, childcare is rightly back on the political agenda and we should welcome that. Childcare is too expensive for many families and that is driving a race to the bottom with poor quality provision. It is local authorities who employ the best-qualified and most experienced childcare workers and are best placed to expand their workforce while maintaining a high standard.
Transforming childcare will cost money, we can’t pretend otherwise, and without doing the preparatory work at this stage it is anyone’s guess as to how much. But we do know it will generate more tax by creating jobs and by supporting women to return to work after maternity leave. And we know there will be a return on our investment. We will also make savings if we invest in getting it right in the first place, as opposed to the high costs we currently pay to overcome the effects of poverty and inequality.
Also in today's Scotsman, there is a helpful piece on child protection social work from the ADSW President, Sandy Riddell. He makes the point that social workers seem to be the default group to blame when a child is harmed. He says: "We shouldn’t risk paralysing a profession in order to give the public the comfort of having someone to blame quickly. No social worker killed any of these children and if we didn’t have good committed social workers, how many more children would be at risk of harm?"
Tuesday, 1 April 2014
Childcare: Time to Deliver
Another report on childcare shows that the high costs and complexities of the current system need to be tackled urgently if we are to give our children the best start in life. The Family and Childcare Trust 2014 Scottish Childcare report found that less than a quarter of local authorities in Scotland have enough childcare for working parents (the equivalent figure for England is 54%). Costs for that care continue to rise: 4.8% last year. The cost for part-time care for two children is now 22% higher than the average mortgage bill. Charges vary considerably across Scotland: in some areas the difference is as much as £3000.
The Family and Childcare Trust highlight how complex the delivery and funding of childcare is for parents and for providers. There are direct funding streams for what is officially early years education: your free hours for three and four year-olds, the childcare elements of Working Tax Credit, voucher based schemes through employers and then various small schemes through Job Centre Plus or other funding streams through anti-poverty initiatives which fund nurseries and crèches and breakfast clubs for example. Local authorities also provided free or subsidised accommodation to social enterprises offering childcare and while not officially childcare there are a range of sports and social clubs in schools which are in effect after school care.
The shortage of spaces for children is pushing up costs. Costs that mean many women just can’t afford to keep or find jobs: and yes it is still women who largely look after children both paid and unpaid. Getting childcare right offers a real opportunity to reduce gender inequality by reducing the financial penalties for motherhood. Ensuring that childcare workers are properly paid and have a career path will also reduce the gender pay gap.
Local authorities are best placed to address the challenges of childcare. Delivery by local authorities will help simplify and reduce the artificial barriers round the many agencies and complex funding streams currently in place. The artificial eradication/childcare split needs to go. Local authority provision is also the most cost effective route as currently nursery provision in the public sector is 11% cheaper than the private and not-for-profit sectors despite the higher wages and more qualified workforce. They need the funding to expand to meet the needs of the communities they serve.
The debate needs to move on from “hours” to organising the delivery of a proper service to support the development of our children and ensure that work pays for all those involved.
Tuesday, 4 March 2014
Childcare Costs Higher Than Mortgages
Lots to read on supporting Scotland’s children this week: A new reporting highlighting the costs of childcare and then two reports focusing on education early years and inequality from The Scotland Institute and the Jimmy Reid Foundation.
For many childcare charges mean that in the short term there is very little financial advantage to working. Twenty-five hours in a nursery now costs on average £102.04 a week in Scotland and an after school club £49.54. For an increasing number of families childcare costs now outstrip their mortgage payments. The high cost of childcare is therefore acting against both UK and Scottish government programmes to tackle poverty and inequality and support mothers into work.
We agree with the institute when it states that local authorities should become the providers of childcare. What this cannot become though is just starting formal school earlier. Early year’s education is very different from formal schooling and must remain so. We need to develop the best early years provision suited to the needs of our children not force them into a school system that doesn’t meet their needs just because buildings have space. Local authorities will be the most cost effective method of provision. They already employ the best qualified and most experienced childcare workers and are therefore best placed to expand their workforce while maintaining a high standard. We need to introduce a requirement that, at a minimum, local authorities are responsible for identifying the demand for childcare in their authorities as soon as possible. It will be very difficult to improve and expand childcare without out knowing what demand is for the service. This duty exists already the case in the rest of the UK.
The new Common Weal education report rightly highlights the transformation that has taken place in Finland where they top the international rankings regularly for excellence and equity. The Finnish system doesn’t start formal learning until 7, before that children learn through play. Excellent parental leave also gives babies much more time with their parents before entering into childcare.
A publicly funded and delivered early years service via by local authorities offers the best way forward. Transforming childcare will cost money, we can’t pretend otherwise but it will both generate more tax by directly creating jobs and by supporting women to return to work after maternity leave. There will be a short term return on that investment. We will also make savings if we invest in getting it right in the first place rather than the high costs we currently pay to overcome the effects of poverty and inequality. These reports show why we need to get on with investing in childcare and the benefits we will gain from that investment.
Wednesday, 5 February 2014
Transforming Scotland Through Free Childcare
Last September we blogged on two reports from Save the Children and IPPR on how what parents need and want from childcare. UNISON is a long term supporter of free publically delivered childcare as a route to transform Scotland.We are therefore delighted that the debate in Scotland has now moved on to “when” rather than “if” for free childcare.
UNISON represents workers who need childcare and workers who deliver the childcare. This largely female workforce faces all the same challenges as other working women in balancing their own caring responsibilities with work and the high costs of childcare. That is why UNISON believes that the promised expansion of childcare has to be publically funded and delivered. Free childcare cannot free some women through supporting them to work and develop their careers while condemning other to long hours on low pay working in childcare.
Delivery will require substantial funding. We know this will pay for itself through increased tax revenues and cuts in benefits spending. Childcare workers need flexible part-time working. Many choose this work because it fits in with their own caring responsibilities. There needs to be a substantial increase in staff numbers to cope with both the extra hours the current children will now attend for but also the extra children who take up the service. As many will want to work part-time the number of actual people will be higher than the FTE figure. We are therefore not convinced that the number of staff required to deliver expanded childcare is being properly calculated and costed.
Quality of childcare depends on the skills of those who work there. This will require training and ongoing professional development. Pay must reflect the skills and experience required to do the job. Cuts and centralisation in FE will impact on colleges’ ability to delivery this training. Meeting even the longer term aspirations requires investment and planning now.
The childcare workforce, particularly in the private sector, is not well paid. The skills required to deliver high quality childcare, as with much work traditionally done by women, are not widely recognised or rewarded in the market. There has been progress in the public sector and one of the key reasons for our support for ensuring that the public sector delivers childcare is to ensure that this is not pulled back by expanding the low paid private sector.
Gender segregation in the workforce and its impact on the gender pay gap is a key issue in Scotland and just as there needs to be support for girls in schools to consider a wider set of job options, boys should also be encouraged to consider childcare as a career.
Free publically delivered childcare can transform Scotland. With proper investment it offers the opportunity to take pressure off families by enabling more women to take up paid work and ensuring they have more of their pay to spend or save. This will also ensure that working mothers can continue to pay into pensions, preventing poverty in old age. More than that through creating high quality care and education and seamless transitions through to school it will give children the best possible start in life. This will bring savings to a range of public services in both the short and long term. There is a lot more to be won than cutting the benefits bill and increased income through taxation.
UNISON represents workers who need childcare and workers who deliver the childcare. This largely female workforce faces all the same challenges as other working women in balancing their own caring responsibilities with work and the high costs of childcare. That is why UNISON believes that the promised expansion of childcare has to be publically funded and delivered. Free childcare cannot free some women through supporting them to work and develop their careers while condemning other to long hours on low pay working in childcare.
Delivery will require substantial funding. We know this will pay for itself through increased tax revenues and cuts in benefits spending. Childcare workers need flexible part-time working. Many choose this work because it fits in with their own caring responsibilities. There needs to be a substantial increase in staff numbers to cope with both the extra hours the current children will now attend for but also the extra children who take up the service. As many will want to work part-time the number of actual people will be higher than the FTE figure. We are therefore not convinced that the number of staff required to deliver expanded childcare is being properly calculated and costed.
Quality of childcare depends on the skills of those who work there. This will require training and ongoing professional development. Pay must reflect the skills and experience required to do the job. Cuts and centralisation in FE will impact on colleges’ ability to delivery this training. Meeting even the longer term aspirations requires investment and planning now.
The childcare workforce, particularly in the private sector, is not well paid. The skills required to deliver high quality childcare, as with much work traditionally done by women, are not widely recognised or rewarded in the market. There has been progress in the public sector and one of the key reasons for our support for ensuring that the public sector delivers childcare is to ensure that this is not pulled back by expanding the low paid private sector.
Gender segregation in the workforce and its impact on the gender pay gap is a key issue in Scotland and just as there needs to be support for girls in schools to consider a wider set of job options, boys should also be encouraged to consider childcare as a career.
Free publically delivered childcare can transform Scotland. With proper investment it offers the opportunity to take pressure off families by enabling more women to take up paid work and ensuring they have more of their pay to spend or save. This will also ensure that working mothers can continue to pay into pensions, preventing poverty in old age. More than that through creating high quality care and education and seamless transitions through to school it will give children the best possible start in life. This will bring savings to a range of public services in both the short and long term. There is a lot more to be won than cutting the benefits bill and increased income through taxation.
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
Listen to Parents
Save the Children have collated the views of parents into a great report on childcare in Scotland. There is a remarkable consensus amongst parents about what the problems are and what they need. The high cost of childcare causes real problems for families across Scotland.
Parents in work either struggle to make ends meet because of the cost of childcare or use a complex mix of support from friends and family and childcare to keep costs down. Others give up work or don’t take up opportunities to work because the cost of care makes it unworkable. Even finding out what’s available for what age group is complex and time consuming. There is a catch 22 where you can’t confirm childcare arrangements until you know when you will be working or studying nor can you confirm when you could work or study until you have childcare sorted.
What we need is to look at the system as a whole. There is still a split between childcare and early years education with one paid for directly by parents and the other via taxation. Childminders and private nurseries while regulated by local authorities are not under their control. There is no strategic planning about how many are needed in each area, in fact no one knows:
• the level of demand/need for childcare in Scotland.
• how many more parents would be working if childcare was available/affordable
• how many hours of childcare parents want/need to balance the needs of their child and the need to earn money
• what mix parents would really like between childminder/nursery provision and providing that care themselves.
UNISON is a long-term supporter of publically delivered service free at the point of use. Delivering childcare in the sameway as post five-education will make the system, simpler, cheaper for families and of a higher and more consistent standard. As an IPPR report shows that the provision of childcare free at the point of use pays for itself in increased tax income from extra hours worked by women entering the workforce. The extra hours promised in the Children’s Bill are welcome but the whole system needs to change if we are to really move forward. The findings of this report suggest that parents would welcome this change.
Parents in work either struggle to make ends meet because of the cost of childcare or use a complex mix of support from friends and family and childcare to keep costs down. Others give up work or don’t take up opportunities to work because the cost of care makes it unworkable. Even finding out what’s available for what age group is complex and time consuming. There is a catch 22 where you can’t confirm childcare arrangements until you know when you will be working or studying nor can you confirm when you could work or study until you have childcare sorted.
What we need is to look at the system as a whole. There is still a split between childcare and early years education with one paid for directly by parents and the other via taxation. Childminders and private nurseries while regulated by local authorities are not under their control. There is no strategic planning about how many are needed in each area, in fact no one knows:
• the level of demand/need for childcare in Scotland.
• how many more parents would be working if childcare was available/affordable
• how many hours of childcare parents want/need to balance the needs of their child and the need to earn money
• what mix parents would really like between childminder/nursery provision and providing that care themselves.
UNISON is a long-term supporter of publically delivered service free at the point of use. Delivering childcare in the sameway as post five-education will make the system, simpler, cheaper for families and of a higher and more consistent standard. As an IPPR report shows that the provision of childcare free at the point of use pays for itself in increased tax income from extra hours worked by women entering the workforce. The extra hours promised in the Children’s Bill are welcome but the whole system needs to change if we are to really move forward. The findings of this report suggest that parents would welcome this change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)