I heard two moms talking at a cafe. They were both talking about their kids entering school nursery and how nice it was to get 2.5 hours a day to themselves now. Their kids must have just turned three, and newly qualified for 2.5 hours of free school a day. The one mom asked the other if she was thinking of going back to work
"Not really" said the mom "because I would still have to pay for wraparound, and it would be like £300 a week in childcare, so it doesn't really make sense".
I've thought about this a lot recently. I live in a place where lots of moms don't work or work very part time. Not in the LA "yummy mummy" way, but in the "it just makes sense for me to watch kids" way.
It's interesting to me that the decision to leave the job market seems often be a financial one. However the decision to leave the job market when kids are young eventually keeps one out of the job market specifically because of the decision to leave. Childcare costs make this decision more and more difficult - the most expensive childcare is for the youngest children.
Childcare gets cheaper as they enter school, but if one has been out of the job market for 5 years then even cheaper childcare now can't keep up with the salary loss of a career gap and re-entering the market.
I am so glad I have stayed in work (which I obviously wanted to do as well, but I feel there is a lot of pressure against that decision here) because I can afford childcare. I can afford childcare because I stayed in work. When all my kids are in school I will be able to afford... other things.
My husband and I make roughly the same salary now. I have never heard him or his friends lament how so much of their salaries go to cover childcare. I have never seen them calculate their take home after childcare.
I guess it's odd to me that there is financial pressure to leave the workforce when kids are small, because childcare is so expensive.
Then there is financial pressure to stay out of the job market when kids are a little bigger, because only lower salary jobs are available to returners.
Then there is financial pressure to get a job when... kids enter secondary school? By the time getting a job makes sense, the monetary value of the kind of employment available is so low that it seems one may as well not work at all.
I wish I could more often express the sentiment that I am not *loving* the experience of childcare now, but I am *loving* continuing to develop professionally, not stagnativing my career, and making enough money to employ someone else. I love feeling like I am financially contributing to my family, and knowing that every pound we pay in childcare now will be a pound we can put into something else later.
If I wasn't working, every pound I saved by not working would decrease in value over time - lack of earnings does not benefit from compound interest.
There is no inflationary bonus on housework... there is just more housework.
[Obviously if you love staying at home with kids then great! Do that! But when people say "are you thinking about getting a job" I feel those people should answer "no, I love staying at home with kids and doing pick up and that's what I want to do" rather than "no it's not worth it financially".]
I'm kind of cheating with my answer since I went the stepmom route and never had to choose between childcare/staying home with the kids.
ReplyDeleteI know that childcare is expensive, but I really doubt that it wipes away 100% of a salary. When both parents work there is more flexibility and more of a safety net. You have two sets of PTO days and (speaking from the US here) access to two sets of benefits/healthcare. Neither parent has to put their career on hold.
Absolutely the other POV is valid - if the family is better off with one parent out of the workforce, or if a parent wants to take a break from their career then that's the right choice for them. It might be harder but it's not impossible to get back in.
Oh snap "lack of earnings does not benefit from compound interest". Mic drop.
Thanks! Yeah I am so happy for people to embrace the decision to stay at home as what's best for their family or for themselves, but the financial argument always feels a bit weird to me. Also, there is no PTO for a stay at home parent, which seems unfair as well. And of course benefits/healthcare is a biggie too.
DeleteI also think even if childcare does take 100% of a salary (which it basically does for us at the moment) it doesn't take away my annual leave, or my bonus, or my time freedom to book a midweek optometrist appointment. None of that is factored into the "after childcare I'm only taking home £100 a month argument"
Also... and this is clearly my bugbear, why is childcare a single cost? Why not mortgage? I've never heard anyone say "It's not worth us living in a bigger house or in a nicer area because then my salary just goes to the mortgage"
Thanks for the support Birchie!
Love this reframe. "If I wasn't working, every pound I saved by not working would decrease in value over time - lack of earnings does not benefit from compound interest.
ReplyDeleteThere is no inflationary bonus on housework... there is just more housework."
So smart. Thank you for helping me think of it this way. -rachel
Aww thanks Rachel! <3
DeleteGreat post. I've taken a bit of a middle road so I never know exactly where I land in these discussions. My husband and I came out of grad school, immediately had a kid (like 2 months after my thesis defence), and had basically zero money. We skipped traditional career trajectories and bootstrapped in a crazy number of ways to start a small business. In addition to multiple part-time positions, we were also full-time stay-at-home-parents and working to to get (eventually two!) businesses off the ground.
ReplyDeleteBut I always felt like it was such a weird middle ground because I didn't have a traditional career and I was home, but not really a "true" SAHM. I didn't fit into either category neatly.
Now I work part-time from home, but am also frequently solo parenting. I often feel - what's the word? it's not ashamed, but it's something akin to that maybe? - that I don't have a "big" career and that perhaps I'm not using my education to its full extent possible...but I also feel like having a part-time job and running a household are literally a full-time job and I have ZERO idea how full-time working mothers can juggle everything they do. Deep down, I know having me home is the best thing for the function of our family and my mental health but I can feel less-than for struggling to make everything fit into my life even though I have a tremendously flexible position and my kids now require a lot less hands-on help from me.
Excellent post, lots of food for thought.
Thanks Elisabeth! I don't think you have to "land" anywhere really - you made some super interesting decisions that were right for you and your family at the time, and that's awesome! I can tell you and your partner put so much into your careers with so little support, it's amazing.
DeleteI bet it did feel a bit awkward to not be a SAHM and also not be a "fulltime working mom" so I bet your perspective is extra interesting here. I always found it awkward when I used to work 4 days week and had Tuesdays off. at playgroups others would chat with me about different playgroups and I always had to say "oh I can't do that, I work the rest of the days" and the conversation just... went nowhere.
Also, solo parenting is a DEAL. I'm amazed.
Also also, one of my good friends here is a SAHM with teenage kids and she feels so judged by the other parents at the school for not being in work. I feel judged for almost never doing pick up or drop off. I feel like maybe there is no escape from feeling judged (which may be in our heads anyways!)
Thanks again for the thoughts! Also, as my answer to how full-time working mothers juggle everything... I don't. My husband does a lot of it. Probably more than me. And we drop a lot of balls. And we don't do stuff other parents and families do. And it works for us for now.
Uffff, I have some thoughts...
ReplyDeleteI never, ever could risk my own financial wellbeing by giving up my career. You simply never know. I don't think T will ever, EVER screw me over, even if we were to separate/divorce (highly unlikely). Call me a pessimist, but you simply never know. Spouses who are breadwinners can pass, can get very sick, or in a case of divorce, you are on your own. Women have the most education, the most professional development hours, but, in spite of all of that, when we come back to the workforce, we are treated as less than. Example: in teaching, when one takes years off, your pension is smaller, your salary step is not as high when you stay in the workforce. Your years of service when you leave and come back, are reduced and that equals reduced pretty much everything. Say I am on step 10 salary guide (that's what public schools use in the US) and I take three years off, then come back - I am on step 11 while my colleague who only took off 6 months maternity is on step 14 because there wasn't a "break" in employment. I personally did not want to be set back like that, kids or no kids, so I went back pretty early- at 6 months for L. With R I lucked out and the pandemic allowed me to "teach" from home so I went back he was almost a year old.
you know I hear you Daria! Its so interesting how different jobs work, and especially that in teaching there is still the career hit. I always think teaching seems like a really hard job for a parent since, even thiough it's considered a good job for working parents. You can't just take days off, and then your days "off" always have your own kids around. Plus your hours are the exact same as your kids school hours, so you don't even get the "benefits" of only working "school hours"
DeleteI also think everything you said about partnerships is true, you're not a pessimist. Thing happen and it's a little more stability to know that you have the ability to support your family if the worst happens.
Yes, it's really interesting when Mums (it's almost always Mums) say this about finances and going back to work. They are, presumably, in a two parent household but somehow the other salary is not considered possible to contribute to childcare?! I have variously worked part time and been a SAHM, it was the right decision for me and my family for many reasons, and I am absolutely now earning less than if I'd stayed in my previous career more fully. All of which is to say, thanks for posting this and pointing out the discrepancies in the reasoning. There are many reasons to work and the cost of childcare in the present is not usually the full story.
ReplyDeleteThank you Nina! You said it better than me:
Delete"There are many reasons to work and the cost of childcare in the present is not usually the full story."
I guess that this decision, like all decisions, is a matter of priority. It's just so odd to me that mums can have an entire language around it that doesn't resonate at all with their male counterparts!
This is an interesting discussion. I’m currently job searching after my youngest entered kindergarten last fall. I’ve had part time work and volunteer positions related to my career field on and off since my first was born in 2016. I wasn’t in a rush to get a job last August because I wanted to enjoy some of the PTO I missed out on for 8 years when my kids were little.
ReplyDeleteThe cost of childcare was never why I stopped working. I have just liked the flexibility and my husbands career has very little flexibility. Now I want to work again to preserve my earning potential and contribute to the family finances.