Hi
@Amy Dawson,
I read the article with a pit in my stomach for very different reasons than you.
I think your take on the situation is from your experience as a teacher who is not earning a worthy wage. You are rightfully frustrated, But you've made some wholesale assumptions about the entire child care industry that are not fair or accurate. And, in fact, Universal Pre-K may actually do more harm than good for the vast majority of families and child care professionals, depending on the fine print in whatever bill ever gets passed (if anything.)
First of all, the child care industry is dominated by non-profit organizations and in-home child care providers in sheer numbers of child care slots. The large chains represent a LOT of seats, but the backbone is really smaller programs. Because you have held teaching positions, you may not be familiar with the economics of operating child care programs.
No one involved in child care is getting rich off the backs of staff members or parents. I am not defending one type of child care organization or another, but I can assure you that the company for which you work is not doing market surveys to pay you the very least they can. They actually want to retain staff. I agree the pay is absolutely miserable, but there are many, many programs that work hard to allocate every penny they can to pay the absolute most they can because they care about quality.
Equitable pay is a problem because the cost to deliver high-quality (or any quality) care does not balance with the amount that can be charged to parents. Even in the most affluent areas where tuition is extremely expensive, the labor costs (due primarily to the need for low child to teacher ratios), the costs for insurance, materials, rent, and benefits like leave and if possible, other benefits, workers compensation, and other operating costs eclipse the tuition by far.
Universal Pre-K only serves children 4 and older. Under Biden's plan, it might (I am not sure) may extend to some 3 year old children. Typically, state-funded Pre-K has only been for children 4 year old children who are economically disadvantaged, not every child. The term "Universal" may or may not mean every child at every socio-economic level, and trust me, middle class families cannot afford the cost of child care of any quality.
The economics of child care mean that families with infants and toddlers pay higher prices than those with children who are 3 or 4 because the child to teacher ratios go up for older children. This means labor costs go down, so rates are lower.
So if a true Universal Pre-K system was adopted without funding for child care for infants, toddlers and 3s, family child care and child care programs would go out of business. Then families would have no child care for younger children at all. That means families cannot work. That means some children who are at risk for abuse, neglect, food insecurities, and lack of developmental stimulation will be left high and dry.Finally, one more thing: What do you mean by "childcare centers and daycares?" Are those two things? This is just my opinion, but our profession would benefit from calling child care programs "child care programs," and the hard working teachers and staff members "child care professionals" or "early childhood educators." The article used a lot of terms I wish we could banish: "Child care workers", "daycares" (is that even proper grammar?). Childcare is not even a word. It; is two words. Sheesh! It's the Washington Post. You'd think they could do better, you know?
Just my $0.02 at 1:30 am when I can't sleep because the world is topsy-turvy.
Fran
------------------------------
Fran Simon, M.Ed.
Engagement Strategies, LLC
Early Childhood Investigations Webinars
Early Childhood Investigations Consultants Directory
Washington, DC Metro
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-12-2021 07:06 PM
From: Amy Dawson
Subject: Article: Child-care workers are quitting rapidly, a red flag for the economy
I found the article very interesting, particularly the phrasing of one of the sentences describing Public schools as "poaching" childcare workers. As if! Many qualified childcare workers have long been wanting to work for public schools and receive adequate compensation and recognition as an educator instead of being seen as a babysitter. They've been waiting for this opportunity for years, yet the article makes it sound as if Public Schools have invaded Child Care centers and are dragging their workers out with a cord around their ankles. The childcare industry treats their workers dismally. My biggest concern with public funding is that childcare centers and daycares will not allocate it appropriately unless forced. My company in particular conducts regular"Market analysis" to make sure their pay rates for teachers are at the absolute lowest they can be while still retaining staffing (despite this, they are failing.) If given a large sum of money by the government, they would get to work immediately like busy bees finding any loopholes and trying to designate the least amount of that money possible towards teachers while finding out how to put the most amount in their own pockets. Designating public funds to for-profit daycares and childcare companies is an exercise in futility, and a disservice to teachers and parents. We'd do better to end the childcare industry altogether and institute Universal Pre-K.
Amy Dawson
Early Childhood Educator
Original Message:
Sent: 09-22-2021 11:26 PM
From: Jorge Saenz De Viteri
Subject: Article: Child-care workers are quitting rapidly, a red flag for the economy
"Child care employment is still down more than 126,000 positions as workers leave for higher-paying positions as bank tellers, administrative assistants and retail clerks. Parents are struggling to return to work as daycare and after-school programs dwindle."
------------------------------
Jorge Saenz De Viteri
http://jorgesaenzdeviteri.com
Pomona NY
------------------------------