National Child Care Workers Strike

Hi all,

Today many child care centres around the country have closed because of a 'day of action' by their employees over 'low pay'.

https://thewest.com.au/news/wa/wa-childcare-walkers-to-walk-...

According to the article the average pay for these workers are around $21 - $23 / hour and they have demanded a 35% increase.

I think this is pure lunacy, 35% increase when Child Care is becoming more and more unaffordable to the average family. It is becoming less viable for the second bread winner to work as child care fees are around $120 - $150 / day, many workers have to make at least $200 - $250 pre-tax just to break even with these fees, so many simply stay home.

Now they want a 35% increase, and at $21 - $23 / hour x 8 hours we are looking at an increase of $64 / day (no Child care centre will absorb those costs increases).

$22 / hour is an accurate reflection for the low skill requirements of this profession. The requirements to enter this profession are LOW, a Cert III which is about $1k with concessions. This is not a knock or an attack of the profession but I don’t think the proposed awards for Child Care workers is reflective of the skillsets required to do that work.

Also doing a strike impacting so many families is not going to endear people to their plight.

I sincerely hope all calls for an increase are thrown out.

Related Stores

fairwork.gov.au
fairwork.gov.au

Comments

  • +18 votes

    Agreed.

    •  

      I second that.

      Make no mistake most parents would be worse off post 2 July 2018 (even my Childcare centre manager said so) for the following reason:
      1. If your centre opens more than 10 hours per day, you don't get subsidized for the hours after that since max hours subsidized would be 100 hours per 10 days (fortnight). So you pay out of pocket for the extra hours IN FULL.
      2. If your child is moving over to school next year, you WILL be worse off as you won't be utilizing the full $10,000 subsidy (as I suspect most people would be on). What used to be straight 50% off now maxed at $380 so cash flow wise you will be worse off at least in the first 6 mths or so; AND
      3. The rates are capped at $11.55 or $10.10 for OHSC meaning anything over will be paid out of pocket.

      Not to mention the means testing. I don't agree discriminating against income as the people on that higher income paid far more dollar tax.

      This will push people to stay at home in my opinion.

      • +1 vote

        Make no mistake most parents would be worse off post 2 July 2018 (even my Childcare centre manager said so) for the following reason:

        According to the calculator that is posted everywhere, I will be $150 a fortnight worse off. I have no idea how the government can continue to spruik me paying less despite the fact that my situation fits all their criteria to do so

      •  

        You'll also be worse off even if your kids aren't moving next year if you're a low user of childcare - the effective daily rebate is dropping, because instead of paying 50% of what it costs they're paying a percentage (generally 50%) of an imaginary cost which is far below what actual fees are. The only way you come out ahead is if you were significantly over the previous cap.

        • +2 votes

          That said, I think that they should be paid more and that fees should be less. The government should be running childcare directly instead of lining the pockets of private companies through subsidies (which generally just push the price and profits up, rather than making them more affordable).

    • +11 votes

      Cheating bastards, sack the whole team.

    •  

      100% agree.

      • +2 votes

        Whether it becomes unaffordable is not relevant. The only question is whether it is a reasonable amount to pay or not. Child care workers don't owe you anything, it is up to you to pay what it costs. I'm not overly keen on having my kids look after by the lowest wage earners.

  • +130 votes

    Not sure what type of involvement you’ve had with child care centres but from the work I’ve seen the staff put in to watching mine and other children is not reflective of $22 an hour. They work tirelessly and in my opinion they deserve a raise, not sure about 35% but certainly $22 an hour is not an accurate indicator of the work they put in. Also, every room requires at least one staff to be diploma educated and depending on how you obtain this qualification, it can cost upward of 10k. Remember it’s not the workers faults that the cost is so high, they don’t set the fees - maybe your frustration should be aimed at the owners and directors of these centres.

    • +49 votes

      I am not trying to knock your point but I think it’s very easy to just say they deserve more because they are doing an important role and with my children, it’s a very emotive subject. If we are aspiring to pay people in accordance to how important they (and their roles) are to society we’d be paying teachers and nurses six figure sums above lawyers, real estate agents and IT consultants.

      Fortunately their worth is tied more to how easily it is to find someone with those low level skillsets should one wish to leave, there is always someone else willing to step in, so the wage is as far as I am concerned at equilibrium.

      Again when I say low skill, it is not to demean their worth, but simply to highlight how easy it is for someone to acquire their skillset and step in, as opposed to lawyer and doctors.

      My children have and are getting good care from dedicated staff who pride themselves on caring for my and other children, for that it is always hard to say they don’t deserve more. But when one takes a step back and see the economic side of it, $21/hour is right.

      • +12 votes

        I didn’t say anything about the importance of roles, your point is commonsense that goes with out saying. I’m talking specifically about the effort, dedication and commitment to their jobs. How much training does a mining operator or a TA to a builder/electrician have to do? Next to nothing other than employer directed job specific training and some of these industry workers are on huge salaries. My point is simple, these staff work very hard and that hourly rate is not representative of their effort and contribution.

        • +30 votes

          It's a matter of supply and demand. If $22/h wasn't worth the duties of the role, workers would quit and get a different job. There would then be a shortage of workers and employers would need to offer more to attract people to the role.

          This hasn't happened so $22/h must be a fair level of remuneration1. What isn't fair is an industry wide cartel holding employers to ransom.


          1. This assumes the efficient markets hypothesis which may not hold due to government regulations, poor information, irrational workers, frictions, etc. 

        • -2 votes

          I don't think you'll find a TA on a huge salary.

        • +4 votes

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          A simple theory that so many seem not to be able to understand.

        • +3 votes

          @brad1601:

          Most people make decisions and form opinions based on emotions. These evolutionary shortcuts may have served us well to make snap judgements in simpler times, but in our complicated society they do not.

        • +5 votes

          Just because someone works hard and puts in a lot of effort does not mean they deserve to be paid more, sorry.

        •  

          Working very hard is not the sole determinant of the level of remuneration.

          I am sure there are many burger flippers and toilet cleaners that work very heard yet their hourly rate is at the minimum.

          Why do you think that is?

        •  

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          As a follow on comment, how do you explain fields like medicine where there is a high amount of well educated potential medical students that are knocked back in order to keep supply low and thus prices high?

        • +1 vote

          @darkzen15:

          Is that a leading question or are you asking me to scrutinise your hypothesis?

          I would imagine that the entry requirements are high due to a shortage of teaching resources.

        •  

          @Scrooge McDuck:
          I don't plan to have kids for a few more years, so I'm really not knowledgeable in this field at all, but I'm just wondering if there's anything stopping the workers from getting together and opening a new centre on their own, where they could receive a higher share of the profits while keeping the costs reasonable for the families?
          basically would it be possible to run a centre as a co-operative and get rid of managers or other "useful" roles that are simply a waste of money?

        •  

          @RiseAndRuin:

          Every business needs management. Just because you don't see what they do doesn't mean they do nothing.

        • +2 votes

          @darkzen15: You did answer your question but you only looked at one side of the equation (demand).

          By restricting supply you can increase the prices as the demand is inelastic (i.e. You can't determine when you get sick and most people can't afford to put it off.)

          If you can increase the supply (which the govt wants to do) then there will be a decrease in price.

          Just because the demand is there doesn't mean the supply responds (both are influenced in different ways)

          For this example if childcare workers increases their wages by 35%, there will be more workers wanting to work but the resulting increase in childcare prices will result in less demand (hence fewer employees will benefit while a large number could be potentially out of work or not able to find work).

          Real examples of this
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Australian_waterfront_dis...

        • -3 votes

          @Scrooge McDuck: the amount clearly is not sufficient as they are striking, right?

          I mean you don't see public servants going on strike.

          Also, sucked in to everyone stupid enough to have children.

          Buying condoms are the ultimate ozbargain deal. (profanity) we should convert the ozbargain logo into a condom.

        • +1 vote

          @x853:

          the amount clearly is not sufficient as they are striking, right?

          Wrong. A group acting together as a cartel is different to individuals acting competitively.

          I mean you don't see public servants going on strike.

          Teachers, nurses, ambulance officers, bus drivers, train drivers…

          Have you ever read the news?

        •  

          @Scrooge McDuck: there is nothing wrong with people banding together to fight for the interest of their memberss.

          Sure bet you enjoy having paid public holidays? OH&S and all the other works right we enjoy today as a result of 'cartels' banding together.

          If it wasn't for the fragility of man to resist corruption - I would be a continued supporter of unions.

          If you want to pay market rate for a service then the labour has a right to have a day at the price they are willing to take.

        • -1 vote

          @Scrooge McDuck: it equally doesn't mean they do anything

        • -6 votes

          @x853:

          there is nothing wrong with people banding together to fight for the interest of their memberss.

          Strikes, price manipulation, businesses failing, unemployment…

          They're exploiting the fact that it's impractical for employers to sack all strikers and employ a new workforce. A monopoly on the supply of labour is bad just as one on a product or service is.

          Sure bet you enjoy having paid public holidays? OH&S and all the other works right we enjoy today as a result of 'cartels' banding together.

          Absolutely not! Public holidays are a pain in the arse when you want to do business. Responsible adults save adequately so they don't need to be paid when they aren't working.

          OH&S has overreached to the point where everyone is mollycoddled just to protect a few from their own stupidity. I shouldn't need to fill out an incident report, go to the sickbay and be empowered to sue just because I stubbed my toe; that's on me for being clumsy. It also increases costs and unemployment. I prefer individual responsibility.

        • +7 votes

          @Scrooge McDuck: Fully disagree with everything you said

          Workers have the rights to advocate for their benefits - if you want to use their services then pay them adequately.

          If they are unsatisfied with their compensation, it is wholly justifiable for them to refuse to work.

          Moronic ideology is how the US has become such a cesspool of eroded workers rights, where there are perverse incentives in play, such as coming into work with a contagious illness (only to spread the illness) for fear of losing your job.

          I like most rational people here don't want to live in the horrors of the American system.

          OH&S - yeah sure don't wear a harness on your roof and fall off to break your neck - that's on you. Management has absolutely no responsibility there…..

          Hey fu ck it - why even have childcare? Just send them to the mines. Let them earn their bread.

          Anyone old enough to play on an ipad, old enough to make an ipad - amirite?

        • -7 votes

          @x853:

          Moronic ideology is how the US has become such a cesspool of eroded workers rights,

          You mean the world's largest economy and last superpower?

          OH&S - yeah sure don't wear a harness on your roof and fall off to break your neck - that's on you. Management has absolutely no responsibility there…..

          Sensible people would wear a harness because their safety is in their own interest, not because it's mandated by OH&S. That's individual responsibility.

          I'm going to stop replying to you because you're making assertions using emotive language without providing any reasoning.

        • +9 votes

          @Scrooge McDuck:

          What does America's relative power have anything to do with the rights of individuals? Pure economic measures do not equate to what is best for society.
          Otherwise, why not get kids into factories? We are losing a lot of productive work hours by having them sitting idle.

          Does being the largest economy equate to having the best system? And then what other metrics do you use to as the measure?

          Countries with more pro-social approaches to governance inevitably have a higher happiness index. Australia is ranked #9, whilst "the largest superpower is ranked #14.

          "I'm going to stop replying to you because you're making assertions using emotive language without providing any reasoning."

          "I shouldn't need to fill out an incident report, go to the sickbay and be empowered to sue just because I stubbed my toe;"

          Seem to talk the talk, but you cant pogo stick the pogo stick, ey?

        • +1 vote

          @Scrooge McDuck:
          that was not the point, my question was if it would be legally possible to run a centre as a co-operative. if you're not familiar with the concept of co-operative:

          "Co-operatives apply the concepts of sharing, democracy and delegation in order to benefit all members. Generally, all members are expected to participate and share the responsibility of running the organisation."

          http://www.business.vic.gov.au/setting-up-a-business/busines...

        •  

          @RiseAndRuin:

          my question was if it would be legally possible to run a centre as a co-operative.

          I don't know, I'm not a suppository of all wisdom.

        •  

          @darkzen15:

          You're mis-understanding why we knock back new medical schools and thus medical students. It's because we don't want an oversupply of junior doctors and no work for them. We already struggle to place all our Australian graduates. We don't guarantee placement for full fee paying foreigners coming to our universities who want to work here (because with current funding, there aren't enough jobs to employ them all), so why would we want to open up even more new graduates if you aren't going to supply the jobs for them?

          Or are you more specifically referring to why we knock back plenty of intelligent people from getting into med school as being our control on the supply? If there is a limited number of jobs available, and there is limited funding for training for jobs, and that training is an extremely high barrier for entry, and of great cost to the tax payer, why wouldn't you want us to pick the best candidates for it?

          It's not a conspiracy to make you wait 6 months to see a consultant.

        •  

          @polk:

          Why do you think there is no need of more doctors at least in bulk billing clinics and public hospitals? Why should patients be overpaying or waiting in queue for months to see a good doctor?

        •  

          @x853:

          Also, sucked in to everyone stupid enough to have children.

          Buying condoms are the ultimate ozbargain deal. (profanity) we should convert the ozbargain logo into a condom.

          If someone had a time machine, maybe we could go back and give some to your parents?

        •  

          @virhlpool:

          There is a need for more doctors I never said there isn't. Wait lists can be horrendously long and regional centres miss out on some services entirely.

          The issue is how would you like to pay these doctors and pay for their training? Funding from your taxes is not unlimited and we shouldn't burn through huge amounts of tax money that we don't have to train extra doctors that we don't have the funding to pay. We already aren't employing everyone we train so what's the point in training more at the moment? Then when you do get a job in a hospital there are very limited numbers of specialty training jobs available in many specialties and limited numbers of consultant positions there after as it is. I think that needs to be addressed before there is any point in ramping up medical student numbers.

          FYI: I am one of these training physicians so I have some insight into how our employment works. I would happily support me having more employment opportunities.

      • +27 votes

        You may think the figure is "right" but the people receiving it obviously don't. Personally, I wouldn't touch this job with a barge pole - the stress would be high given the risk of the kid injuring itself, or others, and daily contact with little disease vectors is enough for danger money on it's own. The difference is society doesn't value it like the do other jobs; even though they would probably nominate their children as the most important thing in their lives.

        • +31 votes

          Exactly. I'd bet my left nut that tsunamisurfer et. al. would be the first in line calling for heads to roll if anything untoward happened to little Tarquin at day care.

        • +35 votes

          @stumo: Exactly, I get so sick of people whining about the "caring" professions wanting their bit of the pie, when they are probably doing the jobs that have the most impact on people - so should be paid more. If there were no child care services then most people couldn't go to work, if there were no nurses then hospitals would grind to a halt because they do most of the actual patient interaction - but all people natter on about is how lawyers and doctors deserve a much larger payout than these people. I work in IT so I'm paid a disproportionate wage because the profession "has value" according to society, so this isn't sour grapes on my part; I just get sick of people who are actually contributing to society getting a raw deal. People try to shame them into accepting what they get because, if they go on strike, they are impacting "vulnerable" people. Funnily enough this is the same "vulnerable" people they look after every day and get paid a pittance for. You get what you pay for. If you are happy to go for the cut rate child care home, with the dodgy uncle hanging around, then pay a pittance - if you want a nurturing environment with qualified staff pony up with the money.

        • +4 votes

          @try2bhelpful: Well said. It's like the doctor/lawyer/manager who earns $100+/hr saying to the nurse/early childhood teacher who earns $22/hr, "What are you whinning about? If you don't like your pay, others will more than willingly take up your role. So whip get on with it."

        • -1 vote

          @OzWizard:

          And it's no surprise most childcare workers are female and subject to discrimination.

          It's past time we had more equity in our society.

        • +4 votes

          I am with you on this. Healthcare and Education profession should be decently paid.

        • -4 votes

          @try2bhelpful:
          So if I want lower quality childcare I can pay a pittance, but if I want good quality childcare, I have to pay more.

          I completely agree. I get to choose how I spend my money and I can enter into a mutually agreeable business contract.

          Now, if someone wants a high paying job, they can go look for a job or company that will pay the wage they think they deserve.

          Almost everyone that works actually contribute to society. The exception is government (they do contribute but only about as much as they diminish) and unions.

        •  

          @try2bhelpful:

          If there were no child care services then most people couldn't go to work, if there were no nurses then hospitals would grind to a halt because they do most of the actual patient interaction

          Why in a country of 25 millions should we not have enough nurses or childcare carers anyway at the first place when it takes only cert 3 (6 months?) to enter the industry?

          No one is saying doctors or lawyers should be paid such highly but their supply is artificially controlled which is not in the case of carers for example. It is supply and demand game my dear. You think people are doing service to the society, but it is often not by choice. People choose some professions just because they are easier to enter.

        • +3 votes

          @virhlpool: "My dear", yet another patronising comment; really not surprised you are still attacking the person because you can't counter the argument. I have seen not one shred of reputable research that has been put forth to counter, just unsubstantiated opinion after unsubstantiated opinion. All the links I have provided are backed by research projects or are from reputable news sources. I even threw in a right wing news source because one of your number put such store in one of their previous pieces.

          As society develops there may well be more need for family care workers than lawyers and doctors; so supply and demand may come into play. It will still require people to overcome their prejudices that child care workers are simply "wiping the drool of the face of 2 year olds", so it still may take some time.

          The arguments I have seen here are the same unsubstantiated rubbish that women, and minorities, have had to put up with for every step forward. Let's recap some of them - Women don't want the vote, it is too much of a burden, women don't want equal pay they are happy with pin money, give women access to contraceptives and their sexuality will run wild, when women signed the marrigage certificate they knew they were signing away the right to say no to sex, women just aren't intelligent enough to go to University - the list goes on and on. But society is now where it is and the sky hasn't fallen. To all the Henny Penny's out there the changes will come, they will probably come more slowly because of the opposition they are encountering, but the building blocks are being put in place. More and more people are realising that equality for women also means equality for men. That in a just society guys would not only have the burden of raising their families in an equal partnership they will also have the joy. The trade off is that both partners careers are impacted by child rearing, but then both partners get to mould what their child becomes. On the flip side both parties have the positives and negatives of workplaces where both parties are treated equally based on merit and pay scales are based on the real value of a position to society. It may well not happen in my life time but I do find myself hopeful given what already has been achieved in my life time.

        •  

          @try2bhelpful: You are touching a different topic all together. I am simply saying that supply of lawyers and doctors is artificially controlled (unfortunately). On the other hand, it's easy to get into professions such as carers, nurses, etc and therefore they don't have supply shortage. It is applicable to men or women - a specific gender is not the point. There are many male carers and male nurses out there.

          I believe that supply should be in constraint to make the wages high (to expected levels) for those professions. If you let supply flow (easy cert 3) easily, then wages do suffer. This isn't just true with only one industry but all those industries where there are workers in abundance. In fact, this should happen with number of doctors and lawyers to some extent as they have become extremely unaffordable. Again, men or women - doesn't matter.

      • +2 votes

        I would simply say that if parents are paying as high as $130/day per kid or even more in Sydney and Melbourne inner city areas, the fees being the same even if kids don't attend childcare due to sickness or any other reasons, and government hardly pays back 30% (or less) of it as a rebate, why are the carers/educators getting so less (if at all it is) - this is the question to be asked to the childcare centre owners. Greed has to be capped and should have a limit. We are probably the most expensive country for childcare expenses - it is time things get fixed or the approach we took for childcare welfare is simply not working and it needs a change.

      • +27 votes

        I'll make it pure and simple for you OP. I work in IT and get paid a handsome salary. I used to finish work, have a few beers with mates from work. We talk on buying the latest gadgets out there because we simply can afford to.

        My wife worked in a kindergarten and got paid a pittance. I'll even put it down on record, my wife graduated with a Masters of Early Childhood from University of Melbourne with full distinctions in all her subjects. She has spent countless hours doing research and learning about kids. She went thru hours of training every year outside her normal work hours to make sure she is equipped with the skills to take care of her kids. She never got time to do it during the week because she had to teach. So courses like First Aid and so on, she attends it own her own time during weekends. She comes home and does another 3-4 hours of preparation for her kids tomorrow. Her list of things to do for the kids never ends. A lot of the time she comes home crying because she is so tired or something happened in school. Parents like you would complain and not appreciate the hard work she puts into her job. I could go on with the list of things. I would like to reiterate again, it is just not doctors and lawyers who spend a lot of time studying to get where they are. They are people in this industry who has gone thru the same amount of study.

        However we all tend to forget, our most precious are in the care of these professionals. A lot of people take it for granted. I wonder what you would do if an untrained person took care of your child and your child hurt themselves. The amount of responsibility they carry is way more than a lawyer or an IT professional handles all day every day ! I hope you understand this.

        We have a young one now, so my wife is not working in the industry anymore. But a lot of other people in that industry makes little to nothing. They work a lot of hours, put a lot of effort into their jobs. It makes me almost angry to see you complain that the people in this profession is trying to make a stand to get paid fairly. I can safely assume that you would not be able to take this job for more than a week without the passion for it.

        My final word. If you're not happy about the raise in cost, you can quit your job and take care of your own kid. No one is forcing you to take up the service provided .

        • -9 votes

          No one is forcing your wife to take up the employment offered.

        • +5 votes

          @tshow: She doesn't work in early childhood anymore. We have a little one now. She has never complained about the money because she loves the kids. But you clearly don't understand my point.

        •  

          @jkmy23:
          I understand your point perfectly.

          People have a choice.

          You just choose to apply that principle to one side.

        • +10 votes

          @tshow: Yep. Cool. So the same principle applies to the other side. If you can't afford childcare, don't put your kid there :)

        • +4 votes

          @jkmy23:
          Precisely. It's not a right. It is a convenience.

        • -2 votes

          No offence but you are still missing the point completely. Just because your wife worked hard, is passionate about her job, cried etc does not mean she is entitled to a higher pay.

        • +3 votes

          @Your Friend:

          Perhaps not in your view but its certainly within an individuals prerogative to argue that they are worth higher pay!

        •  

          @jkmy23: I get your point. Why can’t their raise come from center’s assumably helty profits if Aussie parents are already paying way more for childcare than people in any other country?

          Are you serious when you say $135/day that I am paying for childcare is not enough? Mind it, I have lived in other countries and our childcare standards or curriculum aren’t anything special.

          Why can’t the authorities clamp down on unregulated fees and hence profits and give educators their fair share from there instead of asking parents to pay even more?

        • +2 votes

          @virhlpool:

          Well said. The issue here is NOT whether the child care workers should be paid more. They absolutely should. The issue is where the money comes from.

          The other elephant in the room is the over-regulation. Increasing the red tape and constant re-certification puts further strain on the workers. More work they must do with no time to do it. Increasing the red tape to get a center certified does much less for safety of the children than it does for restricting supply of childcare providers, thereby increasing what they can charge.

          Australians are pricing themselves out of child care entirely. Children aren't going to be safer being looked after by unqualified friends and relatives, or illegal child care operators.

          And then with the push for equality in the workplace and the idiotic use of 50% quotas in many workplaces, the criteria for getting those 50% of jobs isn't going to be competence anymore. It's going to be "Are you a childless female who can therefore afford to stay in the workforce?" Which is a problem for the women as well as the men being left in the cold. Being put in a position you are only qualified for on paper is exceptionally stressful. And both productivity and morale suffer big time. Meanwhile competent women who've spent a fortune on their education are relegated to staying at home and looking after household chores and children.

          We've collectively come off the rails in less than a generation.

    • +8 votes

      There's nothing stopping you from paying them more for looking after your children.
      There's nothing to stop you lobbying the employer of your centre to pay the staff more.

    • -5 votes

      You can do the Diploma inside of a year for $1800.

      I earned less than $22 an hour starting off in my banking position a number of years ago now & that was after a double-degree in Business Management & Finance. My next starting income after an industry change was $23 an hour after becoming a qualified property lawyer. Why on earth would a child care worker be valued at more than their current wages? I don't mean that as an insult, I really do honestly want to hear what it is that they do that actually makes them believe they are worth an extra $10 an hour?

      • -4 votes

        They keep our children safe and teach them values.

        • +13 votes

          Parents teach values - or at least they should.
          I certainly don't want my children learning their values from strangers.

        • -2 votes

          Parents already do both and don't receive a cent for it.

        • +9 votes

          I have never encountered a user whose comments I disagree with more consistently than yours. Even the vegans make more sense!

        •  

          surely they’re just having a lend, nothing better to do than get on this website and bait people.

        • +4 votes

          @blaircam:
          Parents these days don't spend enough time with their kids to teach them values, unfortunately….

        •  

          @Scrooge McDuck: you are just jealous that Molly was a bigger star than you in the 80s

        •  

          @x853:

          I wasn't around in the 80s grandpa!

        •  

          @Scrooge McDuck: If you dislike a comment about keeping kids safe and consistently disagree with me - carry on, I have no problem with that.

        •  

          @blaircam: This is not an all or nothing thing - parents teach values, early childhood education reinforces them by teaching them.

        • +2 votes

          @MissG:

          If you dislike a comment about keeping kids safe…

          Disingenuous political spin, that's one of the prominent reasons I dislike your comments!

        •  

          @Scrooge McDuck: Really? Because I use daycare, they keep my kids safe while I'm at work, I'm extremely grateful, and believe they should be paid more for this reason. My experience influences my position. And again, you disagree with my position, and everything I say, and again, if you want to disagree with my position that they keep kids safe and thus should be paid more, then again, I have zero issue with you disagreeing with me on anything. So interpret my statements how you want, that's on you, but there's nothing political about them - I tend to comment on threads on topics I have experience in (whether I identify that or not), I have nothing to gain politically here at all.

        • -2 votes

          @MissG: So why don't you pay them more, then?

        • +1 vote

          @infinite: I'm not really sure that's a well thought out argument, but just in case it is; because it would not solve the systemic issue here. And I highly doubt any childcare centre would be allowed to accept it. What I would like to see is a tiered pay structure based on years of experience and qualification achieved like other health & caring industries. The early childhood education field has people from certificate level up to degree educated but the remuneration is fairly flat from my limited understanding.

        •  

          @MissG: LOL, you back-peddled away fast from that one !!!!

        • -1 vote

          @infinite: Negatory, I answered your question with an honest response.

        • +1 vote

          @MissG: I strongly disagree with you here. People being paid and promoted based on how long they have been working rather than performance is the worst thing about working in any company.

          Infinite is right you really did back pedal pretty quickly, if you believe the carers who take care of your kids deserve to be paid more then you should pay them more. I’m sure they would appreciate it and there is nothing stopping you from doing it.

        • -1 vote

          @Your Friend: Paying the immediate carers more is completely unfair to the entire industry and makes no sense in terms of the wider problem. If you can't see that then you fail to understand the big picture here, it's not back-pedalling. As for remuneration - you don't seem to understand why performance-based pay wouldn't work in this setting. In health and caring industries, pay is usually based on tenure and education, I know, I work in one, and it works very well - corporate Australia is very different. You don't seem to have any experience with the way the daycare systems or similar industries work, so disagree all you like but I don't think your opinion reflects any real understanding of what's happening here.

        • +1 vote

          @MissG: I think the fact there was a national strike is probably a strong indicator that it isn’t working “very well”.

        •  

          @Your Friend: Yes because it doesn't follow the same structure as other health and caring industries, the structure of which I was suggesting for the daycare industry, which is a mess right now.

      • +13 votes

        It’s intellectually lazy to use your own single situation to justify an argument they the poor conditions child care workers get is acceptable. I’m sure there’s people on here that haven’t got the same academic background as you and picked up a labouring type role on $40-50 an hour… there’s many instances.. the point is, $21 an hour is not reflective of the work they put in.

        • +1 vote

          Everyone put's in a hard day's work, it's the Australian way of life. That has no bearing on the actual value of that work though. I still see nothing credible indicating even a sniff of a legitimate reason why their value is more than their current wages?

        • +2 votes

          @infinite: except me, I'm scrolling ozbargain at work….

        • +3 votes

          @infinite: then why are you having a bitch about child care workers striking? If they are so unimportant why do you care enough to put a post up?

        • -5 votes

          @Jeffgee: Why are you concerned with my personal opinion?

        • -3 votes

          With this argument you should call for volunteers to be paid as well.

          So if I volunteered to help out in a homeless shelter then I should really be paid the same as a hotel clerk as otherwise it will not reflect the work that I put in…..

      • +13 votes

        My mum's a Monash Masters qualified kinder teacher working at a Not for profit kinder (university-based in Melb).

        She has 20+ years experience but her pay is only about 66k a year. Do you think that's fair? That's like the starting salary for some professions requiring only a diploma.

        Not even mentioning the level of responsibility she has and the level of care she has to provide.

        • -14 votes

          Sounds fair, if maybe not even a bit too high, for the level of value her position and chosen industry has.

        • +20 votes

          @infinite:

          Wow honestly? Would like to see you in her shoes for one day - perhaps you can consider doing volunteering in a kinder for a day.
          Just the amount of paperwork including program planning, observations for every child, transition statements, PD, meetings, catering to special needs children and incident reports would drive me mad, not to mention cleaning up blood, pee and poop on a daily basis. I think she's creating far more value than say bankers and accountants (of which I am one), but she's getting paid far less.

        • -10 votes

          @Dadidalol: Why would I do that? I had the common sense to chose a higher paying profession where my value as a worker is higher.

        • +9 votes

          @infinite:

          Huh. Many people choose to be carers, teachers, paramedics, social workers etc. not because they lack common sense, but because they have plenty of it.

          Would you please define your 'value' for me? I hope you can realise that your own perceived 'value' is built upon other people's working contribution to society as well. A higher paying profession doesn't necessarily mean your 'value' as a worker is higher - and that's the point of this whole strike/debate. The child care workers are protesting because they believe their 'value' as a worker is higher than what they're currently being renumerated for. And to be honest, I think they're right. These people are caring for and educating our society's most precious and vulnerable, so that their parents (ie. people such as yourself) can have a career of your own. These workers often come across children with special needs, medical issues, migrant families and cases of domestic violence and depression - they are sometimes the first point of call for families needing assistance and then refer the cases onto other professionals.

          Child care is not just about babysitting, it is also about educating the workers of the future and providing support to their parents. It is no wonder that in some countries, child carers and teachers are amongst the highest paid and most well respected professions. I feel it's really a shame that we have not caught on to the importance and value of the professions. I also feel if you ever work in their roles for a day, or have a close one who works in a kinder/long day care, then you may develop a better understanding of where they're coming from.

        • +2 votes

          @Dadidalol: Nicely put. My wife worked in the same industry for a few years (until we had our own lil ones). She has countless times help diagnose lots of cases of early signs of autism, OCD and other issues. She had to spend hours writing reports, journals, observations etc before passing it on to another early childhood professional. I wonder people in this thread here see that as "value". Hats off to your mom !

        •  

          Wow she aint getting '$21/hr then - just for reference someone on $21/hr is probably on $39-$41k pa

        • +1 vote

          @hoxygt:
          Yep that's right.
          She's a kinder teacher with a masters degree and can teach up to grade 2. She belongs to the AEU, not the child care union, but still went to the strike to support and show solidarity with fellow colleagues.
          $21/hr is most likely Cert 3. Teaching requires a bachelors degree as a minimum (usually takes 4 years full time).

      • +5 votes

        Mate. It's easy to think that way when you're just sitting in an office in a suit.

        You claim that you honestly want to hear their side of the story - but you're blocking your ears and not hearing a thing that the others have just said.

        P.s I honestly want to hear why a qualified property lawyer should be 'valued' more than a similarly qualified child care professional. We're not even talking about inflation or experience level here.

      •  

        I guess the diploma is usually 1.5 years and costs more than 1800.

        Imagine you are spending your day with 10 - 20 children 9 hours a day which is not easy to handle. It's harder than you think. I think it is way harder than your banking position :P . On top of that, they need to do programming for the activities and do child reflections daily which is quite a lot of paperwork.

        On top of that, they spend quite a lot of time to research an plan what they can do with the kids. It's a pity that people like you think like this and when people like you engage daily with child cares, they usually try to complain about all the little things making workers life miserable.

        I guess they work hard enough to receive a higher wage.

    •  

      I agree, OP needs to look at the director of the centre his children are attending. No staff at the centre my child attends is having a walkout as they get paid a decent rate.

    • +3 votes

      My missus was a Child Care worker, Advanced Diploma.

      While she was in the profession she was getting paid way less than me even though I was in retail.

      Frankly with the level of responsibility and accountability (it's not just babysitting) they are paid a pittance. She was writing profiles of all the kids, keeping track of routines and odd behaviour, like Autistic traits, in some cases way before nurses and paediatricians detected it.

      Not to mention report writing.

      So yes, competent and capable CC staff should be paid maximum, with a sliding scale for less competent workers.

      PS- ditched CC for Admin. Gets paid double, for half the responsibility- go figure.

  • +18 votes

    Easy fix, everyone get a pay-rise except train drivers, politicians and management? Mint can print some extra notes right?

  • Top