babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » labour and consumption   » Daycare rates to go up

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Daycare rates to go up
RP.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7424

posted 10 March 2006 01:11 PM      Profile for RP.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Daycare to be $100/month more expensive

quote:
Several Island daycare centres have announced they will raise their rates by $100 a month in July to coincide with the $100 cheques being mailed out as part of the federal Conservative child-care plan.

Daycare operators were unapologetic about the increases.

"I'm putting the rates up because I believe in early learning and I believe in the qualified staff I have here and they are educators and they deserve more," said Lynn Hogan, the director and owner of Campus Kids at the University of Prince Edward Island.

"For so many years we have subsidized child care by settling for a lower wage so it really has to stop," she said.



From: I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cartman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7440

posted 10 March 2006 07:20 PM      Profile for Cartman        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Good post RP. Not a real shock. Conservatives have NOT had a good history of spending conservatively, just talking liberally about planning to do so.
From: Bring back Audra!!!!! | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
scooter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5548

posted 12 March 2006 09:17 AM      Profile for scooter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cartman:
Good post RP. Not a real shock.

So you support continued low daycare worker pay? Any idea when that daycare last raised their rates?

The daycare near us raised their rates last November after having no rate increases in 4.5 years. They were losing staff so they increased wages.


From: High River | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 March 2006 11:45 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I agree with this action too, and I wouldn't be apologetic about it either. This federal program is NOT a child care program, it's a reward to married women who stay home in "their place", and the faster people are disabused of this notion that Harper is funding a child care program and start fighting for a REAL child care program, the better.

[ 12 March 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 12 March 2006 02:08 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Daycare workers are some of the most underpaid and highly necessary workers in our economy. Of course they should be paid more.

That being said, I am not surprised that the Con handout is going to do nothing to increase the number of spaces. That's never been their intention.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Andy (Andrew)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10884

posted 12 March 2006 04:23 PM      Profile for Andy (Andrew)   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I agree with this action too, and I wouldn't be apologetic about it either. This federal program is NOT a child care program, it's a reward to married women who stay home in "their place", and the faster people are disabused of this notion that Harper is funding a child care program and start fighting for a REAL child care program, the better

Michelle, I don't agree with Harper's program but I don't agree that it's a reward for married women who stay at home. Some families will use that money towards paying grandparents to babysit or something like that. I don't think that's right but I don't think it's right to say it supports just one decision.

I also don't think there is anything wrong with one person staying at home.

Maybe it's different between provinces but in Alberta I know of people who are working in daycares that just have first aid - that's it. They have no post-secondary education or training. Don't tell me that's a start to early education, that's warehousing a kid. If people want to be paid well then they should have more skills than a first aid certificate you can get in a weekend.


From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cartman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7440

posted 12 March 2006 04:46 PM      Profile for Cartman        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by scooter:

So you support continued low daycare worker pay? Any idea when that daycare last raised their rates?

The daycare near us raised their rates last November after having no rate increases in 4.5 years. They were losing staff so they increased wages.


Just because I think that this plan is a complete waste of money does not mean that I support low wages for day care workers. Has it ever been law that day cares could not raise their rates or the wages for staff? Is there any guarantee that this extra funding to families will go to workers or just be taken as profit by owners? Next time you attempt to create a straw man, try and be a little more subtle will you? Weak.

From: Bring back Audra!!!!! | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
brebis noire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7136

posted 12 March 2006 04:49 PM      Profile for brebis noire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Andy (Andrew):

Maybe it's different between provinces but in Alberta I know of people who are working in daycares that just have first aid - that's it. They have no post-secondary education or training. Don't tell me that's a start to early education, that's warehousing a kid. If people want to be paid well then they should have more skills than a first aid certificate you can get in a weekend.

It is very different among provinces. Quebec's system is a model to follow (and not one to sabotage, as I fear is what's happening.) Daycare is a given for this generation of parents, and not just any old daycare. It is a high quality, community-based system that has been in operation for many years. Daycare workers are college-educated (three-year program in early childhood education) and although salaries are still low, they are still way above minimum wage.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Quebec model needs to be adopted by the other provinces.


From: Quebec | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
scooter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5548

posted 12 March 2006 04:55 PM      Profile for scooter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brebis noire:
It is very different among provinces. Quebec's system is a model to follow (and not one to sabotage, as I fear is what's happening.)...
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Quebec model needs to be adopted by the other provinces.


Are you referring to the original intent of the program or the existing Quebec program?

The Quebec system supports for profit daycare. The original program failed to deliver the extra daycare spaces required so the government allowed the funds to go to for-profit daycares.


From: High River | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cartman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7440

posted 12 March 2006 04:58 PM      Profile for Cartman        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
I agree with this action too, and I wouldn't be apologetic about it either. This federal program is NOT a child care program, it's a reward to married women who stay home in "their place", and the faster people are disabused of this notion that Harper is funding a child care program and start fighting for a REAL child care program, the better.

[ 12 March 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


That is the way I see it.
The whole reason for wanting a national day care program was to make it possible for women who need to work to be able to do so. This meagre tax cut does not enable such women. At the same time, people who can already afford to stay at home with their kids will continue to stay at home, but they will get money that they do not need.

The Liberals were right on this one. That is, imagine if legislators creating health care opted instead to go for a $100.00/month tax break.

Do you really think that women who do not work in the public sphere and drive Escalades to their 3 story executive homes really give a shit about this program? Do you think it will do much to enable the working poor? If it does not work, then it is a waste of tax dollars. More waste from the Conservatives.


From: Bring back Audra!!!!! | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Andy (Andrew)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10884

posted 12 March 2006 05:03 PM      Profile for Andy (Andrew)   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Cartman I don't agree with the program for many reasons - one is that I think that daycares are accredited and screamed. Most homemakers aren't going to allow health inspectors and educational assessments of their daily plans with their children.

I don't agree with all you said though...

quote:
That is the way I see it.
The whole reason for wanting a national day care program was to make it possible for women who need to work to be able to do so. This meagre tax cut does not enable such women. At the same time, people who can already afford to stay at home with their kids will continue to stay at home, but they will get money that they do not need.
The Liberals were right on this one. That is, imagine if legislators creating health care opted instead to go for a $100.00/month tax break.


The daycare program was not just for women who had to work for financial reasons it was for everyone who wanted to work to have daycare spots. I don't disagree with that but I don't think that it was going to be means tested.

quote:

Do you really think that women who do not work in the public sphere and drive Escalades to their 3 story executive homes really give a shit about this program? Do you think it will do much to enable the working poor? If it does not work, then it is a waste of tax dollars. More waste from the Conservatives.


I know women from Church who are in a position to stay at home who fought tooth and nail for that $100 bucks and think it's important on principle.
The Conservatives got MANY votes based on this policy.


From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
brebis noire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7136

posted 12 March 2006 05:08 PM      Profile for brebis noire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by scooter:

Are you referring to the original intent of the program or the existing Quebec program?

The Quebec system supports for profit daycare. The original program failed to deliver the extra daycare spaces required so the government allowed the funds to go to for-profit daycares.


If a 'for-profit' centre can deliver the same level of care, pay the same wages as non-profit centres, submit to the same standards and inspections, charge the same daily rate to parents as well as remain part of the overall community in the same way that not-for-profit centres are, then I don't see much of a problem in principle. But I'm not sure where the profit aspect comes in...


From: Quebec | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cartman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7440

posted 12 March 2006 05:18 PM      Profile for Cartman        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The Conservatives got MANY votes based on this policy.
More than what the opposition parties received supporting a national day care program? I disagree.

The idea of a national day care program came from the left, not the right. My understanding is that feminists were the ones who instigated this discussion because many women were (and still are) living in poverty because they cannot afford to stay at home with their kids and work at the same time. Consequently, they become dependent upon men.

I have no problem paying money because folks are trying to get ahead in life, but I have a serious problem handing over my tax dollars to support wealthy women staying at home. Stay at home on your own dime thank you.

I would like someone to explain to me why they chose $100.00.


From: Bring back Audra!!!!! | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 12 March 2006 10:38 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cartman:

I have no problem paying money because folks are trying to get ahead in life, but I have a serious problem handing over my tax dollars to support wealthy women staying at home. Stay at home on your own dime thank you.


Thank you very much - that's exactly what I was thinking.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca