thehatfox@lemmy.world to United Kingdom@feddit.ukEnglish · 9 months agoParents forced to quit jobs as childcare costs soar to cover ‘free’ fundinginews.co.ukexternal-linkmessage-square31fedilinkarrow-up1111arrow-down12
arrow-up1109arrow-down1external-linkParents forced to quit jobs as childcare costs soar to cover ‘free’ fundinginews.co.ukthehatfox@lemmy.world to United Kingdom@feddit.ukEnglish · 9 months agomessage-square31fedilink
minus-squareHeartyBeast@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down1·9 months ago I’m confused as to where that caused unqualified babysitters to no longer be able to work? A government funded Pre-K does not preclude a paid independent Pre-K any more than normal schools preclude private schools. You might be interested in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65aa5e29ed27ca001327b2c6/EYFS_statutory_framework_for_childminders.pdf which sets out the statutory framework under which childminders must operate in England. They aren’t unreasonable, but certainly sufficiently onerous to exclude many of the kind of people who were childminders before 2002. Here’s a brief history of how things have changed https://thetrainingfox.co.uk/the-history-of-the-eyfs/
minus-squarehuginn@feddit.itlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-29 months agoGot it. So it was government regulations with 0 additional funding or support and not progressive at all. It reads as conservative as it functionally requires traditional gender roles and serves as a tax on the poor.
You might be interested in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65aa5e29ed27ca001327b2c6/EYFS_statutory_framework_for_childminders.pdf which sets out the statutory framework under which childminders must operate in England. They aren’t unreasonable, but certainly sufficiently onerous to exclude many of the kind of people who were childminders before 2002.
Here’s a brief history of how things have changed https://thetrainingfox.co.uk/the-history-of-the-eyfs/
Got it.
So it was government regulations with 0 additional funding or support and not progressive at all.
It reads as conservative as it functionally requires traditional gender roles and serves as a tax on the poor.