If your daycare or childcare provider closed due to coronavirus, are they still requiring you to pay

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been asked to pay 90% of tuition for April, which we'll do. Hoping that things will become more normal in May.

Woah!!!

Seriously, glad you got it like that! Only 10% off? Why even bother?

Sounds like that center is still paying their staff and their landlord, and the expenses that they are no longer having while closed (catering, etc) amount to about 10% of the total, so they are doing the right thing by passing those savings on to their clients. The words you are looking for are "thank you".

That leaves the owner still making 100% of his normal profit. Somehow it seems right for her to also be taking a big haircut. And that assumes that no effort has been made to work out somewhat of a deal with the landlord, who has a strong incentive to not have a tenant leave in the current economic climate.

Why exactly should the parents, many of who may have precarious job positions, be the only ones to be sacrificing here?

LOL that you think any daycare is ever making a profit. Seriously lolololol. Huge chains excepted, but seriously, your statement just shows how clueless you are. Just because the monthly bill for you is big doesn’t mean anyone’s getting rich.

Of course daycares are making a profit. How do you think they stay in business if they are not? And many of the “huge chains” are franchises, meaning that the local owner has to pay an additional fee to corporate. Even non-franchises have greater central overhead expenses, so I wouldn’t assume that corporate centers necessarily make more than a well run local center.

Even if owners are not “getting rich,” they are owners of profitable businesses that should be expected to share in the pain of the current crisis. As should their landlords.

It’s crazy that you think the parents, most of whom are also “not rich,” should be the only ones sacrificing here.

You’re just totally wrong. I’ve directed three well regarded NAEYC accredited centers, and whatever “profit” you think these places are making is non-existent. Sometimes there’s a good year—100% enrollment, all tuition paid on time, maybe a small grant or two—and we could put some in reserves. Others we ended in the red and used those reserves. Most usually we just had exactly as much coming in as going out.

It sounds like your centers may have been non-profits.

Does/did your centers charge lower tuition than other comparable for-profit centers? Were your expenses higher than expenses for other comparable centers?

If not, presumably you should have a similar amount of money left over at the end of the month as any other center. What was done with that money?

When I searched for daycares, it seemed like both the for profit and non-profit centers all charged essentially the same tuition. And they all seemed to provide the same services. There was nothing that I could see that would have made me assume that the costs to run the non-profits would have been higher. So I don't understand why the economics of the two would be significantly different. Can you explain?

There’s an entire literature on the instability of the child care “system.” Take some time to educate yourself if you’re truly interested in understanding.

For starters, here’s a sobering survey that came out this week—responses from 6,000 programs.

https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/our-work/public-policy-advocacy/effects_of_coronavirus_on_child_care.final.pdf

Why didn’t you answer the questions raised?

The survey you sent doesn’t address normal operations. Rather, it is the centers’ own responses to a survey put out by their association to argue for both support from parents and the government in light of this crisis. That’s not exactly objective data or presented from an unbiased source.

Because your assumptions are wrong and I’m not your personal teacher. I’ve explained that in my experience (running three high-quality programs, often cited on this board as “top of the line”) and for the vast majority of regular joe programs, revenue=expenses. There simply is no money left over. If you truly want to understand, there are thousands of resources.

Yes, I am sure your trade association has put out other resources.

It's simple logic. There are many, many for profit daycare centers. They would not stay in business unless there was "money left over" -- that's just common sense that they wouldn't continue to operate and proliferate if they weren't making money.

It appears that non-profit centers charge the same tuition (therefore have the same revenue) and have the same expenses (they operate in similar buildings, provide similar programs, etc.). If that is true, there should be the same "money left over," whether you call it profit or not.

That is why I asked whether it was accurate that non-profits tended to have comparable revenue and expenses to for-profit centers. You didn't answer that. If non-profits charged lower tuition, then it would explain why there may not be money left over. If they had higher expenses, the same could apply.

Maybe there is something different about non-profit centers -- again, that's why I asked.

But, if you are claiming that there is "nothing left over" even at for-profit centers, that is simply not plausible as businesses do not continue and expand if they are not profitable.

You’re wrong. Child care is not a profitable business model. The end.

I am sure that owning a daycare doesn’t provide a champagne and caviar lifestyle, or anything close to it. But PP’s general argument that daycares wouldn’t stay in business if they weren’t decently profitable makes sense to me.

FWIW, this article quotes a 9.9% net profit margin, although I am sure there is variability among centers.

https://www.inc.com/sageworks/sageworks-why-day-care-profits-are-soaring.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yet no one is complaining that public school teachers are still getting paid!
Treating the teachers of the youngest children with the least respect and pay is why it’s so hard to find enough qualified teachers for children 0-5 — crucial, fundamental years.

Because we are the one struggling to work from home with 2 kids under 4 while paying $4000 a month to our daycare. Would your boss be okay with you not working while the building is closed and you can’t telework? It’s called unpaid leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been asked to pay 90% of tuition for April, which we'll do. Hoping that things will become more normal in May.

Woah!!!

Seriously, glad you got it like that! Only 10% off? Why even bother?

Sounds like that center is still paying their staff and their landlord, and the expenses that they are no longer having while closed (catering, etc) amount to about 10% of the total, so they are doing the right thing by passing those savings on to their clients. The words you are looking for are "thank you".

That leaves the owner still making 100% of his normal profit. Somehow it seems right for her to also be taking a big haircut. And that assumes that no effort has been made to work out somewhat of a deal with the landlord, who has a strong incentive to not have a tenant leave in the current economic climate.

Why exactly should the parents, many of who may have precarious job positions, be the only ones to be sacrificing here?

LOL that you think any daycare is ever making a profit. Seriously lolololol. Huge chains excepted, but seriously, your statement just shows how clueless you are. Just because the monthly bill for you is big doesn’t mean anyone’s getting rich.

Of course daycares are making a profit. How do you think they stay in business if they are not? And many of the “huge chains” are franchises, meaning that the local owner has to pay an additional fee to corporate. Even non-franchises have greater central overhead expenses, so I wouldn’t assume that corporate centers necessarily make more than a well run local center.

Even if owners are not “getting rich,” they are owners of profitable businesses that should be expected to share in the pain of the current crisis. As should their landlords.

It’s crazy that you think the parents, most of whom are also “not rich,” should be the only ones sacrificing here.

You’re just totally wrong. I’ve directed three well regarded NAEYC accredited centers, and whatever “profit” you think these places are making is non-existent. Sometimes there’s a good year—100% enrollment, all tuition paid on time, maybe a small grant or two—and we could put some in reserves. Others we ended in the red and used those reserves. Most usually we just had exactly as much coming in as going out.

It sounds like your centers may have been non-profits.

Does/did your centers charge lower tuition than other comparable for-profit centers? Were your expenses higher than expenses for other comparable centers?

If not, presumably you should have a similar amount of money left over at the end of the month as any other center. What was done with that money?

When I searched for daycares, it seemed like both the for profit and non-profit centers all charged essentially the same tuition. And they all seemed to provide the same services. There was nothing that I could see that would have made me assume that the costs to run the non-profits would have been higher. So I don't understand why the economics of the two would be significantly different. Can you explain?

Let me explain to you. DS goes to a non-profit daycare. They pay their teachers much better than for-profit daycare. Period. Because of that, the teachers turnover is extremely low. The director told me on average their teachers have been there for 8 years. DS has been there for almost 3 years (hence he has been in three classrooms); all but one teachers who have taken care of him are still with the daycare.

I have friends whose children go to a nearby for-profit daycare that charges similar tuition. They told me teachers come and go every month. Kids get used to not bonding with their teachers at all.

The teachers at DS' daycare also have benefits like health insurance and vacation days (maybe 10 days, I don't remember), which I think they totally deserve. I don't know how much DS' daycare workers make, but I'm totally fine if they make twice as much as for-profit daycare workers. They are amazing and like family to my son. As long as DH and I are still getting paid, we will continue paying our daycare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been asked to pay 90% of tuition for April, which we'll do. Hoping that things will become more normal in May.

Woah!!!

Seriously, glad you got it like that! Only 10% off? Why even bother?

Sounds like that center is still paying their staff and their landlord, and the expenses that they are no longer having while closed (catering, etc) amount to about 10% of the total, so they are doing the right thing by passing those savings on to their clients. The words you are looking for are "thank you".

That leaves the owner still making 100% of his normal profit. Somehow it seems right for her to also be taking a big haircut. And that assumes that no effort has been made to work out somewhat of a deal with the landlord, who has a strong incentive to not have a tenant leave in the current economic climate.

Why exactly should the parents, many of who may have precarious job positions, be the only ones to be sacrificing here?

LOL that you think any daycare is ever making a profit. Seriously lolololol. Huge chains excepted, but seriously, your statement just shows how clueless you are. Just because the monthly bill for you is big doesn’t mean anyone’s getting rich.

Of course daycares are making a profit. How do you think they stay in business if they are not? And many of the “huge chains” are franchises, meaning that the local owner has to pay an additional fee to corporate. Even non-franchises have greater central overhead expenses, so I wouldn’t assume that corporate centers necessarily make more than a well run local center.

Even if owners are not “getting rich,” they are owners of profitable businesses that should be expected to share in the pain of the current crisis. As should their landlords.

It’s crazy that you think the parents, most of whom are also “not rich,” should be the only ones sacrificing here.

You’re just totally wrong. I’ve directed three well regarded NAEYC accredited centers, and whatever “profit” you think these places are making is non-existent. Sometimes there’s a good year—100% enrollment, all tuition paid on time, maybe a small grant or two—and we could put some in reserves. Others we ended in the red and used those reserves. Most usually we just had exactly as much coming in as going out.

It sounds like your centers may have been non-profits.

Does/did your centers charge lower tuition than other comparable for-profit centers? Were your expenses higher than expenses for other comparable centers?

If not, presumably you should have a similar amount of money left over at the end of the month as any other center. What was done with that money?

When I searched for daycares, it seemed like both the for profit and non-profit centers all charged essentially the same tuition. And they all seemed to provide the same services. There was nothing that I could see that would have made me assume that the costs to run the non-profits would have been higher. So I don't understand why the economics of the two would be significantly different. Can you explain?

Let me explain to you. DS goes to a non-profit daycare. They pay their teachers much better than for-profit daycare. Period. Because of that, the teachers turnover is extremely low. The director told me on average their teachers have been there for 8 years. DS has been there for almost 3 years (hence he has been in three classrooms); all but one teachers who have taken care of him are still with the daycare.

I have friends whose children go to a nearby for-profit daycare that charges similar tuition. They told me teachers come and go every month. Kids get used to not bonding with their teachers at all.

The teachers at DS' daycare also have benefits like health insurance and vacation days (maybe 10 days, I don't remember), which I think they totally deserve. I don't know how much DS' daycare workers make, but I'm totally fine if they make twice as much as for-profit daycare workers. They are amazing and like family to my son. As long as DH and I are still getting paid, we will continue paying our daycare.

I work at a dc area non profit daycare with low turnover rates. I’ve been there for 14 years as a head teacher in the same age group. I make $38,000/year working 40 hours a week year-round with no spring break, summer break, or winter break. I have 2 weeks of vacation/sick leave. I doubt is any different than what any for profit center would offer. I’m posting this because I don’t think people realize how little we make and how much our salaries matter, and how disproportionate they are to the tuition that families pay each month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been asked to pay 90% of tuition for April, which we'll do. Hoping that things will become more normal in May.

Woah!!!

Seriously, glad you got it like that! Only 10% off? Why even bother?

Sounds like that center is still paying their staff and their landlord, and the expenses that they are no longer having while closed (catering, etc) amount to about 10% of the total, so they are doing the right thing by passing those savings on to their clients. The words you are looking for are "thank you".

That leaves the owner still making 100% of his normal profit. Somehow it seems right for her to also be taking a big haircut. And that assumes that no effort has been made to work out somewhat of a deal with the landlord, who has a strong incentive to not have a tenant leave in the current economic climate.

Why exactly should the parents, many of who may have precarious job positions, be the only ones to be sacrificing here?

LOL that you think any daycare is ever making a profit. Seriously lolololol. Huge chains excepted, but seriously, your statement just shows how clueless you are. Just because the monthly bill for you is big doesn’t mean anyone’s getting rich.

Of course daycares are making a profit. How do you think they stay in business if they are not? And many of the “huge chains” are franchises, meaning that the local owner has to pay an additional fee to corporate. Even non-franchises have greater central overhead expenses, so I wouldn’t assume that corporate centers necessarily make more than a well run local center.

Even if owners are not “getting rich,” they are owners of profitable businesses that should be expected to share in the pain of the current crisis. As should their landlords.

It’s crazy that you think the parents, most of whom are also “not rich,” should be the only ones sacrificing here.

You’re just totally wrong. I’ve directed three well regarded NAEYC accredited centers, and whatever “profit” you think these places are making is non-existent. Sometimes there’s a good year—100% enrollment, all tuition paid on time, maybe a small grant or two—and we could put some in reserves. Others we ended in the red and used those reserves. Most usually we just had exactly as much coming in as going out.

It sounds like your centers may have been non-profits.

Does/did your centers charge lower tuition than other comparable for-profit centers? Were your expenses higher than expenses for other comparable centers?

If not, presumably you should have a similar amount of money left over at the end of the month as any other center. What was done with that money?

When I searched for daycares, it seemed like both the for profit and non-profit centers all charged essentially the same tuition. And they all seemed to provide the same services. There was nothing that I could see that would have made me assume that the costs to run the non-profits would have been higher. So I don't understand why the economics of the two would be significantly different. Can you explain?

Let me explain to you. DS goes to a non-profit daycare. They pay their teachers much better than for-profit daycare. Period[b]. Because of that, the teachers turnover is extremely low. The director told me on average their teachers have been there for 8 years. DS has been there for almost 3 years (hence he has been in three classrooms); all but one teachers who have taken care of him are still with the daycare.

I have friends whose children go to a nearby for-profit daycare that charges similar tuition. They told me teachers come and go every month. Kids get used to not bonding with their teachers at all.

The teachers at DS' daycare also have benefits like health insurance and vacation days (maybe 10 days, I don't remember), which I think they totally deserve. I don't know how much DS' daycare workers make, but I'm totally fine if they make twice as much as for-profit daycare workers. They are amazing and like family to my son. As long as DH and I are still getting paid, we will continue paying our daycare.

You are making way too sweeping a generalization based on your anectdata.

My children attend/have attended a for-profit daycare that has extremely low-turnover. Many teachers have been there 10+ years, a couple 20+. Almost all of the teachers my oldest had also taught my youngest. I know they offer health care and vacation days. I don't know their exact salaries, but I am sure it is better than average -- which I am sure still isn't a ton.

Maybe non-profit centers are more likely to treat their employees better, but I certainly don't know that and I wouldn't necessarily assume it. I do know that some church-based non-profits pay very poorly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been asked to pay 90% of tuition for April, which we'll do. Hoping that things will become more normal in May.

Woah!!!

Seriously, glad you got it like that! Only 10% off? Why even bother?

Sounds like that center is still paying their staff and their landlord, and the expenses that they are no longer having while closed (catering, etc) amount to about 10% of the total, so they are doing the right thing by passing those savings on to their clients. The words you are looking for are "thank you".

That leaves the owner still making 100% of his normal profit. Somehow it seems right for her to also be taking a big haircut. And that assumes that no effort has been made to work out somewhat of a deal with the landlord, who has a strong incentive to not have a tenant leave in the current economic climate.

Why exactly should the parents, many of who may have precarious job positions, be the only ones to be sacrificing here?

LOL that you think any daycare is ever making a profit. Seriously lolololol. Huge chains excepted, but seriously, your statement just shows how clueless you are. Just because the monthly bill for you is big doesn’t mean anyone’s getting rich.

Of course daycares are making a profit. How do you think they stay in business if they are not? And many of the “huge chains” are franchises, meaning that the local owner has to pay an additional fee to corporate. Even non-franchises have greater central overhead expenses, so I wouldn’t assume that corporate centers necessarily make more than a well run local center.

Even if owners are not “getting rich,” they are owners of profitable businesses that should be expected to share in the pain of the current crisis. As should their landlords.

It’s crazy that you think the parents, most of whom are also “not rich,” should be the only ones sacrificing here.

You’re just totally wrong. I’ve directed three well regarded NAEYC accredited centers, and whatever “profit” you think these places are making is non-existent. Sometimes there’s a good year—100% enrollment, all tuition paid on time, maybe a small grant or two—and we could put some in reserves. Others we ended in the red and used those reserves. Most usually we just had exactly as much coming in as going out.

It sounds like your centers may have been non-profits.

Does/did your centers charge lower tuition than other comparable for-profit centers? Were your expenses higher than expenses for other comparable centers?

If not, presumably you should have a similar amount of money left over at the end of the month as any other center. What was done with that money?

When I searched for daycares, it seemed like both the for profit and non-profit centers all charged essentially the same tuition. And they all seemed to provide the same services. There was nothing that I could see that would have made me assume that the costs to run the non-profits would have been higher. So I don't understand why the economics of the two would be significantly different. Can you explain?

Let me explain to you. DS goes to a non-profit daycare. They pay their teachers much better than for-profit daycare. Period[b]. Because of that, the teachers turnover is extremely low. The director told me on average their teachers have been there for 8 years. DS has been there for almost 3 years (hence he has been in three classrooms); all but one teachers who have taken care of him are still with the daycare.

I have friends whose children go to a nearby for-profit daycare that charges similar tuition. They told me teachers come and go every month. Kids get used to not bonding with their teachers at all.

The teachers at DS' daycare also have benefits like health insurance and vacation days (maybe 10 days, I don't remember), which I think they totally deserve. I don't know how much DS' daycare workers make, but I'm totally fine if they make twice as much as for-profit daycare workers. They are amazing and like family to my son. As long as DH and I are still getting paid, we will continue paying our daycare.

You are making way too sweeping a generalization based on your anectdata.

My children attend/have attended a for-profit daycare that has extremely low-turnover. Many teachers have been there 10+ years, a couple 20+. Almost all of the teachers my oldest had also taught my youngest. I know they offer health care and vacation days. I don't know their exact salaries, but I am sure it is better than average -- which I am sure still isn't a ton.

Maybe non-profit centers are more likely to treat their employees better, but I certainly don't know that and I wouldn't necessarily assume it. I do know that some church-based non-profits pay very poorly.

There’s quite a lot for empirical evidence hat NPO centers pay better, are of higher quality, and have lower turnover than other programs. If you’re really interested in leaning, there’s an entire field of research centered on child care economics.

[Anonymous]

This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

agreed, but our center, for example said continue to be paid or you get dropped, so parents don't have that option, which would have been nice. While i think its great the teachers are still getting paid thanks to our continued payment of full-tuition, it's also annoying that we've gotten no reduction in tuition payments, when I know many of our teachers have been hired by center families at $25+ per hour to care for their kids so the parents can continue to work from home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

agreed, but our center, for example said continue to be paid or you get dropped, so parents don't have that option, which would have been nice. While i think its great the teachers are still getting paid thanks to our continued payment of full-tuition, it's also annoying that we've gotten no reduction in tuition payments, when I know many of our teachers have been hired by center families at $25+ per hour to care for their kids so the parents can continue to work from home.

Exactly - it should be an option, not a requirement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

I’ll disagree and say this is not an objective matter. You have to look at it ethically. My ethics say these are people who deeply care about my child and I will continue to pay to support them even if I’m not actively using their service. Your ethics may dictate different behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

I’ll disagree and say this is not an objective matter. You have to look at it ethically. My ethics say these are people who deeply care about my child and I will continue to pay to support them even if I’m not actively using their service. Your ethics may dictate different behavior.

What I'm hearing you say is that you think parents should be forced to pay, while I am saying parents should pay if they can. So if a parent needs to hire a nanny because they are healthcare workers, you think they should continue to also pay for their closed daycare? Sorry, but that's absurd and self-centered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

I’ll disagree and say this is not an objective matter. You have to look at it ethically. My ethics say these are people who deeply care about my child and I will continue to pay to support them even if I’m not actively using their service. Your ethics may dictate different behavior.

What I'm hearing you say is that you think parents should be forced to pay, while I am saying parents should pay if they can. So if a parent needs to hire a nanny because they are healthcare workers, you think they should continue to also pay for their closed daycare? Sorry, but that's absurd and self-centered.

DP, But I posted a similar question/statement up thread. Why are my ethics in question because I don’t want to pay for duplicate services? Yet only receiving services from one of them? Are you guys so insulated that you think folks can afford to do this, even on the short term?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

I’ll disagree and say this is not an objective matter. You have to look at it ethically. My ethics say these are people who deeply care about my child and I will continue to pay to support them even if I’m not actively using their service. Your ethics may dictate different behavior.

What I'm hearing you say is that you think parents should be forced to pay, while I am saying parents should pay if they can. So if a parent needs to hire a nanny because they are healthcare workers, you think they should continue to also pay for their closed daycare? Sorry, but that's absurd and self-centered.

DP, But I posted a similar question/statement up thread. Why are my ethics in question because I don’t want to pay for duplicate services? Yet only receiving services from one of them? Are you guys so insulated that you think folks can afford to do this, even on the short term?

Right, and realistically, daycares are not going to get the vast majority of families to pay. That means they won't be able to pay teachers their full salaries, which means that they may very well actually be better off with unemployment insurance if they are eligible. If they are not, give parents the ability to make tax-deductible donations. If they are eligible, do temporary layoffs and suggest to parents who express concern for the teachers that they organize a collection for the teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic has shifted quite a bit to discussing the actual profit margin’s of the day cares themselves. You HAVE to look at this objectively. Meaning are you paying for a service, and are you receiving that service? And what does the contract say. It does not matter if it is a daycare, personal trainer, lawyers office, or anything else.

+1. I personally think parents who can (eg not if you've gotten laid off or had to hire a nanny) should continue to pay as a donation if they are told and trust that it will mean teachers will continue to get paid. But to be actually charged for service you aren't receiving and threatened with losing your spot? That's absurd.

I’ll disagree and say this is not an objective matter. You have to look at it ethically. My ethics say these are people who deeply care about my child and I will continue to pay to support them even if I’m not actively using their service. Your ethics may dictate different behavior.

What I'm hearing you say is that you think parents should be forced to pay, while I am saying parents should pay if they can. So if a parent needs to hire a nanny because they are healthcare workers, you think they should continue to also pay for their closed daycare? Sorry, but that's absurd and self-centered.

I’m the ethics PP and was responding to the first poster quoted here. I said nothing about anything you suggested in bold. I said my ethical standpoint is that I am continuing to pay for services that I’m not receiving.