RTO and No Childcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you bragging about how you don’t do stuff with your kids after school and how you spent plenty of childcare money/hours in traffic and bent over backwards to be in an office because your boss said so with one parent getting home late … this isn’t the flex you think it is.

To quote Varsity Blues: “I don’t want your life.”

Look, I don’t want FT RTO either. But the fact is you do need to plan your life, and it’s not a foregone conclusion that all parents need to dedicate all this time to after school activities. It’s not even clearly good for kids. Women placing these expectations on themselves (and it’s generally women) are going to drive themselves crazy. Your kid does not need to do travel soccer. They can do the school sports team and get themselves to and from there.

But if your vision IS that you spend from 4-7 shuttling your kid around, then yes, you need a better plan than perpetual FT WFH especially if you are a fed. Set your life up so you can prioritize what’s important to you. That may mean you and your DH flex in opposite directions, choosing a more modest home with a shorter commute, one parent going PT, or investing in childcare.

So prioritize what's important to you ... but not a job with WFH that makes the rest of your schedule possible and more pleasant. Choose jobs with flexible schedules or go part time ... but don't be full time 9-5 with WFH, that's entitled.

Do you hear yourselves?

I think what peeves me the most about the holier-than-thou lecturing is the assumption you thought of something I didn't. My middle schooler is in an alternative school without a bus or aftercare or these mythical school sports you speak of. We have two more years till she can walk to HS, something we planned for when we chose our house. Both DH and I worked from home before covid, something we negotiated - with accompanying pay cuts and limited promotion opportunities - to make this school work. Nobody in my house does travel sports, we just want to be able to get our kid to school in the morning, pick her up after, help with homework, and have dinner together at 6:00. But sure, tell me more about how I'm unreasonable and spoiled for not "prioritizing what's important to me" when I make career and childcare decisions.

I mean yes - planning to have to FT working parents but never have after school child care is entitled. Sorry!

DP but why? Why is wanting to spend afternoon with your kids and being home in time to cook dinner for your family more “entitled” than things like expecting to have good health insurance options, deciding you need a certain level of pay for the job to be worth your time, negotiating for things like transit benefits, expecting paid PTO, etc.?

The only difference is that telework has allowed many women (who were historically home with kids) to join the full time workforce. It’s internalized misogyny telling you that *this* is the thing that employees are entitled for wanting.

I don’t know what to tell you. 40 hrs/week is a standard schedule. there are a variety of ways to make it work and generally they involve paying for childcare.

Yes and for many many years, well before 2020, I made it work with telework. (And did pay for childcare when prior to them being school aged and I do still pay for summer camps, so I do pay for childcare during the hours I work).

There is no business reason for my working hours or location to change except for some billionaires who a) have personal financial interest in boosting the commercial real estate market and b) want to cause chaos to weaken government to their personal benefit.

I think it’s really weird actually that you are cheerleading these billionaire interests over wanting a better quality of life for working parents. But you’re entitled to your priorities …

Thank you for stating this so well. I'm also confused where people are coming from and I think the aggressive ones are really just trolling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I returned to office in 2021 and it was impossible to source childcare in NOVA. We were paying $25/hr! Most of the au pair looking for extra work ghosted me. I used a couple college girls during summer but they had to return to school.

We end up finding lady without childcare experience, she worked in medical billing before. Glad it worked out but that was distressing and impacted my job.

I always laugh at the posters who are like “just hire a teen!” or “pay a SAHM.”

My SAHM friends/neighbors would look at me like I grew a second head if I wanted them to be my after school childcare. They are not working because they do not need the money. They are not going to want to be beholden to my childcare schedule even for an extra $100/day.

Hiring a teen is okay for one off babysitting but most of them are scheduled with all sorts of extracurriculars (see multiple threads in the college forum about needing hooks to get into college).

Most of this advice is akin to older propel talking about printing out resumes on nice paper when applications are mostly online. It’s totally out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2021, I had two kids in childcare. $600 per week. Now I have one. $500 per week.

People will have to quit. My bet is that is the design of the thing. There are fewer childcare spots now. I would be bullish on an expanded child tax credit, but I bet it doesn’t happen, rhetoric about family values aside.

No one will quit. People were paying for this before 2020, they will pay for it again.

You don’t think some people will quit or move away over a 40% increase in childcare costs, a housing boom that has made living close to work increasingly expensive, and a general increase in life stress due to commuting?

Many fed employees are like GS9 level and living outside the beltway. Ever increasing daycare bills and commuting costs may very well cause them to decide this isn’t financially worth it anymore. But you don’t really care if they get pushed out of the workforce do you?

Heyo, would have been nice if the Democrats in charge of local government hadn’t imposed zoning and other restrictions that resulted in skyrocketing housing costs and had focused on better transit and improving schools inside the beltway. NONE of that was a priority. DOGE takes blame for being hostile and ridiculous; but the practical and financial difficulties of living in this region are 100% Democrat made.

Are you really saying dem politicians haven’t tried to loosen zoning regulations and invest in public transit? Because I live in Arlington the home of Missing Middle and the “car diet” so I’d like to disagree. Not saying they handled those well, but let’s not act like republicans are this bastion of trying to make the DC area a better place for the middle class.

Also Musk and Ramaswamy aren’t even part of the government. What qualifications do they even have to make any of these suggestions? And why are we ignoring their significant conflicts of interest and stated intentions to basically burn it all down.

Too little too late obviously! And the feckless Dem politicians will crater to the Dem NIMBYs anyway.

Yes, DOGE is totally the fault of democrats. :eye roll:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the women in my company who tried to WFH and watch their preschoolers themselves in order to save on childcare were fired or forced to quit. Those of us who raised our children before the pandemic did not have it any easier than you all do. Wages have risen in our area commensurate with costs of housing, etc. Give me a break. You all had it easier than we did for a time, but now recess is over.

Not sure where you live, but wages haven't come close to keeping up with housing costs in the DMV. Child care costs have also skyrocketed compared to wages.

I do believe this. I could not have afforded FT childcare and to work FT if I had to do it today (at my equivalent salary when I had my kid).

Nor could I at the time, but I just had to make it work for a few years. I don't know why you all think it's harder now? Wait, I do. It's because you had it so easy during the pandemic. Just stop it. Stop using your employers to pay you while you also watch your children and probably work another job too. The big steal is about to end. Accept it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People forget that before COVID working from home agreements stated you must have childcare if you have minor children at home and you are working from home. That was relaxed during COVID because of labor shortages and the fact no one wanted to work. However that time has passed so you must have childcare at home or take PTO.

Thanks HR. That's not what this thread is about. Try reading.

The point is that a cushy govt job funded by tax payers shouldn't subsidize your childcare costs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid has been working from home since well before Covid. When she and her husband decided to have kids they lined up child care first - the grandparents when the kids were babies and a preschool/daycare once they were toddlers. It never occurred to her for a second that she could watch her kids at home herself and work at the same time. It’s not fair to anyone involved.

Time to return to reality, ladies.

Ugh this is such sexist garbage. As PPs have explained the issue isn’t people trying to WAH with a toddler. It’s tacking on the commuting hours to the workday which = needing even more childcare (this is essentially a sudden pay cut — after care for 2 kids can be $700+ per month).

Also my DH works in private sector IT. He and many other *men* (and women) in his field are fully remote. My DH has enjoyed the work/life balance and being home to coach the kids sports after school, he helps cook dinner, etc.

So it’s not just “ladies” who care about being around for their kids. Sorry your daughter couldn’t find a better father for her kids if you think this way.

You all are just missing the point completely. You have been spoiled and frankly got a little lazy. Here's an idea: stop prioritizing giant houses and big yards. If lessening your commute time is so important, move close to your jobs. Bonus: it's better for the environment. These are ideas that those of us who raised children while working FT before the pandemic did. If we got through it, so can you. Just make better decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dh is WFH for years now. Its amazing. He works 6-7:30. Then helps get kids off the school. Works again 8:30-4 and is done to get them from the bus and to an activity. I work 8:30-5 (very short commute) and come home and take another one to an activity. They do aftercare 2 days a week so I can have longer days. If he is RTO (unlikely) then it's goodbye to earlier activities and more aftercare and tired kids.

Yup. Kids will suffer a quality of life drop thanks to RTO. This brought to us by the party of “family values.”

Well, lots of people who value family believe those values are rooted in a parent being home with the children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are a lot of women employed FT in professional careers really saying they have no childcare? That's not what I've seen on DCUM. People are often talking about the extra time for commuting and difference of being out of the house. So like a 10yp may come home from school and not have childcare from 4-5pm because they can entertain themselves while parent works. But the parent may not want them actually alone in the house. It's a childcare gap. Same with the mornings before school opens - I would need beforecare to RTO and it might not be available this school year (already full). Or preschool may close at 5pm but with commute I'd get home later than that, etc.

WFH necessitates childcare if you have a real job but can be for fewer hours, or you cover the occasional days off and breaks without always taking PTO etc

I’d say telework saved me about 3-4 years of aftercare. But that’s for an older kid - he didn’t need any hands-on care while I was working.

Sorry to bump from early in the thread but this is the savings. There is a difference between being home and working 3-5 with an 11 year old versus leaving the 11 year old alone from 3-630 after my commute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid has been working from home since well before Covid. When she and her husband decided to have kids they lined up child care first - the grandparents when the kids were babies and a preschool/daycare once they were toddlers. It never occurred to her for a second that she could watch her kids at home herself and work at the same time. It’s not fair to anyone involved.

Time to return to reality, ladies.

Ugh this is such sexist garbage. As PPs have explained the issue isn’t people trying to WAH with a toddler. It’s tacking on the commuting hours to the workday which = needing even more childcare (this is essentially a sudden pay cut — after care for 2 kids can be $700+ per month).

Also my DH works in private sector IT. He and many other *men* (and women) in his field are fully remote. My DH has enjoyed the work/life balance and being home to coach the kids sports after school, he helps cook dinner, etc.

So it’s not just “ladies” who care about being around for their kids. Sorry your daughter couldn’t find a better father for her kids if you think this way.

You all are just missing the point completely. You have been spoiled and frankly got a little lazy. Here's an idea: stop prioritizing giant houses and big yards. If lessening your commute time is so important, move close to your jobs. Bonus: it's better for the environment. These are ideas that those of us who raised children while working FT before the pandemic did. If we got through it, so can you. Just make better decisions.

I lived next to a metro station with my toddlers and our home got broken into 3 times. It’s not about a big yard, genius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you bragging about how you don’t do stuff with your kids after school and how you spent plenty of childcare money/hours in traffic and bent over backwards to be in an office because your boss said so with one parent getting home late … this isn’t the flex you think it is.

To quote Varsity Blues: “I don’t want your life.”

Look, I don’t want FT RTO either. But the fact is you do need to plan your life, and it’s not a foregone conclusion that all parents need to dedicate all this time to after school activities. It’s not even clearly good for kids. Women placing these expectations on themselves (and it’s generally women) are going to drive themselves crazy. Your kid does not need to do travel soccer. They can do the school sports team and get themselves to and from there.

But if your vision IS that you spend from 4-7 shuttling your kid around, then yes, you need a better plan than perpetual FT WFH especially if you are a fed. Set your life up so you can prioritize what’s important to you. That may mean you and your DH flex in opposite directions, choosing a more modest home with a shorter commute, one parent going PT, or investing in childcare.

So prioritize what's important to you ... but not a job with WFH that makes the rest of your schedule possible and more pleasant. Choose jobs with flexible schedules or go part time ... but don't be full time 9-5 with WFH, that's entitled.

Do you hear yourselves?

I think what peeves me the most about the holier-than-thou lecturing is the assumption you thought of something I didn't. My middle schooler is in an alternative school without a bus or aftercare or these mythical school sports you speak of. We have two more years till she can walk to HS, something we planned for when we chose our house. Both DH and I worked from home before covid, something we negotiated - with accompanying pay cuts and limited promotion opportunities - to make this school work. Nobody in my house does travel sports, we just want to be able to get our kid to school in the morning, pick her up after, help with homework, and have dinner together at 6:00. But sure, tell me more about how I'm unreasonable and spoiled for not "prioritizing what's important to me" when I make career and childcare decisions.

I mean yes - planning to have to FT working parents but never have after school child care is entitled. Sorry!

DP but why? Why is wanting to spend afternoon with your kids and being home in time to cook dinner for your family more “entitled” than things like expecting to have good health insurance options, deciding you need a certain level of pay for the job to be worth your time, negotiating for things like transit benefits, expecting paid PTO, etc.?

The only difference is that telework has allowed many women (who were historically home with kids) to join the full time workforce. It’s internalized misogyny telling you that *this* is the thing that employees are entitled for wanting.

I don’t know what to tell you. 40 hrs/week is a standard schedule. there are a variety of ways to make it work and generally they involve paying for childcare.

Yes and for many many years, well before 2020, I made it work with telework. (And did pay for childcare when prior to them being school aged and I do still pay for summer camps, so I do pay for childcare during the hours I work).

There is no business reason for my working hours or location to change except for some billionaires who a) have personal financial interest in boosting the commercial real estate market and b) want to cause chaos to weaken government to their personal benefit.

I think it’s really weird actually that you are cheerleading these billionaire interests over wanting a better quality of life for working parents. But you’re entitled to your priorities …

Thank you for stating this so well. I'm also confused where people are coming from and I think the aggressive ones are really just trolling.

The icing on the cake is that given the opportunity, these billionaires would absolutely make decisions that would totally upend the lives of these PPs if it meant raising their net worths by a fraction of a percent.

It’s easy to not care about other people having to go back to an office, especially when you have schadenfreude because you have had to go into an office.

But the reality is that RTO for Feds is just one tiny part of DOGE. I somehow think people are not going to be happy when programs they rely on (even if unknowingly) get gutted or if mass layoffs and benefit cuts lead to a recession, or if public sector cuts lead to layoffs in tangentially related private sector jobs that affect their family, or if the relaxing of safety regulations leads to someone they love being harmed, or if their kid’s IEP gets repealed, or when their overtime gets cut, etc.

It’s naive to think DOGE is going to only affect the federal workforce (which doesn’t exist in a vacuum).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the women in my company who tried to WFH and watch their preschoolers themselves in order to save on childcare were fired or forced to quit. Those of us who raised our children before the pandemic did not have it any easier than you all do. Wages have risen in our area commensurate with costs of housing, etc. Give me a break. You all had it easier than we did for a time, but now recess is over.

Not sure where you live, but wages haven't come close to keeping up with housing costs in the DMV. Child care costs have also skyrocketed compared to wages.

I do believe this. I could not have afforded FT childcare and to work FT if I had to do it today (at my equivalent salary when I had my kid).

Nor could I at the time, but I just had to make it work for a few years. I don't know why you all think it's harder now? Wait, I do. It's because you had it so easy during the pandemic. Just stop it. Stop using your employers to pay you while you also watch your children and probably work another job too. The big steal is about to end. Accept it.

I paid for 2 kids in daycare prior to COVID and had a third with a gap during COVID. You really can’t compare the price and availability of childcare in the 2010s to now. The childcare market has adjusted and so you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People forget that before COVID working from home agreements stated you must have childcare if you have minor children at home and you are working from home. That was relaxed during COVID because of labor shortages and the fact no one wanted to work. However that time has passed so you must have childcare at home or take PTO.

Thanks HR. That's not what this thread is about. Try reading.

The point is that a cushy govt job funded by tax payers shouldn't subsidize your childcare costs

That “cushy” government job pays well below market rate for many employees with high levels of education. The flexibility *is* part of the compensation. If you effectively decrease people’s pay that will affect recruitment and retention. Which clearly you are ok with.

But literally everybody’s job is “subsidizing” aka paying for their life expenses in some way.

[Anonymous]

And you should be making more money now. That plus all of the money you saved over the last few years will be enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The issue for me is the 8-6 in office requirement. Right now, I work 8-5, pick up my kids, and then work a few more hours at home in the evening. Daycare closes at 6 and I have a 45 minute commute, so I'm not sure what I will go if the 8-6 requirement goes into effect.

Who’s required to work 8-6?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid has been working from home since well before Covid. When she and her husband decided to have kids they lined up child care first - the grandparents when the kids were babies and a preschool/daycare once they were toddlers. It never occurred to her for a second that she could watch her kids at home herself and work at the same time. It’s not fair to anyone involved.

Time to return to reality, ladies.

Ugh this is such sexist garbage. As PPs have explained the issue isn’t people trying to WAH with a toddler. It’s tacking on the commuting hours to the workday which = needing even more childcare (this is essentially a sudden pay cut — after care for 2 kids can be $700+ per month).

Also my DH works in private sector IT. He and many other *men* (and women) in his field are fully remote. My DH has enjoyed the work/life balance and being home to coach the kids sports after school, he helps cook dinner, etc.

So it’s not just “ladies” who care about being around for their kids. Sorry your daughter couldn’t find a better father for her kids if you think this way.

You all are just missing the point completely. You have been spoiled and frankly got a little lazy. Here's an idea: stop prioritizing giant houses and big yards. If lessening your commute time is so important, move close to your jobs. Bonus: it's better for the environment. These are ideas that those of us who raised children while working FT before the pandemic did. If we got through it, so can you. Just make better decisions.

No you are lazy with this repeated argument about McMansions, which is not true. People I know in the “big houses” are in the private sector. Most Feds I know live in smaller homes close-in (I’m an attorney and my fellow attorney coworkers live in places like Arlington, Falls Church, and Alexandria) because we’ve historically needed some proximity to DC. Or they have a private sector spouse to offset living inside the beltway so they can afford a bigger house. The ones who live farther out tend to be lower paid support staff and newer hires who missed the boat in living close-in, and they are not in big houses. RTO is going to wreak havoc on the middle class Feds.

My friends who live outside the beltway in bigger new construction homes tend to be in private sector consulting jobs based out of places like Reston/Ashburn etc.