RTÉ Investigates tonight (21:35): Crèches, Behind Closed Doors

DavyD_83

skinny90 wrote: »

So what? The figures be sound disingenuous and dishonest but it does not justify the owners decision to run a crèche the way it was seen in the document.

This owner is a pure and utter cowboy who has a clear disregard for those babies and kids all for shaving down on her own day to day costs

Pretty sure the point is that embellishing your evidence only actually weakens your point and gives people excuses, or other things to focus on.
So people end up arguimg about how much profit she made from mistreating kids, rather than addressing the mistreatment. Or somehow spend pages arguing about whether parents should use crèches...

skinny90

DavyD_83 wrote: »

Pretty sure the point is that embellishing your evidence only actually weakens your point and gives people excuses, or other things to focus on.
So people end up arguimg about how much profit she made from mistreating kids, rather than addressing the mistreatment. Or somehow spend pages arguing about whether parents should use cres...

Fair enough I had not read through the threads just from the last few comments:o


My last points still stands tho

One eyed Jack

DavyD_83 wrote: »

Pretty sure the point is that embellishing your evidence only actually weakens your point and gives people excuses, or other things to focus on.
So people end up arguimg about how much profit she made from mistreating kids, rather than addressing the mistreatment. Or somehow spend pages arguing about whether parents should use crèches...

It’s true that embellishing evidence does weaken a persons point, and it does give people other things to focus on, but, the mistreatment of children wasn’t the only issue raised by the programme either, and it isn’t the only issue in the childcare provision industry either. The issue of unqualified and underpaid staff is one that has also been going on for years. It’s one that is often overlooked in these discussions, so just to put some perspective on it -


Early childcare workers are struggling on wages of just €9 per hour


The committee was told that 70-80pc of the income of a pre-school goes on wages and the rest covers overheads associated with operating the business - including rates, mortgage, insurance, maintenance and equipment.


There are about 25,000 women working in childcare in Ireland (it’s an industry dominated by women), and the average salary for a childcare worker in Dublin is €23,852. But, that’s not the full story either. Over 50% of childcare staff are on part-time hours which means they might only earn half, or even quarter of that amount -

Wages in the Early Years Sector


That said, the Pobal findings still require scrutiny and contextualisation to get a true picture of wages in the sector. For example, the average wage per hour across the sector is €11.93, which is barely above the Living Wage[1], but Pobal also found that half of all staff working in the early years sector do so on a part-time basis.[2] This means their annual take home pay is significantly less than the already low base identified. The impact of part-time hours on the earnings of early years assistants in the sector is frankly appalling. At €11.21 per hour, early years assistants in ECCE have a slightly higher average wage than their non-ECCE counterparts on €10.55, but for many their annual salaries will look like this:

Single ECCE session per day 15 hrs per week x €11.21 per hr x 38 week contract = €6,390 per annum

Two ECCE sessions per day 30 hrs per week x €11.21 per hr x 38 week contract = €12,780 per annum


I’d be interested to see how many of those women are able to afford a mortgage, or to pay childcare, or to be able to pay for their pension or private healthcare on those wages, because it looks to me like those women are simply being exploited.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s true that embellishing evidence does weaken a persons point, and it does give people other things to focus on, but, the mistreatment of children wasn’t the only issue raised by the programme either, and it isn’t the only issue in the childcare provision industry either. The issue of unqualified and underpaid staff is one that has also been going on for years. It’s one that is often overlooked in these discussions, so just to put some perspective on it -


Early childcare workers are struggling on wages of just €9 per hour


The committee was told that 70-80pc of the income of a pre-school goes on wages and the rest covers overheads associated with operating the business - including rates, mortgage, insurance, maintenance and equipment.


There are about 25,000 women working in childcare in Ireland (it’s an industry dominated by women), and the average salary for a childcare worker in Dublin is €23,852. But, that’s not the full story either. Over 50% of childcare staff are on part-time hours which means they might only earn half, or even quarter of that amount -

Wages in the Early Years Sector


That said, the Pobal findings still require scrutiny and contextualisation to get a true picture of wages in the sector. For example, the average wage per hour across the sector is €11.93, which is barely above the Living Wage[1], but Pobal also found that half of all staff working in the early years sector do so on a part-time basis.[2] This means their annual take home pay is significantly less than the already low base identified. The impact of part-time hours on the earnings of early years assistants in the sector is frankly appalling. At €11.21 per hour, early years assistants in ECCE have a slightly higher average wage than their non-ECCE counterparts on €10.55, but for many their annual salaries will look like this:

Single ECCE session per day 15 hrs per week x €11.21 per hr x 38 week contract = €6,390 per annum

Two ECCE sessions per day 30 hrs per week x €11.21 per hr x 38 week contract = €12,780 per annum


I’d be interested to see how many of those women are able to afford a mortgage, or to pay childcare, or to be able to pay for their pension or private healthcare on those wages, because it looks to me like those women are simply being exploited.

This is why the childcare sector has one highest staff turnover rates and then take into account the amount of child care workers on CE schemes for 2-3 years

stampydmonkey

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s true that embellishing evidence does weaken a persons point, and it does give people other things to focus on, but, the mistreatment of children wasn’t the only issue raised by the programme either, and it isn’t the only issue in the childcare provision industry either. The issue of unqualified and underpaid staff is one that has also been going on for years. It’s one that is often overlooked in these discussions, so just to put some perspective on it -


Early childcare workers are struggling on wages of just €9 per hour


The committee was told that 70-80pc of the income of a pre-school goes on wages and the rest covers overheads associated with operating the business - including rates, mortgage, insurance, maintenance and equipment.


There are about 25,000 women working in childcare in Ireland (it’s an industry dominated by women), and the average salary for a childcare worker in Dublin is €23,852. But, that’s not the full story either. Over 50% of childcare staff are on part-time hours which means they might only earn half, or even quarter of that amount -

Wages in the Early Years Sector


That said, the Pobal findings still require scrutiny and contextualisation to get a true picture of wages in the sector. For example, the average wage per hour across the sector is €11.93, which is barely above the Living Wage[1], but Pobal also found that half of all staff working in the early years sector do so on a part-time basis.[2] This means their annual take home pay is significantly less than the already low base identified. The impact of part-time hours on the earnings of early years assistants in the sector is frankly appalling. At €11.21 per hour, early years assistants in ECCE have a slightly higher average wage than their non-ECCE counterparts on €10.55, but for many their annual salaries will look like this:

Single ECCE session per day 15 hrs per week x €11.21 per hr x 38 week contract = €6,390 per annum

Two ECCE sessions per day 30 hrs per week x €11.21 per hr x 38 week contract = €12,780 per annum


I’d be interested to see how many of those women are able to afford a mortgage, or to pay childcare, or to be able to pay for their pension or private healthcare on those wages, because it looks to me like those women are simply being exploited.

That's a great post.

Hannibal_Smith

Where does the state investment go then? Women being exploited, but the parents handing over thousands a month are also being swindled. Who is doing the exploitation and swindling?

Hannibal_Smith

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Where does the state investment go then? Women being exploited, but the parents handing over thousands a month are also being swindled. Who is doing the exploitation and swindling?

Ah. Ah. Ah. State gives subsidy to crèche for parents. 'Yay; cheaper childcare', parents think. However, crèche simultaneously puts up cost of childcare by around the same amount and that's the FG way to "help parents", just like the FF way to "help" house purchasers was to remove stamp duty in the full knowledge the developers would merely increase their prices to take that difference.

And heaven forfend that you might think your child would be safer with a well-regarded, qualified local childminder than in a crèche - no ECCE grant there at all. So this government effectively gives you a financial incentive to send your child to a crèche/denies you the same financial assistance if you find a childminder. More evidence that ECCE is about helping business rather than about helping parents.

In the ECCE grant we basically have yet another piss-poor transfer of wealth from the Irish taxpayer to private companies. This product of neoliberal free market economics is happening across society, from housebuilding to hospital building to broadband provision. The government could do this in a way which actually benefits parents - e.g. tax credits - but its real purpose is to help businesses running childcare rather than to help parents.

Don't be surprised if the childcare industry is being tapped into for a Fine Gael fundraiser soon, just as this post showed the legal industry has recently been tapped into.

LirW

The problem with childminders is that a large number of them operate cash in hand and are not registered. And where there is no registration there is no grant, if one would exist.
A lady running a small pre-school told me that the government is now acting on it pushing childminders to register and rightfully so - but only a small number does and the rest simply stops doing it.
It's just as hard to find a decent fully vetted and registered childminder with availability.

camz09

Has anybody addressed the fact it's called Hyde and Seek when there's no one by the name of Hyde that owns it afaik, and clearly a Davy family business. Mr Hyde = Anne Davy more like It's insane how she's gotten away with it for so long, she has a record dating back to 2005 and was allowed time and again to just change names of her facilities and continue on. Childcare is nothing but for profit venture for her. She literally discourages eye contact with a child just to not be inconvenienced.

pummice

What is the legal basis for PrimeTime going into a business using undercover cameras? Usually recording somebody without their knowledge is illegal. And if PrimeTime can do it, why cant Tusla do it?

Sheepdish1

TheBoyConor wrote: »

To the idiotic statements of some demanding that those creches should be given an immediate closure order in the same fashion as an FSAI audit on a restaurant you have to remember this... A restaurant can close and not really inconvenience anyone apart from the management and owners until the corrective actions are in place. A creche or preschool could be looking after 100 or more children. An immediate closure would have major ramifications to a lot of people such as it results in 100 mothers mainly not being able to go to work for a few weeks because there'd be literally no hope of finding another creche.

The way those children were being looked after is extremely dangerous. At one stage there was a stage ratio of 1:18, most of these appeared to be babies or toddlers. The legal ratio is 1:3 for safety reasons. How can someone safely supervise that many very young babies or toddlers safely? What is one started choking? What if there was an emergency ?

At one stage the manager could be heard telling the person to stop comforting a baby, to leave it on the floor which is unnecessary in that situation.

They were feeding 12c noodles to babies and advertising veg and chicken etc on menu. Diluting milk means the parents think they are getting x amount of milk but in fact they are not. She was telling staff to make up activities the babies were doing. At another stage a baby was left in a high chair for 40 minutes when it clearly wanted to be out of it.

Apart from the poor childcare being given to the children there are other serious concerns. Cots being crammed into rooms that are being used as storage with no access to the babies is dangerous.

Cots blocking fire exits is dangerous. Shutters being closed over windows with a place full of children is massive fire hazard.

SIDS and safe sleep is very important and should be taken seriously. Ann Davey was placing babies on their tummies, holding a blanket over face and placing her hand on a babies head to try get her to sleep at a schedule that suits her. Other babies they were quite rough with.

The point people are making is the FSAI will close down a kitchen but TUSLA can’t close down a crèche that is operating very dangerously to very vulnerable members of society.

It absolutely should be shut down or new management implemented to mind the children until other places can be sourced.

A school wouldn’t be allowed to operate like that. Crèches shouldn’t be allowed to either

Sheepdish1

Boggles wrote: »

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They have video evidence of child neglect, be nothing hard to prove there.

Have they?

Under the legal definition of child neglect.

I'm not so sure they do.

I'm not in anyway defending her, but I don't see grounds to meet a criminal threshold.

I wonder if there are grounds for criminal proceedings. I wonder if the he lack of supervision and the lack of safety could be grounds for prosecution.

GreeBo

Gatling wrote: »

Actually no you shouldn't ,

A parent is not employed by the setting so Vetting had nothing to do with it .
It's more to so with it can cause stress for the child especially if the child thinks mammy or daddy will be wandering in and out willy nilly ,
It causes stress and or upsets other kids who they many be expecting mammy and daddy to be there also ,
It can cause staff to worry about being watched or questioned by a parent /s while trying to do their job as child careers.
Parents are only happily to tell the world how they seen one child not theirs do this and do that In a setting.

These are just a few of the reasons settings want the child brought to the door and handed over then say goodbye and let them get on with their job.
If you had concerns you would need to talk to the service manager as to why you particularly wanted to hover around your child's setting

If seeing your child before collecting them is obtrusive and hovering them I'm sorry but you are (somehow!) doing it wrong

GreeBo

nthclare wrote: »

The first three years of a child's lives experience, has a big impact on how they perceive humanity and their safety in their surroundings.

Now if a parent willingly and knowingly sends their child into a place in which the child isn't happy for most of the time then I think there's something seriously wrong.

All kid's will have bad day's the odd tantrums here and there, but I don't agree with an aul excuse of , what else do you expect us to do.

If in doubt take them out and if you put your careers in front of the kid's well it'll bite you back in the future.

After 3 onwards it's probably time to put up reasonable boundaries and teach them right from wrong, let them be confident and creative but draw the line between right and wrong....

Parenting is hard and my son's no angel but I'm glad I put the work into it at his early years.

I thank my sister for the help, there was times when I felt resentful and told her mind her business....

I'm not sexist but women are great mother's and father's have their own way.

Getting the balance ain't easy either...

But the vast majority of kids are very happy in the vast majority of creches!

GreeBo

TheBoyConor wrote: »

A parent could also be an abuser or an potential paedohpile.

So could the staff.
Now what?

Gatling

GreeBo wrote: »

So could the staff.
Now what?

Hence why there is Vetting and controlled access

Sheepdish1

Gatling wrote: »

GreeBo wrote: »

So could the staff.
Now what?

Hence why there is Vetting and controlled access

But in this crèche there wasn’t vetting

GreeBo

Gatling wrote: »

Hence why there is Vetting and controlled access

How does vetting stop an unknown staff pedo any better than no vetting stopping an unknown parent pedo?

Geuze

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Where does the state investment go then? Women being exploited, but the parents handing over thousands a month are also being swindled. Who is doing the exploitation and swindling?

The firm expects high prices and high profits, like many Irish firms.

What about moving away from for-profits towards more community-based not-for-profit childcare?

Jump_In_Jack

Parents are suing the crèche.
Great news, hopefully they'll bankrupt the evil witch.

seligehgit

Great news.

givyjoe

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

Parents are suing the crèche.
Great news, hopefully they'll bankrupt the evil witch.

seligehgit wrote: »

Great news.

How is that great news? You do realise she is already extremely wealthy and this is a limited company is it not? The poorly paid staff are the ones who are going to be hit the most. Surely the best outcome is a change of management and a creche that adheres to practice in the future, rather than suing it out of existence and magically hoping that solves the problem. Links were sued after their expose, they're still going. Do you reckon that's solved the problems there?

ebbsy

Insurance will pay out.

c.p.w.g.w

Is it possible to sue Anne personally so assault of a minor

walshb

I guess it’s a warning to society..

No matter if in a creche or at home, our children can, if they so choose get the cheque books out

Lil Johnny turns 18...

Hits the lawyer...

I wana sue mammy and daddy.

For years I was brought to mackers to eat that sub standard inhuman rubbish.

Was never brought to the beach or the park. Mammy and daddy just plonked me on the couch to watch repeats of Peppa Pig all day, while they surfed social media posting about what they just left in the toilet bowl, and what they were having for dinner later..

Worst of all, Mr. Lawyer...from time to time, daddy raised his voice and berated me, and mammy even threatened me with the wooden spoon..

Oh, and almost forgot, at least once a month I had nasty little nappy rash because mammy and daddy couldn’t get offline in time to change my happy..

I don’t know how I made it this far, but I reckon I’m due some recompense for these years of hardship..

walshb

seligehgit wrote: »

Great news.

Ridiculous news.

What is with society today and any type of “wrong” and it’s grab as much as we can...

Seriously, are these young children somehow scarred for life, or god forbid, could they maybe survive this?

The thoughts of any children being abused makes me sick, but what is abuse?

Floodgates wide open here to term abuse as almost anything perceived as negative..

My son is in a Creche, and if the worst to happen him was some sub standard noodles and milk I’d consider myself lucky..

Even a cross word here and there, yes, might upset me, but running to a solicitor to sue? Where o where is there any context in society?

How on earth can people think of creating and opening Creches with this level of nonsense as regards compo and courts...

They won’t be able to open/operate..even if cases are unsuccessful, the very threat, alone that you could be sued for any misdemeanor will really break them.

seligehgit

walshb wrote: »

Ridiculous news.

What is with society today and any type of “wrong” and it’s grab as much as we can...

Seriously, are these young children somehow scarred for life, or god forbid, could they maybe survive this?

The thoughts of any children being abused makes me sick, but what is abuse?

Floodgates wide open here to term abuse as almost anything perceived as negative..

My son is in a Creche, and if the worst to happen him was some sub standard noodles and milk I’d consider myself lucky..

Even a cross word here and there, yes, might upset me, but running to a solicitor to sue? Where o where is there any context in society?

How on earth can people think of creating and opening Creche’s with this level of nonsense as regards compo and courts...

They won’t be able to open/operate..even if cases are unsuccessful, the very threat, alone that you could be sued for any misdemeanor will really break them.

When you have as toothless a statutory body as Tusla inspecting these creches the symbolism of the parents taking legal action is positive optics.

The conduct witnessed on that Prime Time Investigates was totally unacceptable in this day and age.

iamwhoiam

walshb wrote: »

Ridiculous news.

What is with society today and any type of “wrong” and it’s grab as much as we can...

Seriously, are these young children somehow scarred for life, or god forbid, could they maybe survive this?

The thoughts of any children being abused makes me sick, but what is abuse?

Floodgates wide open here to term abuse as almost anything perceived as negative..

My son is in a Creche, and if the worst to happen him was some sub standard noodles and milk I’d consider myself lucky..

Even a cross word here and there, yes, might upset me, but running to a solicitor to sue? Where o where is there any context in society?

How on earth can people think of creating and opening Creches with this level of nonsense as regards compo and courts...

They won’t be able to open/operate..even if cases are unsuccessful, the very threat, alone that you could be sued for any misdemeanor will really break them.

So would you be ok with him in a cot in a room with the fire exist blocked ? Would you be ok with him being held down and his face covered ? Watered milk wont scar him , fear and anxiety might

walshb

iamwhoiam wrote: »

So would you be ok with him in a cot in a room with the fire exist blocked ? Would you be ok with him being held down and his face covered ? Watered milk wont scar him , fear and anxiety might

No. But I wouldn’t running to solicitors suing. I’d remove him, and try make his experiences safer..

Carlsberg don’t do creches..

My point is about how many today seems to blame everyone else, and in doing so, seek monetary gain from anything and everything..

The Creche has been exposed. Parents fully aware now. Is it not enough that they are aware, and can make decisions now on where to next for their children?

30 families now feel the need to return and get as much out of this as possible?

Hannibal_Smith

walshb wrote: »

My point is about how many today seems to blame everyone else, and in doing so, seek monetary gain from anything and everything..

Blaming every one else? Are they not blaming the owner of the creche? Who else are they blaming?