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

faceman

I see no issue with the parents suing the crèche. Breach of contract and legal obligations justifies it.

If it was me I’d be seeking full refund of all crèche fees paid + plus compensation for inconvenience, contribution toward seeking a new crèche facilities and compensation for requiring an interim short term childcare facilities while I seek something more long term.

markodaly

seligehgit wrote: »

I'm well aware of same thread and despise the prevalent compensation culture but dislike the idea of such conduct and lack of compliance with regulatory requirements going unpunished due to the powerlessness of a statutory body to shut down or severely sanction such creches.

The answer to that though is not knee jerk litigation. It should be strengthening the powers of those who should be doing their jobs in regulating this industry.

iamwhoiam

markodaly wrote: »

The answer to that though is not knee jerk litigation. It should be strengthening the powers of those who should be doing their jobs in regulating this industry.

And that should not be the parents job . Government should be ensuring our creches are safe places and putting regulations in place
Every creche should be regularly inspected and a certificate on full view .
Staff should be regulated and also their qualifications on view . And staff should be paid properly for the important job they do .
That should be the job of Tusla and overseen by the Department of Children

walshb

faceman wrote: »

I see no issue with the parents suing the crèche. Breach of contract and legal obligations justifies it.

If it was me I’d be seeking full refund of all crèche fees paid + plus compensation for inconvenience, contribution toward seeking a new crèche facilities and compensation for requiring an interim short term childcare facilities while I seek something more long term.

And that’s just utter greed.

Not at all worth thinking of anything that any of those people did that was at all worth something? None of those children received any care whatsoever?

You want to grab every single cent, and more?

This is the problem with society...

Surely you don’t need to be so greedy on wanting every cent and more. Is there a need to crucify and bankrupt here to feel that you’ve gotten “justice?”

mrslancaster

salmocab wrote: »

Crèches do have to be registered and their staff do need to have correct qualifications and vetting. Ultimately tusla are the biggest problem they are beyond useless. Most crèches are well rum places with people that have the kids well being at the fore, obviously they need to make money but without a good reputation it can only last so long for them.

Point taken salmocab but tbf the register on the tusla website does not provide very much useful information to parents and many parents may not even know it exists but I could be wrong about that.

For instance, it doesn't tell parents the numbers / ages of children allowed in the creche and so parents would not necessarily know if the staff/ratios were correct or even if the staff were vetted and qualified. The registration process only needs garda vetting for the owner / person with day to day responsibility of running the service.

The owner is supposed to get all staff vetted before they are hired but how are parents to know if they are vetted or not?

The register also lists any conditions related to the registration but that means parents then have to go and read all the relevant acts and regulations to understand what the conditions are :eek:.

IMO Tusla should issue a 'Registration/Fit for Purpose Certificate' or Pre-School Licence' to each service showing all the relevant details for example:

date cert was issued and how long it is valid for
the premises address (ie, if it's a chain then each location should have it's own cert)
owners name
company name if relevant
service registered name
max number of children and age groups allowed on the premises
required number of staff to work with the allowed number of children
types of service provided - full, sessional etc
hours of operation
details of any conditions attached to the registration

I'm sure there's other information that would be relevant to parents but something like the above would be a start.

IMO it should be a requirement that a current Cert / Licence is displayed where parents can see it and also information about staff qualifications / vetting.

Just my opinion

salmocab

mrslancaster wrote: »

Point taken salmocab but tbf the register on the tusla website does not provide very much useful information to parents and many parents may not even know it exists but I could be wrong about that.

For instance, it doesn't tell parents the numbers / ages of children allowed in the creche and so parents would not necessarily know if the staff/ratios were correct or even if the staff were vetted and qualified. The registration process only needs garda vetting for the owner / person with day to day responsibility of running the service.

The owner is supposed to get all staff vetted before they are hired but how are parents to know if they are vetted or not?

The register also lists any conditions related to the registration but that means parents then have to go and read all the relevant acts and regulations to understand what the conditions are :eek:.

IMO Tusla should issue a 'Registration/Fit for Purpose Certificate' or Pre-School Licence' to each service showing all the relevant details for example:

date cert was issued and how long it is valid for
the premises address (ie, if it's a chain then each location should have it's own cert)
owners name
company name if relevant
service registered name
max number of children and age groups allowed on the premises
required number of staff to work with the allowed number of children
types of service provided - full, sessional etc
hours of operation
details of any conditions attached to the registration

I'm sure there's other information that would be relevant to parents but something like the above would be a start.

IMO it should be a requirement that a current Cert / Licence is displayed where parents can see it and also information about staff qualifications / vetting.

Just my opinion

Well I’d say tusla are the last people that should be involved they are not fit for purpose. They should have been closed after the GERRY Mc cabe debacle.
Things like ratios depend on ages so maybe displaying the ratios permitted would be a start.

faceman

walshb wrote: »

And that’s just utter greed.

Not at all worth thinking of anything that any of those people did that was at all worth something? None of those children received any care whatsoever?

You want to grab every single cent, and more?

This is the problem with society...

Surely you don’t need to be so greedy on wanting every cent and more. Is there a need to crucify and bankrupt here to feel that you’ve gotten “justice?”

If you think that the families that were wronged in this situation are “the problem with society” then you really need to rethink your values. You are victim shaming.

You enter a contract with positive intention and in good faith. The issues highlighted in the show were not accidents or one offs, they were process and procedures on the crèche. Parents are paying between €10k to €14k a year for childcare and in turn should be getting a service that meets the legal and contractual obligations.

But if you want to make out that parents are at fault then keep singing that tune. No one is listening

walshb

faceman wrote: »

If you think that the families that were wronged in this situation are “the problem with society” then you really need to rethink your values. You are victim shaming.

You enter a contract with positive intention and in good faith. The issues highlighted in the show were not accidents or one offs, they were process and procedures on the crèche. Parents are paying between €10k to €14k a year for childcare and in turn should be getting a service that meets the legal and contractual obligations.

But if you want to make out that parents are at fault then keep singing that tune. No one is listening

I am saying the likes of your greedy attitude is what is wrong with society.

No ounce of thought for anyone but yourself. The creche is not one woman. Many people ran it. I’m Sure there were many decent people in it..

Take take take, and some more..would you even meet half way, maybe? Not be so greedy? I mean, surely the did do a lot of stuff “right” as well as the stuff they got wrong? That count for nothing to you?

Or sure, can’t the insurance cover it?

Seriously, just read over your demands...

You think it be fine if all the families wanted that as well?

Hannibal_Smith

walshb wrote: »

I am saying the likes of your greedy attitude is what is wrong with society.

No ounce of thought for anyone but yourself. The creche is not one woman. Many people ran it. I’m Sure there were many decent people in it..

Take take take, and some more..would you even meet half way, maybe? Not be so greedy?

Or sure, can’t the insurance cover it?

Seriously, just read over your demands...

You think it be fine if all the families wanted that as well?

This isn't something minor that people are rubbing their hands together thinking they're quids in. This is huge and you keep trivialising it by thinking it's just about watered down milk and instant noodles.

The parents suing is not what's wrong with society. What's wrong with society is this quick to judge attitude. Events in this creche have be taken seriously and dealt with fully. It can't be trivialised. What was happening was really serious.

The only person in this scenario that deserves any finger pointing is the woman who treated those kids the way she did. I was appalled by it, I can't begin to put myself in the shoes of the parents. Livid just wouldn't cover it.

walshb

You don’t think the demands that the poster listed aren’t just a little OTT here?

And if the issue is this woman, deal with her. Is there a need to bankrupt and grab every last cent from the whole company/organization?

Are there no other people associated with the creche worth considering before you jump in with all these demands?

Hannibal_Smith

walshb wrote: »

You don’t think the demands that the poster listed aren’t just a little OTT here?

And if the issue is this woman, deal with her. Is there a need to bankrupt and grab every last cent from the whole company/organization?

Are there no other people associated with the creche worth considering before you jump in with all these demands?

I would imagine that's down to Company law and the corporate veil. The parents contract was with the company not with the individual herself.

Walshb, I gotta be honest, if it was my kid... I think I'd rip her apart

salmocab

walshb wrote: »

Are there no other people associated with the creche worth considering before you jump in with all these demands?

If staff that have studied childcare thought that the things they were being told to do to some of those children was acceptable then I think they are better off working elsewhere. It’s very easy to get work in that industry so they were by no means stuck there.

As for the woman in the unlikely event she ends up penniless then really I doubt anyone will be too worried about her. She did what she did in full knowledge of what she was at and I doubt she will ever get what she deserves.

walshb

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I would imagine that's down to Company law and the corporate veil. The parents contract was with the company not with the individual herself.

Walshb, I gotta be honest, if it was my kid... I think I'd rip her apart

I know what you are saying.

My view is that there are scores people here in the Hyde and Seek creches.

Seriously, is all their good and honest and decent and caring work just going to swept away because of some issues, some more serious than others?

I think it really poor that we can be encouraging or condoning a complete all out monetary attacks on the company here. Does it have to be so very committed? Let’s not kid ourselves here. This is about financial compensation and monetary gain.

Do we have to wipe this creche out because of one woman? And in doing so, create a complete fear across all areas of childcare, that people can sue here, there and everywhere for whatever they deem unacceptable?

I think it’s a very dangerous precedent..

The whole industry could crumble, or at least be very damaged. Huge insurance increases leading to nothing but costly price increases, or a lack of facilities full stop.

I am not saying people cannot have their day in court. Just that we really need to be careful on how we go about it. There are ramifications and effects.

faceman

walshb wrote: »

I know what you are saying.

My view is that there are scores people here in the Hyde and Seek creches.

Seriously, is all their good and honest and decent and caring work just going to swept away because of some issues, some more serious than others?

I think it really poor that we can be encouraging or condoning a complete all out monetary attacks on the company here. Does it have to be so very committed? Let’s not kid ourselves here. This is about financial compensation and monetary gain.

Do we have to wipe this creche out because of one woman? And in doing so, create a complete fear across all areas of childcare, that people can sue here, there and everywhere for whatever they deem unacceptable?

I think it’s a very dangerous precedent..

The whole industry could crumble, or at least be very damaged. Huge insurance increases leading to nothing but costly price increases, or a lack of facilities full stop.

I am not saying people cannot have their day in court. Just that we really need to be careful on how we go about it. There are ramifications and effects.

I kind of get what you're saying with the bit I've highlighted in bold. I mentioned earlier in the thread that what Tulsa should be able to do is have powers similar to that of a Receivership in business, whereby they can take control of a creche where there are serious issues and run it as a going concern until new owners can be sourced or the issues are rectified. I don't believe closing down creches are the best solution. That approach would eliminate the need for much of the financial compensation I originally outlined.

Hannibal_Smith

walshb wrote: »

I know what you are saying.

My view is that there are scores people here in the Hyde and Seek creches.

Seriously, is all their good and honest and decent and caring work just going to swept away because of some issues, some more serious than others?

I think it really poor that we can be encouraging or condoning a complete all out monetary attacks on the company here. Does it have to be so very committed? Let’s not kid ourselves here. This is about financial compensation and monetary gain.

Do we have to wipe this creche out because of one woman? And in doing so, create a complete fear across all areas of childcare, that people can sue here, there and everywhere for whatever they deem unacceptable?

I think it’s a very dangerous precedent..

The whole industry could crumble, or at least be very damaged. Huge insurance increases leading to nothing but costly price increases, or a lack of facilities full stop.

I am not saying people cannot have their day in court. Just that we really need to be careful on how we go about it. There are ramifications and effects.

I don't think she should have been allowed open a creche in the first place, with her track record.

Hannibal_Smith

faceman wrote: »

I kind of get what you're saying with the bit I've highlighted in bold. I mentioned earlier in the thread that what Tulsa should be able to do is have powers similar to that of a Receivership in business, whereby they can take control of a creche where there are serious issues and run it as a going concern until new owners can be sourced or the issues are rectified. I don't believe closing down creches are the best solution. That approach would eliminate the need for much of the financial compensation I originally outlined.

I like that idea, but I think it depends on what the problem is and how they directly impact the kids.

There seems to be a problem with disclosure. No parents are notified until an investigation is completed. If you look at the reports on the Tusla site, they carry out an inspection, identify any areas of non compliance and the creche seem to respond with proposals. End of report. There doesn't seem to a be a follow up.

So at what point would you send a receiver type crew in? And if you can't tell parents until an investigation is complete, you'd have to be very careful about whether you're setting off alarm bells too soon.

mrslancaster

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I don't think she should have been allowed open a creche in the first place, with her track record.

From reports in IT it seems the owner of the creche has been in court on several occasions for different breaches of regulations. The most serious one was when a child was left behind during an outing to a local park.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/creche-owner-has-appeared-in-court-in-past-over-issues-around-childcare-1.3966384

You'd think those fines and court appearances would make the company ultra careful and make sure they were not in breach of anything again

Jump_In_Jack

givyjoe wrote: »

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?

It’s great news because the evil woman profited by lying to people about taking care of their children.
She deserves to be stripped of any profits from this scam of a business.

Furthermore, any bleeding hearts going into moronic leaps of logic how this is a bad thing need to wind their neck in and cop themselves on.

The legal system is not perfect but the least that can be done here is to hold this woman to account as far as possible so that this is a warning for any other like-minded people who think they can get away with profiting from mistreating children.

givyjoe

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

It’s great news because the evil woman profited by lying to people about taking care of their children.
She deserves to be stripped of any profits from this scam of a business.

Furthermore, any bleeding hearts going into moronic leaps of logic how this is a bad thing need to wind their neck in and cop themselves on.

The legal system is not perfect but the least that can be done here is to hold this woman to account as far as possible so that this is a warning for any other like-minded people who think they can get away with profiting from mistreating children.

I think you could probably do with a dose of your own advice re: winding your neck in. Great news? Really? You dont see any potential negatives re: floods of people trying sue creches for all sorts in the future? Over ratios sue, don't get what you consider to be appropriate food, sue.

Ridiculous, hyperbolic, post.

Jump_In_Jack

givyjoe wrote: »

I think you could probably do with a dose of your own advice re: winding your neck in. Great news? Really? You dont see any potential negatives re: floods of people trying sue creches for all sorts in the future? Over ratios sue, don't get what you consider to be appropriate food, sue.

Ridiculous, hyperbolic, post.

In all fairness why are you letting your imagination run away with itself, this is an isolated case, if all similar cases are litigated then that is justice, any cases that are not similar then it doesn’t follow that there would be a need for litigation.
You’re literally arguing about something that has not nor will ever happen.
Get a grip of reality and cop yourself on.

Lillyfae

givyjoe wrote: »

I think you could probably do with a dose of your own advice re: winding your neck in. Great news? Really? You dont see any potential negatives re: floods of people trying sue creches for all sorts in the future? Over ratios sue, don't get what you consider to be appropriate food, sue.

Ridiculous, hyperbolic, post.

Pot, kettle, black. They're not talking about a child being given the wrong coat going home, they're talking about toddlers being assaulted and actually abandoned in public places . Over ratio they should be fined/ closed by Tusla- what do you think the ratios are there for?? Appropriate food could mean things that they don't have known allergies to.

buckwheat

They're not happy

Hyde and Seek set to appeal after Tusla orders 4 creches to close by end of December

https://jrnl.ie/4909857

neris

You wouldnt be happy if you were about to loose your business

buckwheat wrote: »

They're not happy

Hyde and Seek set to appeal after Tusla orders 4 creches to close by end of December

https://jrnl.ie/4909857

salmocab

neris wrote: »

You wouldnt be happy if you were about to loose your business

It’s the parents that will struggle, very hard to get places as it is, maybe dozens of kids looking for places in the same area that is likely already short of places.

buckwheat

salmocab wrote: »

It’s the parents that will struggle, very hard to get places as it is, maybe dozens of kids looking for places in the same area that is likely already short of places.

I'd have to be seriously ****ing struggling before I'd consider leaving any of my kids with that shower.

GreeBo

Listening to Joe Duffy today (I know!) I was staggered at the crèche owners complaining that Tulsa was forcing them to get a fire cert.
Some of these were converted houses with no fire safety and 20 kids

salmocab

GreeBo wrote: »

Listening to Joe Duffy today (I know!) I was staggered at the crèche owners complaining that Tulsa was forcing them to get a fire cert.
Some of these were converted houses with no fire safety and 20 kids

Tusla came along this year and brought in a pile of new things, the fire certs are actually very hard to get and cost a lot of money, the upgrade works are going to put a lot of places out of business and a lot of parents are going to be left in the lurch. Crèches don’t have tens of thousands to come up to standards that weren’t there when they opened. Next year will see childcare in the news constantly and it won’t be good for parents.

mrslancaster

salmocab wrote: »

Tusla came along this year and brought in a pile of new things, the fire certs are actually very hard to get and cost a lot of money, the upgrade works are going to put a lot of places out of business and a lot of parents are going to be left in the lurch. Crèches don’t have tens of thousands to come up to standards that weren’t there when they opened. Next year will see childcare in the news constantly and it won’t be good for parents.

In fairness, most parents would want to be sure their kids were in a safe place so if a fire cert is needed then its part of the business costs for the creche owner. It's also for the staff working in the creche - they need to have a safe place to work. We used a creche over twenty years ago and they had their fire cert displayed on the wall so it was needed then.

Insurance companies should not provide insurance cover without a fire cert and if no insurance then the business can't operate. If there was a fire and a child or an employee was hurt it could be very serious so better to have the necessary checks beforehand IMO.

I don't know any business that doesn't need a fire cert whether they are open to the public or not. Afaik every workplace has to comply with H&S standards including fire safety.

salmocab

mrslancaster wrote: »

In fairness, most parents would want to be sure their kids were in a safe place so if a fire cert is needed then its part of the business costs for the creche owner. It's also for the staff working in the creche - they need to have a safe place to work. We used a creche over twenty years ago and they had their fire cert displayed on the wall so it was needed then.

Insurance companies should not provide insurance cover without a fire cert and if no insurance then the business can't operate. If there was a fire and a child or an employee was hurt it could be very serious so better to have the necessary checks beforehand IMO.

I don't know any business that doesn't need a fire cert whether they are open to the public or not. Afaik every workplace has to comply with H&S standards including fire safety.

They have to have their buildings certified by engineers for tusla, in the past they built a building to spec and then had their fire alarm maintained, now a lot of them are going to be put out of business because they have to bring the place up to newer standards that’s if they can even get someone to do the cert, there is going to be a massive shortage over the next few years and cost increases on the back of this, your right that they should be safe but it’s a huge cost to throw at them.

mrslancaster

salmocab wrote: »

They have to have their buildings certified by engineers for tusla, in the past they built a building to spec and then had their fire alarm maintained, now a lot of them are going to be put out of business because they have to bring the place up to newer standards that’s if they can even get someone to do the cert, there is going to be a massive shortage over the next few years and cost increases on the back of this, your right that they should be safe but it’s a huge cost to throw at them.

I wonder if the fire that destroyed the schools in Dublin in October has made Tusla focus on this now?

IIRC it took six units of the Fire Service to get the fire under control and the school was empty when it happened. It could have been very serious if it started during the day.