Jump to content

Recommended Posts

BBC used to but closed it down around 8 years ago because it couldn't benefit the number of people who wanted to use it so they felt it was an unfair advantage for a privileged few. They switched to childcare vouchers instead justifying the closure by the fact the vouchers could benefit everyone.


Returning to work with onsite childcare was wonderful though - I could feed my baby at lunchtimes and the return to work overall was much easier and more practical.

We have a workplace nursery. It's run by Bright Horizons, but based in our office building. Apart from the obvious plus points of having a nursery at work, it also works out cheaper because my employer offers a salary sacrifice scheme, where nursery fees are deducted from your salary *before* tax. I have two children in nursery, so that really helps soften the financial blow.
When I worked for ILEA I used their nursery for my youngest. Fees were on a sliding scale and set at a percentage of gross monthly income. The first nursery was at County Hall and she went there from 4 months to about a year. I then transferred her over to the Bellenden Old School one, as not only could hubby pick her up, it gave me a chance to apply for promotion and I worked in Tower Hamlets. Both excellent, well used, long waiting lists. Took a variety of ages and income brackets. Daughter left rising 5 years to start school

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...