Printable View
I'm sorry to say that we have lost all the amendments we requested.
Liberals and NDP voted down every, single amendment brought forth by Garfield and Gila. Every single one.
Get ready for some big changes and if you're one of the many about to lose your business, I'm so very sorry.
We're still fighting and the Ombudsman is assisting us at this point. Will let everyone know when I know more.
Thanks for all that you've been doing. Thanks for the update.
It's done, been passed by the committee. The house still has to vote on it, but that's largely a formality. Hold on guys, come January 1st, 2016, we are all officially screwed.
So sorry for everybody that this will affect.
It seems like it is official? When will the final vote be?
Indeed a very sad day for all families with young children and home daycare providers in Ontario!
:( So where does that leave us?
Does that mean it would still be 5 daycare kids for unlicensed care but your own children count and you follow the rule of 1 under 1 ....2 under 2 etc
and licensed care can have 6?
there is no 1 under 1 rule. The new restrictions are:
-age of a daycare child has been raised from 10 to age 13. Now a child under 13 in your care will count as one of your total 5
-unlicensed providers can have a total of 5 children, including their own under age 6
-all providers must follow the 2 under 2 rule
-agency providers will be allowed to have 6 children, but must have agency approval for square footage and provider capability, it isn't automatic.
These are set to come into effect January 1st, 2016.
There was ONE amendment that the Liberals made, but it is very unclear. The LIB MPP that read it said that a provider's own children under age 6 that are enrolled in a full-time JK or SK program won't count "on school calendar days." We have no idea what exactly this means. It could refer to only B/A school on regular days, it could extend to PA days, xmas break, and spring break, it probably won't extend to summer break (because then the child would never count in the numbers, and obviously they will sometimes, because otherwise the Bill would have been amended to count providers own children under age 4, or providers own children that are not in school, etc). The only thing to do with that is to wait for clarification from the liberals as to exactly what that means.
Thanks to everyone who worked so xhard fighting for this. I, like many others are thankful for my peers who came together to protest and fight for what we believe to be a necessary change in this bill and I am sincerely dissappointed that in a country like Canada that we clearly don't have a government that is willing to allow their voters to actually have a say in how ouur country is run.
This changing the age of a child from under 10 to under 13 is ridiculous. My son is 12 Xmas eve this year and stays home alone and is legally allowed too. He babysits for short periods of time and can cook a frickin basic meal without supervision and does laundry and other chores independently to contribute to the household. But...he will now have to count in my numbers I assume???? That is some kind of BS right there. Absolute nonsense. Someone earlier mentioned Jan 2016?? Well, he'd be 13 just at that time and wouldn't be an issue and thank goodness I'm set up to be quitting the biz and going to school full time. I was likely one of a few that thinks there should be heavy regulations and support aome kind of limitations including ratios although I don't agree with Bill 10's outline, but honestly where do they come up with this stuff. It blows my mind that these muppets are running the country and can legally give us a massive middle finger and dismiss all of our concerns, which are not only valid but also things that can be explained and proven to not increase safety, and then have the ordacity to claim that we have a say in how our country is run. This is a perfect example of how we just don't at all.
Bright Sparks, your own 12 year old son will not count in your numbers. Only if your child is under the age of 6. DCK's who are under 13 will count as well. Not your own child under 13.
Thanks for the clarification :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Other Mummy
I am not quite following all of this. why does it seem so bad if this bill passes because it's hard to stay at just two under two? I'm not following
It's not just 2 under 2. Do you have any young children of your own?? If they are under age 6, they will take up one of your 5 spots. Do you have any daycare children who are 10 or over, just come after school? Right now they don't count in your numbers, but this will make them count until the age of 13. So pretty much all B/A school older kids, who's parents put them in daycare because they're not ready to be home alone, will now be forced to.
Also, the majority of people looking for care are parents of one-year-olds, as that's when mat leave ends. I know multiple caregivers in my city alone that have 3 or 4 under 2 right now. I had 3 under 2 at this time last year. All of those providers will have to terminate 1, 2, or more infants. Those kids will have NOWHERE to go. There was no provision made for parents of multiples. If people have twins, they will have to find a daycare with A) 2 spots currently open, and B) both of those will have to be the 2 infant spots. That will be almost impossible. Those parents will have to split up their babies. Heaven forbid someone has 2 kids close in age, like I did with my older 2, or triplets. It would actually be illegal to have your triplets in the same home daycare.
To use me as an example, my own kids are 6, 5, and 2. If they were these ages next year when the Bill comes in, I would have to terminate 2 dckids because of my 2 younger kids. My husband and I want one more baby. If we do that, I'm looking at at least 3 years of only running on 3 dckids instead of 5, because of the age of my youngest. Those 3 spots will have to be filled by full-time kids, because I can't make a living otherwise, so both of my B/A dckids (ages 6 and 4) will have to go. There is no room in the B/A school program at their schools. There are no other providers that do B/A school in this district. They will have nowhere to go.
As much as this screws over providers trying to make a living, it screws over parents so much more. They won't be able to keep siblings together, they'll have to coordinate schedules with 2 different daycares, and parents that need part-time care or B/A school care will not be able to find it. The fees of the spaces that are available will go through the roof, as providers scramble to afford their bills on less kids. Anyone who thinks this Bill won't create a childcare crisis here just has their head in the sand.
Ok. Yes that makes sense with mat leave babies and filling spots. :(. Do u think caregivers will not follow rules thinking they will only get caught if someone calls on them? I see that now. One caregiver has 6 instead of 5 but her thinking is she won't get caught unless someone calls and if she does it b a warning first.
When will this announcement be made officially
What makes you better going thru a licence company that you can have 6 kids, those companies are a joke. I did it, and do recommend it. Basically you need to have 6 kids just to make up the difference for 5 kids you would have if you were private.
A concern among some of us is that they are setting the stage for universal daycare, which NDP and Libs all voted in favour of last week. This will leave all of us out of the loop. I can live with the bill as it is. My children are older and my ages are staggered...we've been through lean times before, and we can certainly do it again. What has many of us in an uproar and wanting to continue fighting is the flat out corruption and collusion that was involved in the making of this bill. It was absolutely set up to leave us out. This was being discussed in 2012 with AGENCIES!!! Agencies were involved in the whole policy writing process AND represented themselves as stakeholders. None of us even knew about this bill. It took 1 hour to get through 2 days worth of review of 90 amendments. Our concerns were never even considered in any meaningful way. It was an absolutely disgusting display of power. And, now the agencies have themselves a nice, shiny new loophole to take advantage of regarding waiving the 2 under 2. You know damned well that it won't just be used in the case of multiples.
I hope everyone in here is furious! You should be! You were all just treated like nothing.....you don't matter in the eyes of your government! We're not done fighting....we'll keep going and I hope everyone will join the cause. I'll let everyone know what the next course of action will be once we all have a chance to regroup.
Mom of Nerds...did you mean that you DON'T recommend it? Would you be willing to write me something outlining why that is? Tell me about your experience with an agency....I'm having a train of thought here. If interested in participating in this, please email me at c.a.fredenburgh@gmai l.com
I'm very interested in hearing what you have to say as a former agency provider.
Do u think caregivers will not follow rules thinking they will only get caught if someone calls on them? I see that now. One caregiver has 6 instead of 5 but her thinking is she won't get caught unless someone calls and if she does it b a warning first.
It is my understanding that there would not be a warning. Don't quote me on it, but it has been said that they will not need to go through the court process to issue fines if a provider is caught with infractions. I do think there will still be providers who don't follow the rules....they'll just be smarter about it. I also think that's playing a very dangerous game.
Alot of what is being described here is how it is in Manitoba. There is a shortage in spots and it is common to have families split there kids between 2 different daycares. Finding spots for 2 infants, especially in licensed care is very diffficult.
babydom, I don't THINK they will have to issue a warning first. It is my understanding that this Bill makes it much, much easier to shut down daycares and to fine providers for going over in ratio - Liz Sandals has said, for example, that "her" inspectors will no longer need a warrant to enter a home daycare, and that daycare can be shut down immediately if they find grounds to. Also, they have upped the fines to $250,000 - yep, a quarter of a million dollars!! I for one could never take that risk.
They still need a warrant for independent home daycares. For agency care, no warrant necessary. That's my understanding. I seem to recall something being said that they'd need a warrant for unlicensed unless they had caught them red handed....something to that effect. Don't quote me on it and I could be way off base, but I recall something to that effect. And yep....if you're over and they catch you, $250,000. No courts, no lead up....just done.
This really just reinforces how this bill isn't actually about safety at all. The child who died in Vaughan was at a daycare with how many children? and how many dogs? And how unsanitary was the dwelling? Those kinds of providers wont see this as a deterrent at all. There was already the risk of a child injuring themselves or falling sick regardless of numbers in such an unhygienic childcare setting so if these kinds of providers couldn't give a crap about those basic things prior to opening their doors to every tom dick and harry, this isn't going to bother them either. They clearly didn't give a thought to the liability in their position thinking they were immune to the rules then. You are going to find other providers just like these who think this will never happen and carry on as normal. Without licensing and a database, there is no way to keep track of the actual people making childcare unsafe so no way to find them unless they are reported and even with reporting them there was very little follow up after all the other complaints and perhaps people will just become smarter at covering up and staying hidden in the wake of the new bill?!?! Breaking the rules is breaking the rules even if a provider is over by 1 child, but the children who died in care, which prompted this revamp of the day nurseries act in the first place, died in the care of a provider committing gross misconduct. Not just over ratio but neglect amongst other things no doubt too. Ratios won't mean anything to them even with this hefty fine because they clearly don't care about the wellbeing and safety of children. I can't even rationalize their thought process as it just makes no sense to me why a person not putting child safety and wellbeing first would even go into this kind of business.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyEight
Wow, this is very scary! I imagine they'll be eventually doing this Canada -wide. There was talk of institutionalizing daycare here in B.C. They claimed they wanted to include family daycares. I think they were going to subsidize daycare and charge parents $10/day.The speaker was very smug and basically told us we would have to sign on or we could give it a go on our own. Very hard to compete for $10/day!Quote:
Originally Posted by cfred
So what are the rules for being unlicensed?
In Ontario? The rules I already laid out. Or are you asking about BC?
Most providers around here who aren't following the rules don't do so for any of the reasons you cite.
Many are low income stay at home parents who take in a few children because they view it like babysitting and since their teenager doesn't pay tax on babysitting at the weekends, they view it as tax free income.
Some know it should be declared but don't care. Others are just naive. None of these people are opting into this business because they care about children - LOL - that's not why they do it. They do it because they view it as easy money. They sit the kids in front of a TV, let them play with cheap dollar store toys or yard sale crap, and all they actual do is babysit. Because they often don't provide food (parents do) and because their clients are paying them under the table rates, they don't care if they have 6, 10 or 20. It's no extra work for them since all they are doing is providing minimal supervision.
They often don't get reported because they don't move away from the screen long enough to go out. They usually will take kids from 6am until 6pm often opening the door in their PJ's. They don't teach and encourage the kids to so anything other than play quietly.
They aren't going into this business with any consideration of child welfare or safety, they are going into it as a means to make cash income from home. Even if they undercut the local market and charge $25 a day, that $200 on top of anything else they get, which is a grand a week. No expenses because they don't provide anything.
These are the people who make this business dangerous.
Sure, there are providers who do run as a business and go one or two over from time to time and although I don't condone that, it's the above which is the issue and it's the above which the regs aim to weed about and to do that, firm limits have to be set even if it hurts the good providers. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and the limits set, and where ever those limits happen to be, good carers will get caught up in the mix.
All in home providers here, registered or not, are the responsibility of Community Services. They may come into any day home, unaccounted, and close down instantly. For a registered/approved provider of course there are more regulations to abide by but an unregistered can equally be visited and closed.
Parents will be called to collect their children, fines applied and CRA informed so a full audit happens. It's not unusual here for fraud charges to be filed too if income is being hidden.
Will this get rid of all the bad/risky providers - no - but for the most part, unregistered homes follow the rules because the risks of not doing so are high.
For those individuals who cram the kids in and just take the cash - those personalities won't ever understand or care why the rules exisit but educating the public in terms of what they should be getting, and that it's not really cheap care when those in real financial difficulty get government help, or paying the going rate includes food, does help to make these dodgy providers more open to being reported.
I'm assuming you are replying to my post as I'm the only one talking specifically about what you are referring to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachael
I don't assume to know why a provider goes over on their limits but like you, I would hazard a guess that it is for the reasons you listed. I however was not referring to those particular providers. I was specifically referring to those individuals like in the Vaughan death case and others in Ontario who were already hugely liable, far beyond a 250K fine as they were putting the children in serious harm. That is what I'm referring to when I say no thought about safety and wellbeing. Disregard would require some thought and had those providers given it any thought, even without such a monitory fine, it would have been quite clear that at those numbers and conditions, it was high risk for a child to get ill or die. That particular daycare was reported numerous times with nobody following up. Numerous others that have made headlines and were running illegally on numerous levels were never reported to my knowledge. Without a database, so licensing to some degree, there is no way of keeping track. Unfortunately the deaths that have occurred have not occurred in homes of those merely operating over ratio by one or two occasionally, but through gross misconduct as I said. With mandatory licensing, anyone operating without a displayed license in a front window for example would be much more easily noticed and therefore reported. A provider behind closed doors with over 20 kids went largely unnoticed in the neighbourhood, so those who are over ratio but running a generally good program aside from that would largely go unnoticed to the GP who at large do not know the rules. I don't pretend to have a hard fast solution for this, but yes this is what happens when a few extreme cases hit the media and tragedy occurs. We all get painted with the same brush. It is also really irritates me that so many providers actually don't think its a big deal to be over by 1 occasionally in exceptional circumstances. Fact is that at those moments of being over ratio, the providers insurance, if they have any at all in the first place, are nil and void. There were numerous providers at day of action totally okay with it if it meant they could maximize their earnings. That's not me presuming to know what other providers grounds are for doing it. They are words right out of their mouths to my face!
Do we know for sure that it will be Jan 2016 before it takes effect? I thought there was talk of Sept 2015? Please clarify. Thanks.
January 1st 2016 was the date that the Liberal MPP put forward in an amendment, but it hasn't been confirmed publicly yet, and probably won't be until after the house votes, and possibly not until the royal assent.
Sorry to hear of this!! Losing income is never a good feeling, whether we are prepared for it or not!
However, on the bright side at least you do have a year to get things under control and decide if you can still make a go of running a hdc or if you will need to close up and find work elsewhere, as well as finding childcare for some of you! It can't be an easy decision, I'm sure!
I sure do wish that childcare was the same across the provinces. I can understand why the prices of dc would be different, given the cost of living is different. It just makes no sense to me as to how "they" can say one province is okay to watch 8 children while a person in another province is only okay to watch 5. Seems so silly IMO.
Good luck to all of those who this will affect!! Seems hard to believe but in a few years this will be the norm and all will be back to regular. Hopefully most of you who want to keep running a hdc, can!!
Exactly 5LM.
Everyone has times when they have a decrease in income through no fault of their own. Most adults look at reducing their outgoing or taking a second job for more money. It will all settle.
New carers will spring up like they always do and that will pick up some of the excess clients from the higher numbers now. Kids will go to school in September and not be replaced by the carer' It will all settle down again with little change to the fees other than a slight blimp that will soon settle as the value of child care is established by the market not the carer's financial situation/outgoings.
Parents with 4 children will simply not consider opening their own day care an option which it currently is since their own children are now included. No big deal - just one less option if a parent wanted to stay home and open their own business.
Sure, some existing carers will close but again, that's hardly uncommon anyway in this industry.
There's a whole year to figure it out. Someone said that with Moms returning to work and seeking care for a 12 month old and kids going to school at 4 anyway, there's likely a high turnover in lots of day homes. They just won't replace as many as they leave, that's all.
A few years and you'll look back and wonder why you thought it might be the end of the World but you'll figure it out. Change is good.
I can understand that, at a distance, it doesn't seem like a big deal. For me, it's not so much the change in rules. Like you said Rachael, this business is often fluid with children coming and going and circumstances changing. I will continue to run my business and my year is fairly well sorted out. Where the problem lies is with the complete corruption of this entire process. I'm saying this as someone who has been fully ensconced in this battle from the beginning, so of course, it means a lot to me. The Liberals didn't even acknowledge our existence for the first 3/4 of this whole process. On the rare occasion they did, it was negative and the media had a heyday with it. Our reputations, as a whole, have taken a beating, so that's one reason to have our panties in a twist.
The policy writing began 2 years ago without the knowledge of a single independent provider, who are the largest stakeholders in the industry. Agencies who basically fleece their providers for 20%-30% of their income in exchange for, at best, mediocre services were the policy writers. The policies were written in such a way that they benefit ONLY agencies and absolve the government of any responsibility. This is collusion. We came to the table with many valid amendments, one of which is independent licensing, which is available in other provinces. Every single amendment was shot down...every one. Their bill does not provide any extra oversight and removes due process in the event of issuing fines of up to $250,000. The reason for this bill, as it has been shown on the CICPO page tonight, is basically, to cover the government's own ass...or so it would appear by a specific clause in the bill outlining how they cannot be sued.
The independent providers of Ontario have been completely left out of a process which directly affects them. We have been slandered in the press and by our own government. The committee review which was supposed to have occurred yesterday was nothing more than a show of power. It has been made very clear to us by our government and agencies alike that they want us off the map. We're not quite ready to give up just yet. We cannot just blithely say that we'll sit back and things will sort themselves out. This is our opportunity to make a change for the better in a field that the Ontario government really couldn't give a shit about. I appreciate the sentiment that I think you're trying to convey, and it is soothing...but on the other hand, we shouldn't become complacent. There are many people fearful of losing their homes. I was one of them, till I learned that I have until January 2016. I'll be ok, but many other wonderful providers won't be and it's just not fair. We're not done yet. I want, by the end of this, to AT LEAST see a new licensing model that doesn't include for profit agencies.
I feel passionate about being able to stay private for those that want too so I admire you and the work you've done/are doing cfred! And everyone else whose worked on this!
However, I'm also a realist (not that you aren't!) and I know the govt will always do what they can to make money off of us and be in a position to "control" us. We are small business owners and just like many other industries, the push to move private business owners out is always going to be a challenge. The govt feels they need to regulate every thing!!!
I admire people like you who fight to change things!!! I really do! I'm the type who accepts it for what it is and I focus my energy on how I'm going to prepare for the change without even thinking that I can stop the change from happening.
This isn't a new situation here in Canada. Reforms happen in all industries and the only input ever seems to come from the 'official' providers and the government and sometimes any unions which are involved. Fair - no, but having lived here for almost 14 years now, it's the only model I've ever seen.
The small business owner, the self-employed are NEVER considered in any reforms here unless they are part of a larger body which has a government relationship - in this case, day care agencies.
The only time I see anyone object to this common practice is when it's their own industry being affected and therefore when it has a direct impact on themselves. I have never once seen someone get involved in fighting change when they work in an unrelated field.
I'm not saying that's right - I'm saying it's how it seemingly has always worked in this Country and it's a practice which initially surprised me but no longer does. I think it's your outrage that bemuses me when this practice of excluding a large part of the providers is nothing new.
I think what it boils down to is that if one does nothing, one achieves nothing. Will we get anything that we want? Maybe....probably not. BUT, one important thing we've done in the process of this fight is shed light on it. Public awareness is critical in any cause and in that regard, we've done extremely well. CICPO is all over the news broadcasts, articles, radio shows, social media, etc, etc. We've brought a cause that, before our fight, no one really knew anything about, right to the forefront. In my opinion, the secrecy in which this has been put together is disgraceful. We've brought it to the forefront, educated thousands and given unity and a voice to providers all over the province. That in itself is fantastic! I've watched all the media go from flat out condemning us to now giving us balanced, fair and factual stories. Lucy Lopez had me in a gem of a blunder in my interview for CBC news...I really buggered it up. She didn't use the part to work against us......6 months ago, it would have been used for sure! In the end, it was a balanced piece, to my great relief. Even Lizzy herself changed her tune toward the end. She's still a heinous hag, BUT she heard us...loud and clear. We've even garnered the assistance of the Ombudsman himself, which is beyond cool! We have a little clout and the ear of the media (to some degree). Given that we just started up in July, that's quite remarkable. But the best part is that we're unified and striving toward one cause. I believe this will carry forward beyond this fight. Even if we don't win this battle, we've still won...if ya know what I mean. So yes, Rachael, change IS good! But I'll be damned if I'm going to be complacent. Nothing is gained with complacency.....too many great things come out of a good fight ;)
I'm honestly really surprised about comments saying change is inevitable and that laws are changed without input all the time and no one cares. Just because it happens all the time doesn't make it ok.
Sure, things change all the time but that doesn't mean we should just bend over and take it.
CFred, Heidi, Kim, Veronica, Tracey and so many others can look in the mirror everyday with pride and know that they did their best for something they believed in with all their hearts, regardless of the outcome.
"No big deal"???? Are you kidding me???
Maybe in the grand scheme of things, "it will all settle," but tell that to the actual providers and families who's lives are about to get turned upside down.
I live in a working-class, low-income, small city in Ontario. My Arts degree in European Studies and German is completely useless here, but my husband's job is here, so we are stuck. My youngest will already count in my numbers, and we had planned on one more baby sometime next fall. If I continue that plan and refuse to let my government dictate my family size, then I will have to terminate 2 clients. I will be forced to run on 60% of my barely-minimum-wage-already income for 3 more years. My business will essentially be in the toilet. I will be working 10 hour days for under 20 grand a year. However, daycare costs, even just for my existing three children, would be that amount themselves. So to be better off, I need to walk into an entry-level job that offers straight day shifts and pays at least 40 grand a year. Please, tell me where I'm supposed to find that. I don't have "other options" available to me. This was a career born out of necessity.
I am ONE example of thousands and thousands of providers across this province. My clients have nowhere else to go in this school district. They cannot afford higher fees. They are a few examples of an even bigger number of families that will be affected.
To say nothing of rural Ontario, where there are very few centers and in a lot of places, no agencies either. They rely on ICP's almost exclusively, and now ICP's are about to be forced to terminate spaces.
Rachael, how can you be so nonchalant in saying that people with multiple young children "simply won't decide to open their own business, they will have one less option"?? Exactly how many other options do you think there are?
I realize you think that the laws here were unfair to begin with, and I realize that providers in other provinces have figured out a way to make ends meet with harsher restrictions. But that is not the point. Regardless on whether or not they were right or fair or whatever other word you want to use, Ontario has been running with these ratios for decades. Providers, myself included, have planned our families around the current laws. Thousands of providers have bought large homes with separate daycare spaces, for example, have planned the number and spacing of their children, have made huge, life-altering decisions based on the CURRENT ratios, and now are faced with trying to figure out how to fix the damage that has already been done. They can't magically go back in time and have less kids or space them further apart. They can't just pick up and move to a city with more job opportunities. They can't go back in time and decide NOT to buy that bigger house, NOT to spend money on renovations for daycare, NOT to upgrade their schooling with ECE courses, etc etc etc. Those choices were made years ago based on the current ratios, and the damage from them has already been done.
These are people's livelihoods at stake, that the government has thrown away. I'll be damned if I'm going to sit back and allow a bunch of corrupt politicians throw my career under the bus in order to cover their own asses, and do nothing about it. I'm going to fight for all the providers and families that will run out of options after this law goes through, because then I can at least look myself in the eye in the morning.
Please keep the actual people that this will hurt in mind before simply brushing off such monumental changes in legislation as no big deal. Change is only good if it is going to improve the lives of everyone it affects, and this will only improve the pocketbooks of agencies and the government.
Ouch!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachael
You sure have a lot to say for someone who really only has a distant view of what has been going on here in Ontario. I don't think this has merely been about change. You should have seen how ICPs were being thrown under the bus left and right in the media after that little girl died. And then the Bill came out and it honestly felt like a witch hunt. Suddenly we were ALL criminals and being a home daycare provider, for me, was depressing and embarrassing. I am very grateful for those who fought HARD and turned some heads and went and retrieved the respect for home daycare providers that was lost for a bit.
We were all for change, all along. We WANT to be licensed and have training available through the government and they turned us down!!
For some, this bill is maybe not the end of the world, but it is the end of doing daycare and they really are scrambling.