-
3 under 3 AND 2 under 2!
Just to give Ontario providers some warning, the committee hearings on Bill 10 are happening yesterday and today. Yesterday, many different agency reps began pushing hard for unlicensed providers to abide by a "3 under 3" rule, as well as "2 under 2." This would put many more providers out of business - JK starts at age 4!!
If you haven't already sent in a submission to the Committee, you have until this evening (Nov. 18) at 8:30pm to send in a letter, outlining how this Bill will affect you, your clients, and your families.
PLEASE take 5 minutes and send in a submission.
You can email them to the committee clerk at: vquioc@ola.org
-
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CrazyEight For This Useful Post:
-
-
-
Question totally out of curiosity, but why don't unlicensed providers get licensed then? In Manitoba the law is already no more than 2 under age 2 ( and a max of 4 kids total) for unlicensed providers. I believe it is used as incentive to get people to become licensed.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to AmandaKDT For This Useful Post:
-
Because we can't unless we are with an agency taking a big chunk of our income. There is also no grants or gov. assistance.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to torontokids For This Useful Post:
-
The Ontario gov't doesn't have licensing here. We have 2 options - go private ("unlicensed") or work for an agency, who set our rates and take upwards of 20% of our wages - that are already under average, because they set them! That is the problem - neither option (agency or private) will be a financially feasible business after Bill 10.
-
-
Originally Posted by torontokids
Because we can't unless we are with an agency taking a big chunk of our income. There is also no grants or gov. assistance.
Can you explain the agencies, why is it that they exist? Are agencies privately run or government run? What would make someone want to join an agency.
-
-
Manitoba has a much friendlier system than Ontario. Really, don't you think we WOULD get licensed if it was prudent to do so? We do have some non-profit agencies, but they aren't available everywhere. For instance, in my city, I have WeeWatch and Hopscotch - both for profit, both taking a minimum of 25% of my fees in admin costs. In addition, their oversight and client sourcing are, so far as I've seen, dismal at best. 25% - 30% of our incomes are a dear price to pay for a little shoddy oversight, don't you think? We also have Full Day Kindergarten to contend with, which has really changed the face of childcare in Ontario. Kids are gone now as young as 3.5 yrs. Our window with children is very small, which is why we take issue with 2 under 2. It's very, very difficult to maintain numbers with that ratio in place. 1 under 1 or 2 under 18 months, sure! But 2 under 2 doesn't work.
-
-
They are privately run and for profit. No one wants to join an agency. In my experience it is more newer providers, new immigrants or people with no experience that join an agency.
-
-
There are non profit here too Torontokids...they just aren't everywhere. I went to a round table discussion with other providers and the coordinator and I were discussing it.
-
-
Originally Posted by cfred
Manitoba has a much friendlier system than Ontario. Really, don't you think we WOULD get licensed if it was prudent to do so?
That was the reason I was asking, cuz I don't know the situation behind it. Was trying to fully understand since the providers from Ontario are making such a big deal about it.
Are there plans in that Bill 10 about how agencies are run? Are there any changes being made about that area?
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|