Patagonia's CEO Explains How to Make On-Site Child Care Pay for Itself
fastcompany.com
fastcompany.com
Some small things to think about:
1) custody disputes are a pain in the butt and you are now part of it
2) going on the theme, who picks up the kid is actually more complicated than just the employee who drops the kid off (come in early with Mom, but get picked up by grandparent to be with other kids is not uncommon) - get this crap in writing
3) get the food correct for the children - you need to feed them - you are now running a restaurant
4) Lysol - wholesale purchases
5) Make sure you follow all codes and do the required number of fire, tornado, etc. drills
6) Read the Early Head Start and Head Start staffing guidelines as many places require you meet those. Also note, those flexible Silicon Valley hours are going to be amazingly fun with staffing requirements.
7) Security camera setup with DVRs - should go just fine with the webcams
8) Be a nice employer and do the assessment tests for your staff
9) know the facility requirements in detail.
If you spend the time and money on setup, you will have an amazing workplace. If you half-ass it, you will be sued a lot.
I did "data consulting" for the predecessor research program to Early Head Start called CCDP when I was first out of college and it turned into knowing every regulation and rule. Its amazing how computer people become domain experts.
I should add that the Denver II screening is now free and you should check with the state your in to find out what child assessment tools you need to teach your child care staff to administer. We used LAP and E-LAP which were pretty easy and focused on what play activities the staff should do with the children.
11) Sometimes kids or parents aren't compatible with day care staff or management or policies, and that's OK when day care management and your management don't report to the same guy and you're not under the same roof, but it gets stressful when you're all one big family. Much like having a company bank or a company store sounds really nice until you look at some historical issues... Now you have employees complaining to their supervisor because the kids aren't getting enough zoo field trips, etc.
Or don't provide food and have the parents bring the kid in with a lunchbox.
What did they put on for restrictions? Was there a form? Out of curiosity did they post any information online?
They have a parent manual online - we also have a hard copy - which includes a section on food. I've copied their instructions: https://gist.github.com/pavellishin/69b9dabdd3a9ae8ecd0dce46...
(I think there's a typo there - I believe that "because we do have a commercial kitchen" should be "because we do NOT have a commercial kitchen".)
I'm going to include the list of forbidden foods here. I'm surprised that carrots and grapes are forbidden; I don't know what sort of hazard carrots present.
> NUTS of any kind. This includes nuts in cereal or baked goods.
> PEANUT BUTTER, in any form
> RAW CARROTS, in any form
> HOT DOGS/SAUSAGES link style or cut in circles. They will be served only if diced.
> POPCORN, CHIPS, SODA, CANDY, and PRETZELS are never served (except at parties).
> FRESH GRAPES are never served. In fruit cocktail, you must remove or cut the grapes.
> HARD BOILED EGGS are served only if they are peeled and cut into quarters.
> FRESH FRUIT must be peeled, pitted, and cut. One exception: bananas.
> CHERRY TOMATOES will be served only if they are quartered.
> OLIVES will be served only if pitted and halved.
> SEAFOOD is a common allergen. If there is anyone in a class that has this allergy you may be
> asked not to bring seafood.
> MEAT or CHICKEN must be removed from the bone.
I suppose these modern children need to be taught to chew their food and not asphyxiate themselves by vacuuming it down whole.
Excluding the things on that list still leaves lots of fruits and vegetables.
> I suppose these modern children need to be taught to chew their food and not asphyxiate themselves by vacuuming it down whole.
I know you're being facetious, but small children are at a very serious risk of asphyxiation, and this daycare has four month olds which cannot really handle solid foods yet. So yeah. Modern children need to be taught how to chew, eat, and not asphyxiate. Ancient ones did, too.
Grapes and Carrots are chocking hazards just like Hot Dogs and sausage. Grapes and Carrots are just not worth the trouble they will cause during such a busy time.
> I'm not sure what being rural and low-income has to do with it; can you expand on that?
People sometimes screw up and driving miles to fix the problem is an issue along with causing an unneeded expense for low-income folks. It was just much easier to come up with a dozen different meals and learn to assembly line them.
Even mashed? They specifically say that carrots in any form are forbidden. Maybe that's just badly phrased, though.
Sadly, its a real problem every time you put the responsibility on parents. This is just the reality of two systems interacting which should be a familiar theme for the folks on HN.
I'm still not convinced that putting in a kitchen is a better approach than having parents bring food; parents need to feed their children at home anyway, so they're going to have food. And if children have specific needs, parents will be better able to handle those as well. (For instance, the room my kid is in has children aged 4-10 months - the very small kids can only drink milk, mine is at the age where she can eat some pureed foods, and the older kids are happily eating crackers and other stuff.)
Kitchens also take up space - which is probably a bigger concern here in New York than your rural area.
I'm equally dumb then, but in our defense, someone has probably tried
> Kitchens also take up space - which is probably a bigger concern here in New York than your rural area.
Probably, but an urban area is in a much better position to contract with a local group to buy meals appropriate to the children. I look at it as a point of contention that can blow up. Your now mixing work and life in a very personal way. The easiest way to handle that is to provide the meals and document any issues for individuals that the provider (be it you or a contractor) need to handle. Avoiding problematic parental choices is worth quite a lot in the sanity of your child care staff.
Or can you?
http://simplegreensmoothies.com/tips/carrots and http://www.willitblend.com/
I really, really hope those are just terrible stock photos.
Not possible. Kids require a lot of attention, and a lot of care. Maybe when she's older, and can entertain herself, but there is zero chance of me getting work done if I'm also taking care of her, and maybe a 10% chance if other peoples' kids running around.
I truly cannot comprehend how you can do both. Just doing the stay-at-home dad thing for a week was taxing.
(Naturally she'll be a nightmare tonight, now that I've praised her ability to sleep.)
Credits and deductions are not the same thing. A credit is netted against your tax bill, a deduction reduces the taxable amount of your revenue. A $1 deduction therefore provides a much smaller benefit than a $1 credit.
>The federal government ... grants a qualified child-care program a yearly tax credit of $150,000. In addition, the government allows a company to deduct 35% of its unrecovered costs from its corporate tax bite.
This may just be unfortunate phrasing. The author uses the word "deduct" but then says its deducted "from its corporate tax bite", not EBITA. As you point out a reduction in EBIDTA does reduce the tax bill, just not 1:1 like a tax credit. The phrase isn't clear that its another tax credit or a deduction.
Minus points for a lack of clarity either way...
Patagonia has been making a concerted effort to raise awareness of on-site childcare in recent months; this article appears to continue that mission.
From a scrappy start-up perspective, Chouinard claims that having a ready bank of testers was important for the development of Patagonia's children's clothing line.
It's a weird place. I have to get out and travel just to remind myself that strangers can be friendly to each other.
"urban" = poor/not white
"transient" = homeless/drifter
"aren't as invested" = don't contribute to society
Midwest: starting to wish my neighbors would leave me alone, what with all the casseroles on my doorstep and invitations to euchre night.
Seattle: I couldn't even tell you the race of some of my neighbors, as I never see them outside. I know they exist only because I see the car pull into the garage right before the garage door closes. Of the neighbors with whom I'm friendly, or at least talk to once in a while, the majority aren't from U. S. See also: "Seattle freeze".
It would be a good read for this crowd.
I am all in for an onsite child-care facility as long as it is a standalone facility. Looking at the pictures, it looks like children are all over this office. Not being a parent, I can still comprehend the hardships of new parents who have to juggle between childcare and full time jobs. But having a baby does not give you a golden ticket to do whatever you want (NYC subway stroller parents please don't ram in a Humvee size stroller during peak hour). You have to respect the common shared space such as office space. Some people are not that fond of cute pudgy babies, not to mention the distraction etc..
I do support an onsite childcare facility and wish more companies will do the same but they should make sure that kids stay inside such facilities only where parents can check on them during their breaks.
parents please don't get defensive here. This is just an opinion not an ignorant insensitive slur towards parents and their young ones
I would prefer having a shorter workday where we can just efficiently get stuff done and then go home to the kids.
It's also a little disappointing the way the writer completely writes off men being caregivers to kids.When I started reading the piece I was thinking "yeah, onsite childcare would be kind of nice," but nope, apparently the writer thinks this only for women.
I expect most parents are like me: happy to have a kid-free zone to get some stuff done.
I would personally love to work in an office where people were welcome to bring their kids. I'd happily deal with the interruptions and inefficiencies. If the company thought the benefits outweighed those costs, I'm game.
That works both ways. If you believe parents shouldn't bring their children to the office space because they should respect you and your desire for children not to be there, then it's only reasonable that you should respect their desire to have their children with them. Whether you're fond of babies or not is irrelevant; the important thing is the impact on the business. If having children around means an overall productivity drop then they're a net loss, and a dedicated child-care facility is a better option. But if the parents in the office are more productive with their children close by, to a point that outweighs the loss of productivity from the non-parents, then children in the office is a positive. Few workplaces have ever measured that, so there isn't a simple "it's worse with children around" answer.
Plus, and this is really important, there's a distinct danger that employers who say they don't want children around the business using that as a way to limit opportunities for women (albeit subconsciously; few would admit to it). That's something to guard against.
You do know realize that an office space means a space for employees to do work for someone who is paying them. It is not a space for their children or parents or grand-parents or cousins or favorite stuff toys.
An employer offering in-house childcare has benefits, this does not necessarily mean your kid will be sitting on your desk and you will be taking care of it.
I've been in office spaces that were spaces for quiet work, heated discussions, listening to music together, nerf battlegrounds, emotional reconciliation, alcohol-infused parties, Quake tournaments, and philosophical debate.
Humans and their activities defy simple categorization, despite how much our industrial mindset might encourage us to treat them—us—as cogs in a machine.
Really? When were office spaces expected to have children around?
still, there were times when you could send your kids to work. that sort of thing is frowned upon/illegal now.
You know my office used to have speakers in it? That we played music on? That bothered no one because the door was closed!?
Oh the horror.
As someone who works from home with a toddler on the other side of the door, I'll go ahead and challenge that assumption.
I've worked both in a traditional environment (I drop the kids off at daycare before work, and pick them up afterwords), and a remote work environment (I walk into my office, the kids are on the other side of the door, in the care of a nanny).
I feel more guilt being in the same house as my kids, and not being involved, than I did with them at a separate daycare.
It's nice when I eat lunch or take a break, to be able to walk out and hang out with my kids. It's not nice when I'm on a conference call, and I can hear the wailing on the other side of my (well-sound-insulated) door when someone stubs a toe, and feel guilt that I'm not involved.
On site, but separated, child-care is I think the ideal solution for working parents and the workplace. It gives parents the ability to visit their children when they have a break, or need to breastfeed. It gives them a bit of space, so they don't feel obligated to be involved in the tens of minor-crises that occur every day in the life of a child.
It also keeps a bit of separation between "work" and "family" time, which even as a very involved father I feel is valuable.
EDIT: This is in response to the idea that one has to respect parents wanting to have their children at their desks. I'm fairly certain the photos in the article are stock photos, and I'm fully in favor of having a separate day care facility.
I see that straw men can be used to argue both against an idea, and apparently for an idea as well.
I also went to a college where there were some (relatively) older students who were married and had kids. Many of them brought kids to class (mostly sleeping infants). It looked difficult for them, but good on 'em for continuing their education. Didn't have much affect on my learning.
No, you can't. Your next sentence ...
> (NYC subway stroller parents please don't ram in a Humvee size stroller during peak hour).
... is a nice demonstration of your selfish, thoughtless, demanding, lack of understanding.
Calm down sir those are some harsh words. Subways are dangerous disgusting disease-prone place anyway for young infants. Maybe parents should use cabs often. Cab fares should be included as part of child-care costs which most parents include in their detailed plan before they decide to raise a child.
> Cab fares should be included ... detailed plan before they decide to raise a child.
You simply don't have the necessary perspective here. Come back to this conversation when you're a NYC parent.
Let's say a family owns one stroller. It is large (one of those top-of-the-line models), and it was a gift from a registry. The family usually stays in Brooklyn, but occasionally rides the subway into Manhattan.
You want a family to buy a second stroller just to save a few inches on those occasional trips?
Or let's say you're a parent or nanny responsible for watching a child. You don't want to stay home all day, so you pack the supplies necessary to travel around and do stuff. Which requires space to hold things.
You want that caregiver to travel in a taxi all day instead of the subway?
It's easy to judge from afar. Life with kids is hard and expensive and complicated. Becoming a parent changes your perspective.
Just because you're a parent doesn't mean everyone should bend over backwards for you.
The attitude of "I have a legitimate use of public transport, and fuck those parents for daring to use it at the same time as me" sucks.
By "NYC parent" you mean people who actually live here especially in Manhattan and I am excluding tourists as NYC parents as it is beyond me that why in the world would anyone want to bring their young kids on a trip to the New York City! Why did you never think about moving to somewhere peaceful as in New Jersey to raise a family? A lot of my coworkers moved there the moment they decided to have kids. I will move there or to some outer borough or outside of NYC eventually if I decide to have kids of my own one day.
I have seen parents fighting with homeless people on the subways when they try to interact with their kid. I have seen parents using twin-strollers just for one kid. Confirmed by my own neighbor, this is actually a “trick” that most young parents use in NYC. It apparently gives them more room on the walk path or in the subway and they can use the secondary space for groceries etc.
I hear you, but there is no substitute for actually being a parent, with all the struggles and rewards that come with it.
Have you ridden the New York subway, or taken care of an infant? They're not crawling on the floor, putting random things in their mouth. And other subway riders aren't spitting at my child when I take her on the subway, either.
> Maybe parents should use cabs often. Cab fares should be included as part of child-care costs which most parents include in their detailed plan before they decide to raise a child.
In your magic world where cab fare is paid for, sure, I agree. But in the real world, there are people who can't afford cabs, but still need to take their child to the doctor, or to daycare, or to a family member, or wherever.
When we picked out our stroller, we definitely picked a smaller one - both as a courtesy to everyone around us, but also as a convenience for us. You think it's fun being bumped by a stroller in a subway car? Imagine how fun it is trying to negotiate a stroller through one. And onto a elevator. And on the street.
Fair enough; poor people during winter should just push their kids in a stroller 30 blocks through snow to the pediatrician.
> Heard of crazies pushing onto the subway lane?
Yup. Happens so rarely that my kid is in more danger when I'm pushing her across a crosswalk.
> Or the extreme humidity these days that make the subway atmosphere like a baking oven where your child is constantly crying in agony and discomfort.
That is a definite concern in the stations, but the trains themselves are air conditioned.
But the end point is that it's public transit, and it's ridiculous to suggest that certain members of the public are assholes for daring to use it just because they have children.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12305558 and marked it off-topic.