AnonyMouse_4495 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 Quick question - our Supervisor has mentioned in passing that we are now no longer allowed to employ unqualified staff, unless they are committing to undertake training leading to a childcare qualification - is this right? We are re-issuing current contracts and one of our older members of staff is unqualified and has no interest in doing a qualification. The Chair wants it in her contract that whilst she is able to do the role at the moment, she would not be employed now, I think this is a tad hard on the wording but she wants it in. Firstly, is this correct information? Secondly - any other word choices for the contract? Help! Thanks x
AnonyMouse_5970 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) As far as I know without looking, you should have a level 3 or above leading the setting with at least 50% of all other staff at level 2 or above. There is nothing to say you cannot or should not employ unqualified staff. We are a highly qualified team with graduates, EYP's etc. but we still have some unqualified staff, including someone in a similar position who does not intend to do any training, but is a good practitioner. Edited October 13, 2014 by Stargrower 1
AnonyMouse_4495 Posted October 13, 2014 Author Posted October 13, 2014 I did think it was a bit random when she mentioned it and I can't find any reference on the oracle that is Google. We are well within qualified staffing ratios, but this was specifically to do with employing new unqualified staff; so, in fairness, not actually relevant to this member of staff, but she is a bit of a natter-er, so I think the Chair wanted to put her in her place a bit! Thanks for your reply - saves me thinking I am completely nuts and making things up!
AnonyMouse_13453 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 I'm with Stargrower on this. I'm pretty sure the standards say 50% minimum of qualified level 3 or above. Ask her to show you where she has found this information in the standards.
AnonyMouse_22106 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 just out of interest; now to do a EY qualification you have to have GCSE English & maths - does that mean that if you take on an unqualified member of staff they would need to have the GCSE?
AnonyMouse_19802 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 As long as you meet the standards Im sure you're within your rights to employ who you wish...GCSE's or not. What about equal opportunities in the workplace? We too had a marvellous lady without a qualification to her name except: the ability to relate, understand needs, was gentle, kind and worth her weight in gold! Sadly she's left : ( 2
AnonyMouse_5970 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 The GCSE thing only applies to those beginning qualifications now, I think. If you're already qualified, you don't have to go back and do them. I guess if you're not qualified, it doesn't apply! 1
AnonyMouse_5970 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 Ooh just noticed I've passed the 1,000 post mark! :1b 1
AnonyMouse_6721 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 I have always thought that it works well if you have different 'ranks' of staff. No point having a room full of Chiefs. As long as you are in ratio. I presume she may earn less than qualified staff? 3
AnonyMouse_4495 Posted October 13, 2014 Author Posted October 13, 2014 We have a good mix, thankfully. And you're right - she's the one that has the most empathy, the parents always 'go to' and the children love her company. She also runs our toddler group where the parents stay so she is a great link between those leaving toddlers and starting playgroup. She is the only unqualified member of staff out of 7, so we are more than covered with regards to other requirements. It was just the comment that, if we were employing her now we couldn't, so she should appreciate that she has a job (not quite said like that) but as I said before, she is a bit of a moaner, so the Chair and Supervisor just want to hammer home where she sits in the hierarchy of the setting, And yes, there is a sliding payscale, of which, she is at the bottom.
AnonyMouse_19762 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 She sounds as though she is worth her weight in gold - I wouldn't be adding any 'snippy' comments in her contract - life is too short
AnonyMouse_12805 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 What a odd thing to put in someone's contract? Surely a contract should just be a statement of your terms and conditions of employment? Or am I wrong? 1
AnonyMouse_19762 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 What a odd thing to put in someone's contract? Surely a contract should just be a statement of your terms and conditions of employment? Or am I wrong? No you're not wrong - you are absolutely right :1b if Chair and Supervisor really feel the need to address this then it could/should be done in a supervision in my humble opinion.....
AnonyMouse_6721 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 Don't you feel that in most roles the goal post have changed over the years. A nurse in a & e I know has be doing a degree course as the nursing course she did years ago isn't good enough now.
AnonyMouse_39602 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) Supervisor/ manager minimum level 3 and at least 2 yrs experience , 50% of all other staff qualified level 2 or above and GCSE s English and maths applies to all undertaking a level 3 from this September , unqualified staff can be employed and those working towards qualifications can not be counted as qualified until they are , and despite a supervisor manager being counted in ratio unless 50% of all other staff are qualified this does not count ! We have had to advertise for another qualified staff member as despite taking on another qualified staff it's not enough and had to change job role for staff member who does not wish to qualify but is loved by children and parents , oh joy! Edited October 13, 2014 by lashes2508
AnonyMouse_51737 Posted October 13, 2014 Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) She may have got miscommunication, the government originally (around 2009/10) wanted in 2012 a workforce that was level 3 and above only classed in ratios they then moved it to 2015 but this has changed again! Todapends who is in the driving seat of the country ! My only member of staff who is unqualified refuses to train even though she is more than capable it's due to various factors but has been made fully aware that these issues have been raised by the powers that be (you know that person that sits in Downing Street who knows so much about childcare) and fully understands that if this ever does come in she will be out of a job! All I can do is inform her that this is a possible future prospect, sad really as she has been with us for many many years and is fantastic at her job ! Just put my hand on latest info; Proff Nutbrown recommended it again in her report for full implementation by 2022 through a period of a staggered changes in percentages from the current 50% but goverment have said no. Edited October 13, 2014 by Rochelle 2
AnonyMouse_73 Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 There was a statement in the statutory framework for 2012 which stated that for unqualified staff, 'providers should consider supporting them to gain a relevant level 2 qualification'. This may be where she got the info from. However this was removed in the 2014 framework.
AnonyMouse_4495 Posted October 14, 2014 Author Posted October 14, 2014 No you're not wrong - you are absolutely right :1b if Chair and Supervisor really feel the need to address this then it could/should be done in a supervision in my humble opinion..... I agree! We had a management meeting last night and the supervisor backtracked a bit (a common thing!) and said it wasn't that we couldn't employ an unqualified member of staff but if we were looking to recruit, we would look for a qualified member of staff or someone committing to training as she is taking up the place of a keyworker therefore, putting more pressure on the qualified staff, if you catch my drift. So in essence, if we were recruiting now, we wouldn't employ said member of staff. Phew! It's not in her contract now - it's gone in the employment pack with the overtime and payment schedule breakdown. Thanks, as always, for your responses.
AnonyMouse_22106 Posted October 15, 2014 Posted October 15, 2014 if we were looking to recruit, we would look for a qualified member of staff or someone committing to training as she is taking up the place of a keyworker therefore, putting more pressure on the qualified staff, if you catch my drift. So in essence, if we were recruiting now, we wouldn't employ . Mmmmm, I have to say we have found ourselves in this position after 3 VERY quiet years I seem to have children coming from everywhere! We have an unqualified member of staff who is fab in everyway and I wouldn't want her to face the day with out her on the team, but now with so many children, keyworker groups are growing rapidly and they are getting stressed out and we are only in October! There is no way this person wants to be a keyworker though and actually couldn't afford to train now and we couldn't afford to pay for it either. There's always something
Guest Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 We are in a similar position, with a staff member who joined last year (pre me!) and has no intention of qualifying. She is great with the children and is a gentle person, and last year she was asked to do more and more and in the end was doing the same work as the qualified staff in terms of key groups, learning journeys, assessments, etc. This apparently led to snippy comments from the qualified staff She approached me a week into the term saying she wasn't comfortable with how she was made to feel by the other staff and didn't believe she should have to do the same work given that she's had no childcare training other than 'on the job'. We came to an agreement that she will operate in more of a support role - preparing snack, washing up etc giving the qualified key persons more time with their children. She has also remained on the lowest pay grade whereas others have had a pay rise to reflect their qualification. Of course, this means that there is more pressure on those of us with key groups as we are effectively a member of staff down (we can only operate on ratio, and not exceed it), so of course now the qualified staff are moaning that she 'gets to play and have none of the responsibility'... Damned if we do, damned if we don't! It has clarified in my mind that should we need to recruit, I will only look for qualified staff, no matter how good someone unqualified may be, which is quite sad in a way.
AnonyMouse_73 Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 Even if you have very good unqualified staff, you still need to show how you are developing their skills within the team, through supervisions, CPD etc. You cant exclude unqualified staff from this requirement of the EYFS, and so its harder now to recruit unqualified staff and still meet all the roles and responsibilities they will inevitably have (unless you are lucky that your unqualified person is 'extra'). I am not really sure of the benefit of employing (now) an unqualified person who is unwilling to train, have key children etc other than perhaps cost? So in a sense, going back to the original question from Running Bunny, whilst you can legally employ someone unqualified, your Chair is probably right in the sense that she may not be easily employed now because of the issues raised by others. (especially if they are not going to have a key person role and the impact this has on the rest of the staff) However there is no need for a statement in the contract other than an expectation of what roles and responsibilities they will have and how they will be expected to develop skills and knowledge to future improve etc. 3
AnonyMouse_19762 Posted October 20, 2014 Posted October 20, 2014 We are in a similar position, with a staff member who joined last year (pre me!) and has no intention of qualifying. She is great with the children and is a gentle person, and last year she was asked to do more and more and in the end was doing the same work as the qualified staff in terms of key groups, learning journeys, assessments, etc. This apparently led to snippy comments from the qualified staff She approached me a week into the term saying she wasn't comfortable with how she was made to feel by the other staff and didn't believe she should have to do the same work given that she's had no childcare training other than 'on the job'. We came to an agreement that she will operate in more of a support role - preparing snack, washing up etc giving the qualified key persons more time with their children. She has also remained on the lowest pay grade whereas others have had a pay rise to reflect their qualification. Of course, this means that there is more pressure on those of us with key groups as we are effectively a member of staff down (we can only operate on ratio, and not exceed it), so of course now the qualified staff are moaning that she 'gets to play and have none of the responsibility'... Damned if we do, damned if we don't! It has clarified in my mind that should we need to recruit, I will only look for qualified staff, no matter how good someone unqualified may be, which is quite sad in a way. Just wondering why this lady doesn't want to work towards a qualification? Is it a confidence issue - perhaps with some support she would reconsider?
AnonyMouse_41458 Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 Just been reading this thread, I have a question........if you have unqualified staff, are they allowed to be a Key Person or not? We have a member of staff who is very good with the children etc., but she is unqualified. The Supervisor has given her a key group. Is this actually allowed?
AnonyMouse_51737 Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 My unqualified member has been with us for nearly 10 years and gone through every staff mtg, in house training and external training she displays a very indepth knowledge of the EYFS etc, so she key children but half the amount of qualified staff as I deem her to be very competent. Another member who is training to be qualified has only 2 key children to work on but is overseen by a qualified member. We have had as you can tell numerous inspections with our unqualified of 10yeaes and it's never been an issue and they did check her key children information on last visit. x 1
Guest Posted October 26, 2014 Posted October 26, 2014 Just wondering why this lady doesn't want to work towards a qualification? Is it a confidence issue - perhaps with some support she would reconsider? She is already qualified in other things (she was a florist once, for example) and knows that this isn't a career for her, but more a little job to pay off her credit card bill each month, or to treat her children to some nice things. Plus there's the financial/time issue with training. This is an issue I have with most of my (small) team - lack of real commitment to the job. They're all experienced and qualified (except this one), but all part-time and have other jobs/interests that I feel sometimes take more of a priority. Sigh.
AnonyMouse_30128 Posted October 26, 2014 Posted October 26, 2014 She is already qualified in other things (she was a florist once, for example) and knows that this isn't a career for her, but more a little job to pay off her credit card bill each month, or to treat her children to some nice things. Plus there's the financial/time issue with training. This is an issue I have with most of my (small) team - lack of real commitment to the job. They're all experienced and qualified (except this one), but all part-time and have other jobs/interests that I feel sometimes take more of a priority. Sigh. Do you offer a full time position or are their hours limited?
Guest Posted October 26, 2014 Posted October 26, 2014 Do you offer a full time position or are their hours limited? We're only open 4 mornings, and staff do 9.00-12.30. Most do 2 days only. I'm the only full-timer.
Guest Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Hi, sorry to jump on an old thread, but I am new to all of this! I am in the process of buying a preschool and it would seem to me after reading all the relevant docs that the setting is currently not working to the correct ratios as 2 members of staff are unqualified. If you have 6 x 2 year olds, you need to have 2 members of staff for them, one being a L3, can the other member of staff be unqualified? If you have 18 x 3-4 year olds, you will need to have 3 members of staff, again one of them needs to be a L3, but what about the remaining 2 members of staff? We have 2 x L3 and 2 x unqualified. Can someone help me with this?? Thanks!
Guest Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I know that there is a whole process that you have to go through to change a staff member's existing contract. Adding this clause sounds as if it would fall into this category. There is information on the ACAS website so it would be worth exploring there, or even giving them a call. Good luck.
AnonyMouse_22029 Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 Sorry Katie I don't have my eyes with me to confirm but I think you are ok with 2 year olds but this is the think bit with your 3 year olds at least 50% have to have l3. Sorry I get do confused. But if you are buying out someone else do look at TUPE as it guarantees the workforce their current terms and conditions. I think the academic site can help you out there. When I am able to check eyfs I'll get back to you.
Recommended Posts