59 replies to this topic

[jonny]

The highway follows a salmon spawning river, which is protected under federal law. It would require hundreds of millions of dollars of blasting work which would adversely the Goldstream River. Its bad enough with the current highway.

So how'd all those highways get built along and over the Fraser? The Fraser has salmon. Compared to the Fraser, Goldstream is a ditch.

[UrbanRail]

So how'd all those highways get built along and over the Fraser? The Fraser has salmon. Compared to the Fraser, Goldstream is a ditch.

 

Well there is a difference, first off, the Fraser is a lot bigger and so can handle any major changes, unlike the Goldstream River (or as you call it, a ditch) is far more sensitive. Second, There are several restoration efforts along its banks, so any blasting or alterations along the highway would have a negative impact. So unless you are suggesting we put the Goldstream "Ditch" in culvert, we have to consider other alternatives.

[LJ]

The high care-provider to child ratio coupled with wages in this sector (notoriously low) are what makes it so expensive.  At $1200 a month per child, with a 3:1 ratio for a licensed infant spot, you only have $3600 to work with, from which you must pay wages and overhead (of which $2600 per month or more is wages alone).  It's not a gold mine from the care provider side of the equation - and lets face it, its not a job you want people doing just because they can't afford to do what they really want to. It takes a special kind of person to put up with a toddler (or three) day in and day out.

You can get a live in nanny for about $1000 a month.

[Awaiting Juno]

You can get a live in nanny for about $1000 a month.

 

Plus the provision of room and board.  And I think the $1000 a month figure is outdated and incorrect.

[lanforod]

Plus the provision of room and board.  And I think the $1000 a month figure is outdated and incorrect.

 

I know of one who pays 2600/mo.

[nerka]

Well there is a difference, first off, the Fraser is a lot bigger and so can handle any major changes, unlike the Goldstream River (or as you call it, a ditch) is far more sensitive. Second, There are several restoration efforts along its banks, so any blasting or alterations along the highway would have a negative impact. So unless you are suggesting we put the Goldstream "Ditch" in culvert, we have to consider other alternatives.

Spend enough money and four lanes could go through Goldstream with minimal impact on the "river" (more like a creek by my standards) and the fish habitat.  Think elevated lanes or tunnels. The question is whether anyone wants to spend that kind of money......

[Layne French]

It's also a two or three year program by law to become an early childhood educator. Who wants to do that much school to only get paid $12/hr?

QFT... The amount of credentials you need in order to work in some jobs is insane in this country. My Fiancee works as an admin support to one of the directors of Shaw here in Calgary. Sadly most HR departments would say that an administration program is a requirement. 

If its not school then it is industries trying to create "accreditation" boards.... I still am confused about how Interior Designers feel they need to have their own industry body and accreditation process... I hardly feel my profession needs one, however we do and I question the value of it each day.

Edited by Layne French, 04 November 2016 - 01:28 PM.

[Mike K.]

The most sensible solution to the Malahat problem would truly be a bridge over the inlet.

 

Let the Malahat remain a wagon trail and run a floating bridge to Mill Bay. The 520 bridge in Seattle is 3.5km in length. We could build a span of 3.1km in length between 17A and the La Furtune Road area.

[nerka]

You can get a live in nanny for about $1000 a month.

I doubt it is possible to respect labour laws and have a live in nanny for $1000 a month.  Maximum deduction for room and board is $325 IIRC.  $10.40 x 8 hours/day x 21 days = $1750/month. Subtract Room and board and you have $1425/mo before even considering employer contribution to EI and CPP. Plus WCB. Plus 4% holiday pay.  I'd guess about 1700/month would be minimum if you wanted to fully comply with the law.

Edited by nerka, 04 November 2016 - 01:30 PM.

[Bingo]

The most sensible solution to the Malahat problem would truly be a bridge over the inlet.

 

Let the Malahat remain a wagon trail and run a floating bridge to Mill Bay. The 520 bridge in Seattle is 3.5km in length. We could build a span of 3.1km in length between 17A and the La Furtune Road area.

 

Here?

 

[UrbanRail]

The most sensible solution to the Malahat problem would truly be a bridge over the inlet.

 

Let the Malahat remain a wagon trail and run a floating bridge to Mill Bay. The 520 bridge in Seattle is 3.5km in length. We could build a span of 3.1km in length between 17A and the La Furtune Road area.

A similar project was proposed in the late 90s. But it wasnt a floating bridge, it was suspension bridge. There was talk of having rail underneath it? Anway, it got a pretty cold reception from the North Saanich Crowd. So I doubt it would receive anything different now. But I could see that happening.

[LJ]

I doubt it is possible to respect labour laws and have a live in nanny for $1000 a month.  Maximum deduction for room and board is $325 IIRC.  $10.40 x 8 hours/day x 21 days = $1750/month. Subtract Room and board and you have $1425/mo before even considering employer contribution to EI and CPP. Plus WCB. Plus 4% holiday pay.  I'd guess about 1700/month would be minimum if you wanted to fully comply with the law.

COST OF A LIVE-IN NANNY IN ONTARIO
$13/hour | 44 hours per week | Paid every 2 weeks
Gross pay ($13/hour x 44 hours/week x 2 weeks)

$1,144

Taxes deducted (federal tax, provincial tax and employee contributions to CPP and EI)

$206

Room and board deducted, if applicable

$170.50

Net pay (nanny's take-home pay)

$767.50

Source deductions (taxes deducted, as above, plus employer contributions to CPP and EI)

$286
Total cost (your out-of-pocket expenses) $1,053.50

[UrbanRail]

Spend enough money and four lanes could go through Goldstream with minimal impact on the "river" (more like a creek by my standards) and the fish habitat.  Think elevated lanes or tunnels. The question is whether anyone wants to spend that kind of money......

 

Its not going to happen and I doubt first nations will support it either. As much as you may think its just a creek, it has important cultural significance to them. At the same time there is a large marsh area at the foot of the Goldstream river at the end of Finlayson Arm, so any impact will have consequences no matter how small.

 

I think 2 to 3 billion is better spent elsewhere.

[lanforod]

COST OF A LIVE-IN NANNY IN ONTARIO
$13/hour | 44 hours per week | Paid every 2 weeks
Gross pay ($13/hour x 44 hours/week x 2 weeks)

$1,144

Taxes deducted (federal tax, provincial tax and employee contributions to CPP and EI)

$206

Room and board deducted, if applicable

$170.50

Net pay (nanny's take-home pay)

$767.50

Source deductions (taxes deducted, as above, plus employer contributions to CPP and EI)

$286
Total cost (your out-of-pocket expenses) $1,053.50

 

That would be 1053.50 per 2 weeks, not per month.

[nerka]

That would be 1053.50 per 2 weeks, not per month.

Bingo! 

 

Plus the numbers not quite right anyhow.  1144 gross pay + 4% holiday pay = 1189.76 - 170.50 (room and board amount) = 1019.26 + 83.80 (employers EI and CPP) = $1103.06 per two weeks. That doesn't include WCB coverage (mandatory under the foreign live in caregiver program).  Plus the minor detail that your live in nanny will require actual food that may cost your family extra:-)

[Bingo]

Bingo! 

 

 

Yes?

[Awaiting Juno]

The childcare issue is a big problem that doesn't have easy answers and is very similar to the elder care problem.  At either end, there are people who need to be cared for and the carers have largely joined the workforce - meaning somebody must either leave the workforce, or they must import help (either via the live-in program) or otherwise.  Those jobs don't pay a lot - but at the same time, there isn't a lot left over after paying for it either.  Periods of caring also tend to be very transitory (ie. 6 years duration or less, mitigated by school entry or death).  Further, there are gender and equity issues that make solving the problem something that requires thoughtful analysis of the policies put in place.

 

Maternity/Parental leave solves the problem for a large number of people for the first year of life, as does compassionate care leave somewhat.  However, I'm not sure if "opting out of the workforce" is really what is desired or even what is optimal.  For many, the ability to work part-time enables better care sharing than a complete opt-out, so perhaps the facilitation of job-shares might be more helpful.  For others, perhaps encouraging further skill development during periods of caring might be a good strategy. 

 

Ultimately - the burden needs be met - and the choices on how it is met may have significant impacts.  Which is why a cohesive strategy that helps those facing these challenges is a good plank in an election platform for the island. 

[LJ]

That would be 1053.50 per 2 weeks, not per month.

mea culpa. I didn't look at it very carefully I must admit as it is not something I need.

[Awaiting Juno]

mea culpa. I didn't look at it very carefully I must admit as it is not something I need.

 

Yep, and when you need it, it is a significant issue.  It is something that impacts everyone though, because if a person can't find childcare, they can't return to their pre-parenthood position or if the childcare isn't adequate, it will impact on their performance in their roles.  The working mom gig often isn't easy - and finding a balance is just a never ending pursuit.  To be honest, right now - with whatever I take on, I find myself asking "Does this work with my obligations to my family?", and if the answer is no, it's something that I've got to say "not now" to.  I anticipate that that will be the case for the foreseeable future (read: unlikely to pursue politics for the next decade at least)...

[Nparker]

... I anticipate that that will be the case for the foreseeable future (read: unlikely to pursue politics for the next decade at least)...

And the CRD is poorer for that, but I respect your dedication to your family 100%.