I don't think Mary Poppins was indicating in her original post that she was pushing out anyone, I think she was asking if she should put it in writting and that her clients already know that being p/t could put them at risk of loosing their spot if she found a f/t family because of the issue I am currently into. I don't see what's unfair about that. She is now wanting to put into writting what has already been agreed upon verbally. IMO, if a parent is willing to sign on to that p/t spot knowing that, then that's their choice right? If the family isn't happy knowing they could be pushed out to a f/t child, then they don't have to sign on with her or anyone else who has a statement like that in their contract.

For me, my minimum p/t is 3 days/wk, I have one p/t family now and have been told different things from them in recent weeks. I need to protect my own business and income, so when DCM asked me to allow her fewer days per/wk and indicated that she would be happy to keep little man home if I didn't agree to her request, I started to interview. Now, she has changed what she told me and wants to talk more to her husband, but I have found a f/t family to fill her spot when she goes on mat leave this summer. Of course I don't want to tell anyone I can't care for their child anymore because they are p/t, but I am doing the move for me, my family and what works for us financially. By keeping the p/t vs taking the f/t I lose $244/month...over the year that adds up to over $3000 if you take into account the months that have 5 pay days in them!

In my case the DCM has been unclear on her needs/wants which forced me to ensure I didn't have an emtpy space to fill at the last moment or that they decided to stay and then later leave because they couldn't afford it (she mentioned costs) - but in reality - I'm sure there are a number of providers who find themselves needing to change things up to be in a better position financially and life changes over time and so do the needs of each daycare.

Reply