Stumbling Through Work
Working in education is to stumble through your everyday! We love what we do, but staff, families, policies, regulations and sometimes even the children make us quit everyday then come back the next day. Just remember, you are not in this alone.
Stumbling Through Work
Milk Mustaches and Mixed Messages
Headlines say whole milk is back for kids, but that’s not the whole story. We dig into what the new Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act really changes, what it doesn’t, and why most early childhood programs are still bound by CACFP, state licensing, and QRIS. If you’ve already fielded a parent email that starts with “If schools can do it, why can’t you?” this conversation will arm you with simple language, clear reasoning, and a plan to steady expectations without extra drama.
Follow me :
Website: https://www.abbreviatedlearning.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/abbreviatedlearning
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/abbreviatedlearning
Welcome to Stumbling Through Work where Educators Figure Shit Out. The podcast for educators and anyone who ever walked into their program and said, nope, not today. I'm your host, Jared Huff, here to unpack the wild stories, broken systems, and to call out the chaos. Let's get into it. Hey team, welcome to another episode of Stumbling Through Work where Educators Figure Shit Out. Today's episode is about milk. Yes, milk, the white liquid. Because apparently in 2026, milk needs bipartisan intervention. So here's the deal, y'all. Congress passed and the president signed the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act last week. That translates into schools participating in federal lunch programs are now allowed to serve whole milk and two percent milk again alongside low fat and skim. For those of you all that do not know, once you hit the age of two, children should no longer be drinking whole milk. They should be drinking uh low fat skim 1% milk. It reduces the fat after, you know, once you hit the age of two. And now this reverses that decade-old rule that said, nope, too much fat, kids don't need that. Hey, that rhymed. And now the government has said, actually, they might. Same kids, same bodies, different administration. And before we even talk about whether this is good or bad nutritionally, let's acknowledge something important. If the federal government keeps changing its mind about milk every 10 to 15 years, maybe just maybe the problem isn't childcare centers. So on paper, this law only applies to K through 12 school lunch programs. So why am I mentioning this? Because everyone who works in early childhood already knows how this works. Policy never stays where it starts. Let me repeat that again. Policy never stays where it starts. It trickles, it echoes, and eventually it walks into your center disguised as a parent question because families don't read legislation, they read headlines. And the headlines was basically whole milk is back because kids need fat. So now directors are about to hear, why don't you serve whole milk? My pediatrician says fat is good for brain development. If schools can do it, why can't you? And suddenly your nutrition policy, which hasn't changed, is being treated like it's a personal choice. Here's the part that gets skipped in every single article. Most childcare centers are not governed by the same nutritional rules as K through 12 schools. Most centers operate under CACFP, state licensing regulations, QRIS standards, or kind of a mixture of all three. And those rules don't automatically change just because Congress passed a bill. So now centers are stuck somewhere in that middle place. They're stuck between federal headlines, state regulations, program funding requirements, and parent expectations. You're not being stubborn, you're being regulated. And try explaining that in a two-sentence email while also managing ratios, staffing shortages, and a broken copier. For families, this change creates mixed messages. And I get it, I totally understand because parents are also overwhelmed. Pediatric advice changes, nutrition trend cycle, social media says one thing, and then it says another, then schools do another, centers do something else. So when a center doesn't match what parents heard on the news, it can feel personal, like the program is withholding something. This is where trust gets tested. Families need clarity, not defensiveness. And I I understand, I totally get it. It's almost why do I have to take time out of my day to present something to you that has nothing to do with us? But that's just what we do. So parents need to know what milk options are available, why the center follows specific guidelines, and that nutrition decisions are about safety, consistency, and compliance, not convenience. Because when families don't understand why, frustration fills that gap. You have to take the time to explain because if there's gaps, they're just going to get frustrated, y'all. And for centers, this isn't really about milk. Let's be clear. It's about system strain. Because one small policy shift can trigger menu updates, supplier changes, budget increases, staff retraining, documentation edits, parents pushbacks, licensing questions. You see how all of that came from just a simple thing. All in a field that already runs on thin margins and thinner staffing. Early childhood programs don't get transition teams or rollout tool kits like elementary schools. No. What we get? An email, a deadline, and a parent who wants an answer right now. So yes, whole milk might be back in schools, but for childcare centers and families, this moment highlights something bigger. Policy is loud, but implementation is quiet. Let me say that again for y'all in the back. Policy is loud, implementation is quiet. And in early childhood, it carries the weight of both. It's not about the carton, it's about the confusion. And once again, early childhood is asked to translate national decisions into our daily practices without extra funding, time, or grace. And on that note, we'll be right back. Okay, quick break. If you're a teacher or a director who's currently stumbling through work, and I mean that literally, figuratively, or spiritually, you need to check out our new merch. We've got shirts that say exactly what you want to say in staff meetings, what you want to say to parents, mugs for caffeine that hold your entire personality together, and gear so you can walk into the building already announcing, Nope, I don't have time for this today without even opening your mouth. These are perfect for the classroom, the office, or the car where you sit for 12 minutes pretending you're going to quit. Again, grab your shirts, your mugs, and your survival merch at abbreviatedlearning.com because if you're gonna stumble through work anyway, you might as well look good doing it. Welcome back to Stumbling Through Work. So I have a question, and it is very simple, y'all, but it's a dangerous question, and is borderline unhinged. What are the benefits versus the cons of becoming a teacher in 2026? Because apparently, despite everything, despite the burnout, the shortages, the group chats, the resignation letters, people are still saying, I'm thinking about becoming a teacher. And to that I say, my friend, let's talk about it first. Let's start positive. Because, you know, education folks are always told sometimes that we can be a little too negative. So benefit number one, you matter. Like you actually matter. Teaching is one of the few jobs where you can change the trajectory of a human being's life before lunch. You don't just teach content, you're teaching safety, consistency, confidence, health practices, how to exist in a world without losing your mind. Some days you are the only regulated adult a child sees. Really think about that. You could you can that one day we don't know what's happening at home, we don't know what's happening at other places, but you are that one regulated adult, and that's powerful. That's meaningful. That's also emotionally exhausting shit. But you know what? We'll get there. Benefit number two, job security. Sort of. So let's be real. In 2026, if you can pass a background check, show up on time, and not scream at people, congratulations. You are employable everywhere. Teacher shortages mean you can move states, you can switch programs, you can negotiate a little bit. I mean, you're not gonna get rich, but you probably won't be unemployed. It's definitely a low bar, but you know what? Hey, it still counts. We'll take it. Benefit number three, the community. When it's good, when teachers' environments are healthy, you find ride or die co-workers, trauma bonds that turn into friendships, inside jokes that make no sense outside the building, and people who just get it without explanation. There is nothing like laughing in a break room after a day that absolutely tried to take you out. It's that part. That part is special. Now let's flip to the other side of that coin. Let's talk about the cons. Alright. Deep breath. Con number one. You will be asked to do more with less. Forever. In 2026, teaching has officially become education, counseling, social work, crisis management, customer service, data entry, emotional regulation for adults, all in one job for one paycheck, with the expectation with the expectation that you do it for the kids. Which is cute, until for the kids becomes a replacement for, you know, adequate pay, planning time, mental health support, you know, basic respect. Passion doesn't pay rent. Let's just be honest. Con number two, everyone thinks they know how to do your job. Parents, politicians, people who haven't been in the classroom since 1998, everyone has opinions. They will tell you what you should teach, they'll tell you what you shouldn't say, they'll tell you how you shouldn't manage behavior, and why it's your fault. And if something goes wrong, it's never systematic. It's always just you. Con number three, burnout is no longer a risk, it's a feature. In 2026, burnout isn't a surprise. It's built into the structure. You are expected to be flexible, to be resilient, to be positive, to be quiet about being overwhelmed, and when you finally say something, you'll be told you might need better self-care. No. The system needs better care. Come on now. Let's address the elephant in the room. Pay. Some places are improving, some places are not. Some places say they value teachers and improve otherwise. You will likely work unpaid hours, buy your own supplies, be guilted into staying late, be told raises aren't in the budget, but somehow there's always money for rebranding. So should you become a teacher in 2026? And here's the honest answer. If you're looking for validation, easy work, respect from systems, a calm, predictable day, this is not your lane. But if you care deeply, you can hold boundaries and you're willing to unlearn pretty much everything. Understand that loving kids doesn't mean sacrificing yourself. Then maybe, just maybe, you belong here. Teaching in 2026 requires a backbone, humor, boundaries, and a very strong no. Teaching is not dying. The version of teaching that exploits people is, let's say that again, the version of teaching that exploits people is. If education wants to survive, it has to stop surviving on the backs of burned out teachers and educators. So if you're considering becoming a teacher in 2026, don't ask, do I love kids enough? Ask, will I protect myself while doing this work? Because the kids do need you, because you also need you, and will return shortly after the break. So, are you an educator watching everyone else get promoted, watching everyone else get raises, or even get their recognition for things you've literally have been doing forever? That's why we offer educational career development coaching designed for teachers, directors, and leaders who want to move up, earn more, and actually get the credit for the work they do. We work on interviews, resumes, salary negotiation, leadership confidence, communication skills, and how to stop letting your admin gaslight you into believing you're not ready yet. You are ready. You just need the strategy. Book your session at abbreviatedlearning.com and start moving towards the title, salary, and respect you deserve. Because stumbling through work is funny, but stumbling through your career is not. Okay, guys, we are back with asking for a friend. Number one, after a lengthy conversation, I am deeply concerned about an employee who has faced three parent complaints for rough handling of children, was caught with her phone powered on in the diaper changing area, and has said creepy things to kids like, Can I come to your house and play? And can I sleep in your bed? She has been reminded not to hug or kiss children. Additionally, she became physically combative with me when I questioned her about hurting a child. WTH. Does it take to get rid of a liability employees and actually put children's safety first? The owner is weak and isn't taking any further actions. Before I dive into this, y'all, why did I read, Can I come to your house and play? Why did I sound like a creepy ass doll when I said that? But okay. I need someone to explain something to me slowly, with examples. Let me just set the scene. So an employee has three parent complaints for rough handling of children, was caught with their phone on one being on their phone and having their phone on. So I'm assuming it was giving the creepiness of videoing children in the diaper changing area. Then they say things, they say things to children like, Can I come to your house and play? Can I sleep in your bed? Has told has been told repeatedly not to hug or kiss children, and then when questioned about hurting a child, she got physically combative, and yet we're still monitoring the situation. So my question is simple. What exactly is the threshold? Come on now. One complaint, let's coach. Two complaints, let's retrain. Three complaints, let's have a conversation. Phone on during a diaper change? Well, I mean, did we see her use it? Sexually inappropriate comments to children? She didn't mean it like that. Physical aggression towards others, she was just emotional. I am sorry. Are we waiting for a fourth complaint and a police report? Because children aren't test cases. This isn't about grace. This isn't about second chances. This isn't about supporting staff. This is about liability and more important, safety. When someone violates boundaries, ignores direct instructions, makes children uncomfortable, escalates physically with adults. This is not a training issue. This is a move on from the building issue. You don't need one more write-up. You don't need one more coaching plan, one more meeting with coffee and feelings. You need a spine. And the owner or administrator refuses to act, they're not being kind. What they're being is cowardly. They're choosing avoiding conflict, avoiding unemployment claims, avoiding uncomfortable decisions, over children's safety, staff morale, the program's integrity, and guess who pays for that? Not the owner, not the liability employee, the kids do. And so, you know, the staff who now knows knows if something bad happens, leadership won't protect us. I'm exhausted by the idea that we have we need a perfect storm of evidence before we act. Children are not a risk management exercise. If your gut is screaming, if parents are complaining, if boundaries are being crossed, if behavior is escalating, that is your answer. Because doing nothing is still a decision. Not and by got pissed off. Let me move on to the next question.
unknown:Whew.
SPEAKER_00:Okay. Hey y'all. I'm planning for next month right now, and I'm coming up empty with ideas for our week that is president's theme. I'm specifically looking for ideas for science, blocks, and math centers that would fit this theme. I'm finding this one hard to plan for while also remaining sensitive to different views and the current political climate. Any ideas would be helpful. Well, thank you, person, for uh for this comment. Um I just want to say out loud that you are thinking what every teacher and educator is thinking at some point. But present this week is one of those themes that sounds fine until you sit down and plan and realize you teach three and four-year-olds. You are not here to explain modern politics, and you'd really like to avoid angry emails. I get that. So let's start with re let's start this with reassurance. You are not wrong for finding this hard. You are not required to teach political ideology to toddlers, and president does not have to mean politics. So take a breath. Chill girl, you are right. So, what you can do is reframe the theme. So here's the mental shift that saves your sanity. Presidents' week could Equal leadership, symbols, history, not political opinion, parties, and current events. You are teaching roles, jobs, symbols, numbers, structures, not debates. This is not debate team girl. If anyone expects more than that from a preschool classroom, then that's just on them. Let's stop pretending we're doing political science. If you're stressed out about teaching Presidents Week, that tells me you care. It tells me that you're thoughtful in your actions and what you're presenting in your classroom, and it actually tells me you're a good teacher. But preschool is not the place to solve adult political tensions. It is a place to teach curiosity, respect, um, thinking, counting, building. You're not failing the theme. The theme is just kind of poorly defined. And so I hope that answers your question. And we will return after the break. You know that moment in your day. The one when you stop, stare into the fluorescent lights, and think, There has to be a better way than whatever nonsense way we're doing right now. The best practice series is that better way. Because these books, they're short, they're friendly, they're written in plain English, and not that education jargon sprinkled with fairy dust language. Hand them to your team and say, Please just do it like this so I don't lose my last good nerve. We've got guides on tours, policies, communication, safety, programming, and all the daily madness nobody warns you about. And the best part, your team will get it, families will feel the difference, and you get to breathe like a normal human again. Grab your copies at abbreviatedlearning.com or just risk another week of someone asking, wait, what's that procedure again? Hey team, we are back with our interview question for the day. You ask the question, how long would you plan on staying with us? And they respond with, Well, at my last job, they were toxic. They were understaffed, underpaying me. My director cried every day, and stop. Stop immediately. Do not hire them. Absolutely do not hire them. But you know what? Some of y'all will because y'all hire out of desperation. The question was not their therapy. Let's start off with that. And let's also let's also be honest. No one actually knows the answer to this question. We're always asked it, but nobody does. This includes you and I. Nobody knows the answer. So let's look at some other responses that should conclude with you showing them the door. Wrong answer number two. Forever. I'm looking for my forever job. I'm very loyal. I plan to retire here. Child, what I heard was I will emotionally collapse if this doesn't work out. Also, no, you are not retiring here. This is a job listing, not a marriage proposal. Wrong answer number three. As long as it works for me, that translates into the second this becomes inconvenient, I'm gone. Even if that's true, and it is, we don't say that shit out loud. Wrong answer number four. I don't know. I mean, was it honest? Yes. Was it helpful? No. I'm just seeing how it goes tells me I have zero intentions on committing to anything. And then let's do one more. Wrong answer number five. You know, until I finish school, get certified, find something better. Listen. It's to find something better for me. That just told someone, you are a placeholder job. That said to me, what you do don't matter. To me, it says this job ain't shit. That's what I just heard. So, you know, I would just smile, I would nod, and I will quickly not call you back. But what the question truly really is asking, it's not for an actual timeline. What I'm asking for is are you a flight risk? Are we about to spend months training you just for you to leave? Do you understand that turnover is expensive? Are you realistic or are you delusional? Do you see this as a step or a dumping ground, especially in childcare? Because onboarding in ECE is background checks, which equals money because you got to pay for them or I gotta pay for them, but somebody paying for something. Training hours, spending time where you're not in classrooms, training you how we do things in our company, ratio adjustments. Um, if your background isn't cleared, you can't be by yourself, then I have to rearrange and I have to add in you somewhere else and changing schedules, um, classroom transitions, moving staff around so that the building is covered the way that it needs to be, parent trust, families taking in time to get to know you. They're like, oh, I like so-and-so, or I don't like so-and-so, and then you just disappear. So I'm asking, if we invest in you, are we going are you going to disappear in six weeks? That's it. That is the subtext. And what you should say is something that sounds stable, thoughtful, honest, not desperate, not temporary. This is what I would like to hear. I'm looking for a role where I can grow and contribute long term. I don't make short-term decisions about employment. I want to be somewhere that's a good fit for both me and the company. If the expectations are clear, the support is there. And I'm able to grow professionally. I see myself staying and investing in the role. Boom. There it went. Not a single time frame given. See that answer says that I'm not flaky. It says I'm not naive, and I understand that this is a relationship. I plan to stay if things are healthy. And I tell people that a lot. In a job, you should get something from a job, and a job should get something from you. It should be reciprocal. So remember, this question is not about years, it's about risk. Don't promise forever, don't announce your exit plan, and don't overshare your trauma. And for the love of all things professional, if they say I don't really know, we'll see, don't hire them and we'll be right back. Listen, if your center or program is currently held together by tape, caffeine, and vibes, you might need consulting. And that's where abbreviated learning comes in. We work with childcare centers, studios, and youth programs that are doing their absolute best while simultaneously drowning in staffing issues, quality, enrollment gaps, and with that one parent who emails 14 times a day. We help you streamline your systems, fix the operational chaos, train your teachers, and get the program functioning like you're not just winging it every morning at 6 a.m. Whether you need policies, tours, staff development, or someone to just look at your program and say, okay, here's how we unjanky this. We're here for you. Visit abbreviatedlearning.com to book consulting for your center or program because stumbling through work is funny on the podcast, but not in real life. Okay, team, we are now back with policy time. And remember something. Something became a policy because someone then messed this shit up for all of us. Today's policy is communable diseases. The policy reads: Any staff member who has a diagnosis or is in direct contact with someone in the same household who has been diagnosed with a communable disease must not report to work and must immediately notify their supervisor immediately. Here's the policy in plain English. If you are sick or someone in your house is sick, don't come to work and notify your boss. That's it. That's the policy, that's the tweet. It's that simple. The policy exists because childcare is not an office with cubicles and Lysol wipes. We are holding babies, we are changing diapers, we're wiping noses, we're touching faces, we are sharing toys that will end up in some child's mouth, maybe one of their ears. One sick adult does not stay one sick adult. It becomes 12 sick children, 12 sick families, you know, seven sick staff members, licensing and health department calling, parents emailing, and one director crying in their car. All because someone said, I feel fine. So let me introduce you to Brenda. Now Brenda is a team player. Brenda doesn't like to miss work. Brenda prides herself on pushing through. Brenda wakes up one morning and her partner says, Hey, I just tested positive for a highly contagious illness. And Brenda says, Well, I feel okay. So Brenda comes to work anyway. Brenda says she got bills, she got nails, and she got heels to buy. Brenda hugs the babies. Brenda wipes noses. Brenda helps in the in the toddler room. Brenda eats chips out of the staff room bag with her bare hands, and this is why I don't eat food that y'all be passing around at y'all's schools, and why I don't do potlucks, but that's a whole nother conversation for another day. Let's fast forward 72 hours. Now, three kids have symptoms, two staff members are out, parents are emailing screenshots of CDC guidelines, and licensing wants to know why didn't you follow your own policy? But Brenda says, I didn't think it was a big deal. Brenda, it was in fact a big deal. This is not about trust. Let's be clear. This policy is not because we don't trust staff, it's not because we think people are lying or because we want to punish someone. This policy exists because exposure matters, even without symptoms. You don't have to be coughing, you don't have to feel sick, you just have to be contagious. And those are two different things. And childcare does not get the luxury of waiting to see what happens. Also, and this part isn't fun, but it's real. Licensing and the health department does not care about intentions. Parents do not care about intentions. Public health does not care about intentions, they care about policies, they care about documentation and whether we follow them. If we thought it would be fine, is not a defense. So when we say do not report to work and notify your supervisor immediately, what we're really saying is protect the kids, protect the families, protect your coworkers, protect the center, protect your job. Stay home is not being unreliable. Staying home is being responsible. So please, if you or someone in your household has a communable disease, if you don't know what a communable disease, look it up. Don't be Brenda. Brenda is tired, Brenda is stressed, Brenda is now patient zero in the group chat. Follow the policy, send the text, stay home. We'll survive one absence. I promise we will, and we would not survive an outbreak. Well, that's all that I have for you today. I want you all to do several things for me. One, prepare for the milk question that will arise. It's coming, so be prepared with an appropriate answer. Two, we are in cold, flu, RSV, COVID season. If you are sick, stay home. And three, get rid of creepy ass people. That's it. And other than that, I'll talk to y'all later. Bye. Alright, that's another episode of Stumbling Through Work where educators figure shit out. If today made you laugh, think, or just say, Wow, that's my life, go ahead and subscribe and leave a review. Or share this with another educator who's one licensing violation away from quitting. I'm Jared Huff. See you next time, probably stumbling, but still showing up.
