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
Preschool Wins, Childcare Loses
Want to know how a well-meaning universal preschool plan ended up shrinking childcare access across Los Angeles? We pull back the curtain on the economics policymakers ignored: four-year-olds don’t just fill classrooms, they subsidize infant and toddler care. When those children moved to free public programs, more than 150 community centers closed and 12,000 seats disappeared. We walk through the margin math, the licensing realities that make “just pivot to infants” a fantasy, and why the equity win landed hardest in wealthy neighborhoods while working families lost options.
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. Alright, if you're an early childhood director, owner, administrator, policymaker, or even a parent, buckle up because this one, this one is for you. This one is personal. So California rolled out free preschool for all four-year-olds, a universal transitional kindergarten situation, and everybody clapped. This is specifically LA. Legislators were high-fiving, you know, press releases were flying, headlines said things like equity, access, opportunity, closing that gap. And then over a hundred and fifty child care centers closed in the LA area. That averages twelve thousand child care slots gone. Which I know sounds confusing and sounds like the opposite. It's wild because apparently nobody thought about the fact that when you remove four-year-olds from child care, the entire child care business model collapsed. Let me rewind. So California launches free preschool inside public elementary schools. In theory, this sounds fantastic. Free early education, lower child care costs, better access, school readiness, equity. Love that. No notes. I have no notes on that. But here's what actually happened in LA. Public schools opened free preschool classrooms. Families pulled their four-year-olds out of private and community-based childcare centers. Those centers instantly lost their most profitable age group and then they folded. Because childcare centers do not survive on infants and toddlers alone. And let me repeat that for the policymakers in the back. Childcare centers do not financially survive on infants and toddlers alone. Four-year-olds are the economic backbone of early childhood programs. They have higher ratios, lower staffing costs, fewer licensing restrictions, and larger group sizes, which means they subsidize infant and toddler rooms, staff benefits, you know, facility costs, and pretty much literally everything else. So when four-year-olds disappeared, the math stopped mathing. And that's exactly what happened. More than 150 centers closed in LA County alone. 12,000 childcare seats vanished, which means families didn't actually gain child care access, they lost it. So now we have free preschool. But this now means fewer places for infants and toddlers, which means families still can't work. But sure, let's celebrate this. Now see, here's where it even gets messier. Who actually benefited the most from pre-free from free preschool? Wealthy families. The highest income neighborhoods saw a 148% surge in public preschool enrollment. Why? Because these families were already paying$25,000 to$36,000 a year for private preschool. So when so when it became free and it became available, they said, well, free? Yeah, I'll take it. I mean, who wouldn't? If I didn't have to pay$25,000 a year, I wouldn't do it. Meanwhile, enrollment in low-income neighborhoods only increased about 50%. Now I know everyone's kind of wondering why. Because many low-end families already had subsidized child care and they need full-day child care and not half-day public school schedules. They relied on relatives. That's just what that's just what we do. Or they couldn't manage the transportation to elementary schools. So the families who needed access the most benefited the least. And the families who needed financial relief the least benefited the most. Policy design, ladies and gentlemen. Policy design. Now here's the part policymakers love to say. Well, centers can just pivot to serving infants and toddlers. Oh, can they? Let's talk about that. You can't just, you know, snap your fingers and turn a preschool room into an infant room. To serve infants, you need lower ratios, which means more staff, new equipment, cribs, diaper stations, more sinks possibly, um, health approval, licensing inspections, renovations, thousands of dollars, and six to twelve months of you know, just waiting for all of this to transpire, all while making less money per child. So let's do the math. Preschool is like usually one teacher to about 12, 13 children based off of your ratio wherever you live. Pretty universal. But with infants, it's one teacher to three to four kids based off of your ratio. So that means more payroll, more liability, more staffing shortages, more burnout, less revenue. Most infant rooms operate at a financial loss, and I don't think people realize that. You don't make money with infants. Centers rely on preschool revenue to offset that cost. So when you remove preschoolers, the entire business model collapse. This isn't greed, people, this is math. And math does not care about your feelings. And see, this is the part where I talk directly to childcare folks. This is for the child care people. Because if you run a center, this article that I that I'm getting this information from, it didn't shock you. Because you already knew this was coming. Because we live in tensions of policy ratio payroll, subsidy delays, rising costs, staffing shortages, parent affordability, regulatory pressure, and then policymakers come in with these huge system changes and don't include us in the design. They design education systems for schools and not for childcare ecosystems. But child care is infrastructure. It is workforce infrastructure, it is economic infrastructure, it is family stability infrastructure. When childcare collapses, parents can't work, staffing shortages worsen, businesses lose employees, poverty increases. But universal preschool was never built with child care economics in mind. It was built with education optics in mind, and that's the disconnect. Now, if you think this is just a California problem, it's not. Every state considering universal preschool expansion needs to pay attention. Because what LA is showing us is you cannot pull one thread in early childhood without unraveling the entire system. You can't add free preschool without stabilizing childcare funding, without integrating private providers, without protecting community-based centers. Because when those collapse, families lose choice, access, and stability. And let's be honest, childcare already operates on razor-thin margins as it is. Nobody in this industry is driving Lamborghinis. We're driving 2002 Hondas with goldfish crackers in the seats and staff schedules in the cup holders. So when policymakers say this will help families, but the result is now families can't afford infant care anywhere, we have a problem. So what's the lesson? The lesson is not universal preschool is bad. I want to be clear about that. The lesson is universal preschool must include community child care centers as partners, not casualties. Because when you fund public schools only and exclude private centers and ignore childcare economics, you collapse the very system families rely on. Good policy requires system modeling, financial modeling, provider inclusion, real-world testing. Not just, hey, this sounds good in a press conference. So yeah, free preschool didn't save child care. It nearly destroyed it. And if we don't learn from this, we're going to repeat it everywhere. And you know what? If this section hits home with you, send it to a policymaker, a school board member, a legislator, somebody in your licensing, or that one friend who thinks childcare is just babysitting, because this is work. This is infrastructure, and infrastructure matters, and 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. This is for anyone in ECE who has ever thought the Department of Education told me to do this, and Health and Human Services said absolutely not, and licensing wants it documented and triplicate. If you've ever felt like early childhood education is a shared custody arrangement where the adults refuse to speak to each other, congratulations! You're not crazy, you're just an ECE. Early childhood education exists in a very special place. Not fully education, not fully, you know, care, just vibes, I guess. The Department of Education says we're preparing children for school success. Health and Human Services says we're protecting children's health and safety. And ECE providers are like, cool, cool, cool, which which one of you is paying for this? Because see, here's the thing education wants lesson plans, assessments, outcomes, alignment, data, and health wants ratios, diaper logs, hand washing posters, food temps, bleach dilution measured by NASA, and both want compliance. Neither wants confusion, but ECE lives in confusion. Let's talk about the lived experience. Education says children should have hands-on learning experiences. But then health will say, why is there sand on the floor? And then education comes back and says, you know, children should explore sensory materials. And then health will say, Is that labeled, covered, logged, and approved? And then education will go, outdoor learning is essential. And then health says, Well, where's the shade plan, health index protocol, and emergency binder? ECE providers are out here like So do we teach them or disinfect them first? And if you get it wrong, no one says, We understand, this is complicated. Nah, what they're gonna say is this is non-compliant, and go ahead and write you up. Speaking of writing up, let's just go ahead and dive into licensing. Licensing doesn't make the rules. Licensing enforces the rules. Licensing shows up with a clipboard and a neutral face like I don't agree with it either, but I still have to cite you. They're enforcing education mandates written by people who don't even visit classrooms, health regulations written by people who don't run centers, and policies written in offices far away from crying toddlers. And when you say, but the Department of Education told us to do it this way, licensing says that's not what health requires. And when you say, Well, health approved this, education says that doesn't meet quality standards. And ECE providers are just standing there like a child holding two parents' hands while they argue in the parking lot. Just embarrassing. But see, none of these departments argue over ECE, actually run programs. They don't cover staffing shortages, they don't pay overtime, replace broken sinks, buy PPE, they don't fix playgrounds, train staff. ECE programs pay for conflicting rules, conflicting inspections, conflicting expectations, and conflicting timelines. Education wants innovation, health wants risk elimination. ECE wants enough funding to survive. But spoiler alert, you don't get innovation when you are terrified of citations. You get compliance theater. Just want to make sure that everyone understands that. ECE is judged as a school when the outcomes are low, a daycare when things go wrong, a business when funding is discussed, and a nonprofit when guilt is applied. You are always the problem, never the system. And if kids aren't ready, it's your fault. If a regulation is missed, it's your fault. If staff quit, it's your fault. But no one asks, What happens when two departments give opposite directions? Because the answer is inconvenient. Here's the truth nobody wants to say. Early childhood education cannot thrive while being pulled apart by agencies that don't collaborate. You cannot ask programs to educate like schools, operate like hospitals, pay like nonprofits, and perform like corporations, and then act shocked when people are burned out. ECE doesn't need more rules or binders, more audits. ECE needs alignment, collaboration, funding, and you know, adults who actually talk to each other. And then ECE providers will keep doing what they always do, holding everything together while being blamed for the cracks. Send this episode to someone so they know they're not crazy and the shit just doesn't make sense. Just know if the system feels impossible, that's because it was built that way. So we will just keep stumbling through work and we'll be right back after the break. So, are you an educator watching everyone else get promoted, watching everyone else get raises, or even get the 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. After almost everyone called out, and we can't use our PTO or vacation time if we call off. It's extremely toxic and greedy for the higher-ups. They knew how bad the conditions were and still delayed closing, potentially jeopardizing people's health if someone got into an accident on their way to work. Also, they could only have to pay a small fraction of their workers for the day. Alright. Let's talk about snow days. Because apparently some executives woke up today and said, hmm, should we value human life or should we squeeze out$8 of productivity before someone hydroplanes into a guardrail? And somehow, they pick the guardrail. So here's the situation the Northeast, over a foot of snow, ice, roads closed, everything shut down. And when I say everything, I mean schools, highways, government buildings, probably even Duncan said, nah, we just not doing this today. But childcare centers? Oh no, we're open. Figure it out. Because obviously, if hospitals can close, courts can close, and the state can shut down, but somehow preschool staff are expected to magically transform into Olympic snow rally drivers. Let's paint the picture. Staff woke up at 5 AM. They look outside, they see a literal winter apocalypse. Cars buried, driveways iced, plows nowhere in sight, and leadership says still open, see you at eight. People can't even back out of their driveways. But sure, let's risk, you know, black ice, totaled vehicles, medical bills, possible death for circle time. Now here's where it gets premium level ridiculous. They finally close fifteen minutes before staff was supposed to arrive. Not the night before, not early morning, not when weather alerts started screaming, no. They waited until everyone already stressed, already scrambling, when everyone's already risking their safety and only close after almost everyone called out. That translates to if they close early, they pay staff, but as staff calls out, they save money. See, I know how the corporate mind thinks, and apparently payroll is more. Important than people. And let's talk about the PTO piece because this deserves its own emotional support segment. You can't use PTO or vacation if you call out due to weather. So let's understand this. You're telling employees risk your life driving in unsafe conditions or lose pay. Also, don't you dare use the time off you've earned to protect yourself. That's not policy. That is coercion. That's financial pressure disguised as leadership. They're saying we value attendance more than survival. And what makes it worse? They knew the conditions were bad. That wasn't like surprise snow. That was this wasn't like a freak flurry. This was weather alerts, state, you know, state warnings, road closures, ice advisories. They had every data point to make the right call. They just chose the cheapest one. And listen, I run child care. I understand budgets, I understand margins, I understand closures, expenses, I understand all of that. But I also understand lawsuits, I understand workers' comp, car accidents, medical claims, I understand staff turnover, burned out resentment, glass door reviews, because all of those cost a whole lot more than one snow day. This is how trust dies actually, and not in like big dramatic moments, but in small, consistent signals that say you are replaceable, you're expendable, your safety is optional, and people remember that. They still show up, they still may clock in, and they st but guess what? They stop caring, they stop giving extra, they stop staying late, they stop covering shifts, they stop recommending friends, and just stop emotionally investing. And eventually they just stop staying. Let's be very clear. This is a toxic leadership behavior, not strict, not disciplined, not high expectations, just toxic. Because healthy leadership says, is this reasonable? Toxic leadership says, how far can I push them before they break? And here's the wild part. This industry already struggles with staff shortages, burnout, low wages, high stress, um, emotional labor, unrealistic expectations. And somehow leadership keeps saying, Let's make it worse. Childcare workers already lift kids, clean bodily fluids, manage emotions, um, manage emotions from parents, navigate licensing, documents everything, and they run on caffeine and survival instincts. And now we're adding driving blizzards or else. You know what? Nothing screams quality early childhood education like skeleton staffing, anxious employees, employ empty classrooms, and leadership hiding behind hiding behind policy manuals. And then leadership wonders why is morale so low? Why is turnover so high? Why can't we keep staff? Your choices in those moments show exactly who you are. And that's all that I have to say on that. So moving on to the next uh topic, next question. I'm not overly happy with our current water bottle storage. The children's cubbies are too small to keep them in. Does anyone have water bottle storage ideas? Both for easy access for the other children and easy access for the younger classes that would drink out of any cup they can get their hands on. Now, I hear the concerns about water bottles. Our cubbies are too small, kids drink out of each other's cups, teachers can't manage access, it's chaos. And I'm here to say correct, correct, correct, and correct. Which is exactly why paper cups win. Let's start with the fantasy version of water bottles. Every child has a labeled bottle that stays in their cubby and they only drink from it when it's clean daily and they never it never gets swapped and it never gets contaminated. That version exists in Pinterest Land. Because in real life, kids are feral. They grab anything within arm's reach, they drink out of each other's cups, they're nasty, they switch bottles, they put mouths directly on other people's lids, they knock them over, they spill them, they lose them, and then teachers spend half of their day playing. Is that your bottle? That is not part of the lesson planned. So let's talk about sanitation because water bottles and group settings are germ hotels. Those spouts, straws, the flip tops, they are bacteria theme parks. And unless every single bottle gets washed daily, gets sanitized properly, and gets sent home consistently, which we know they don't, you're building a tiny science experiment of saliva plus milk residue plus warm classroom air equals just nasty. And then we wonder why is everyone sick? Ma'am, the answer is right there on the straw lid. But now let's talk logistics. You already said it, cubbies are too small. So where do bottles end up? On the floor? On shelves, on windowsills, on tables, and and bins, which means more mess, spills, cleanup, and confusion. And somehow the bottle system turns into a full-time job. And for what? So everyone can take exactly two sips before dumping it? They're kids, that's what they're gonna do. And even within younger classrooms, because if there's a cup in reach, they will drink it. They don't care whose it is, if they see liquid, it's getting drunk. It's instinct that they you can label it, you can color code it, you can personalize it, you can put a photo on it, they will still grab the nearest one. Which means teachers are in a constant loop of not yours, that's not yours, put it down, no, that's her cup, stop drinking that, and that's not teaching, that's refereeing. Now let's introduce the hero of the story. Paper cups. Paper cups say no confusion, no contamination, no chaos. Because here's what paper cups do beautifully. One cup, one child, one drink, throw it away. No swapping, no storing, no tracking, no disinfecting. Just hydrate, toss, move on. And suddenly teachers regain time, germ spread, you know, germ spread decreases, storage problems disappear, classrooms feel calmer, and the part that leadership loves is cheaper long term. Yes, I know, paper cups cost money, but so do sick staff, sick kids, parent complaints, illness outbreaks, sanitation violations, staff burnout. Pick your expense. And let's talk about the excess. Paper cups allow easy teacher control distribution, fast hydration breaks, simple routines, zero bottle chaos. Teacher pours, child drinks, cup is gone, and then you're done. Not where's your bottle, go find your bottle, that's not your bottle. Who took your bottle? Why is there milk in this water bottle? Let's talk about safety and licensing along with this. Because many licensing agencies strongly encourage single-use drinking vessels for sanitation control. Why? Because shared bottle storage equals cross-contamination risk. And when licensing walks in and sees 30 water bottles stored together, that's not giving high-quality health practice, that's giving potential citation. Even parent expectations because parents love bottles. They love bottles until their child comes home sick, and then suddenly, why are kids sharing bottles? Why wasn't my child protected? Why didn't the center have better hygiene practices? And now leadership is explaining, well, we allow personal bottles, which turns into we allow we allow preventional risk, and paper cuts eliminate the entire conversation. So, in reality, teacher all teachers are already managing ratios, curriculum, all this other shit. What they don't need is water bottle management. And I get it. People are saying, oh, but what about the younger children? Totally understand that. For smaller children, the sh the center should have sippy cups for meals to use. Take them back to the kitchen and wash them so they aren't lingering in the room. You don't have to label them, you have to go anything. The children drink them while they're eating, and then you get rid of them. And then teachers help younger children with cups throughout the day when it's not meal time. So you're teaching them how to use cups because we are tired. Water bottles have become our villain origin story. So, yes, break up with bottles, choose peace, choose paper cups, and we'll be right back. 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. Cause 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? We are back with our interview corner for today. Let's talk about one of the most awkward, uncomfortable, and misunderstood interview questions. How much money did or do you make? Because if I ask you that in the interview, your internal panic response is probably is this a trap? Is this illegal? Do I lie? Do I overshare? Do I fake a Wi-Fi outage and disappear? And honestly, all of that is valid. Now, depending on where you live, this is a disclaimer. This is a pure disclaimer. Some places is it is illegal to ask that question. But for the sake of this conversation, we're gonna say that it is legal. So let's break this down from you know my side of the table as we usually do, because there are three parts to this. One, what I don't want you to say, two, what I'm really trying to learn, and three, what I hope you respond with instead. Because I promise, if I'm a good leader, I'm not actually fishing for your bank account balance. Let's start with what makes me immediately cringe as an interviewer. If I ask how much money did or do you make, and you say, Well, I made$38,400 a year, okay, now I'm uncomfortable. And I'm uncomfortable because not because of the number, but because now I know the number. You just anchored yourself. And if I'm ethical now, I can't unhear it because I know that you've probably been probably have been underpaid, that you've been in a toxic environment, that you've been working for a nonprofit, or you've just been in survival mode, and that number does not reflect your value. Now, let's look at other answers that you know drive me crazy as well, which is well, you know, whatever you're offering is fine. No, that tells me you don't know your worth, or I don't really care about money. You will, and you're a lie, and you will very soon, and then you'll resent us. Or like trauma dumping your finances. Uh, well, my rent is high and my bills are crazy, inflation is wild, ma'am. I am not your physical or your uh financial therapist, and this is not um where you get help out and get counseling, this is an interview. Or my favorite, I'll just take whatever. That translates to me as I will burn out and quit in six months. So let's be real. I don't want your lowest number. What I want is a confident number because underplayed, underpaid employees become burned out employees, and burned out employees become turnover statistics. Here's the part that nobody really says out loud. When I ask how much money did or do you make, I'm really trying to understand your market awareness, your confidence, your experience level, expectations, your negotiating skills, not your past. I want to know: do you understand your value? Do you know what this role is worth, and can you advocate for yourself? Because leadership roles require confidence, boundary settings, um, self-awareness, you know, strategic thinking. And this question exposes all of that. I'm also trying to understand: are we even in the same financial universe? If your expectations are, let's say, 35,000 and the role is budgeted for 85,000, that's a mismatch. Or if your expect expectations are 110,000, but our budget is only 45,000, that is definitely a mismatch. So, yes, I'm gathering data, but I'm not actually interested in your salary history. I promise I'm really not. I'm interested in your salary mindset because people who undervalue themselves, overwork, undernegotiate, overextend, burn out, and resent everyone. And people who understand their value, they set boundaries, they manage their workload, they communicate clearly, they tend to stay longer and perform better. So when I ask this question, I'm really asking, how do you see yourself? Now, if you're sitting across from me and I ask you that question, what I would love to hear is someone that does like a deflect, reframe, and direct situation. Like, I prefer to focus on the responsibilities and expectations of this role rather than past comfort compensation. Based on my experience and the scope of the position, I'm looking for a salary in the range of X through Y. See now if you say this, I'm thinking like, okay, you confident, you know, you're professional, you know your worth. Or they say something like, you know, my past to compensations has varied based on the roles, and I'm targeting a range. If you notice, I love ranges, a range between so and so. I'm like, okay, you did your homework, you know, but don't do not just be like a straight number. Don't do that. Just that will completely turn me off. And what also turn me turns me off is when people are like, I need this job. It ain't that deep. Because the truth is, I need talent, I need leadership, I need stability. And so this isn't this is not, you know, me choosing you. What we really should be looking at is us choosing each other. So don't shrink, don't apologize, don't minimize. Answer like someone who expects to be valued, because the best hires already believe they deserve to be. 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. Alright, it is policy time, and remember, something became a policy because someone then messed this shit up for all of us. Today's policy, smoking. This is a non-smoking facility. No smoking is allowed inside the building at any time. Smoking is also prohibited within 50 feet outside the center. Let's be clear. Policies, first off, are just documented trauma. And let's talk about why this is a policy. First, because of children. We serve infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Their lungs are smaller, more sensitive, and more vulnerable, which means secondhand smoke hits them harder, faster, and more dangerously. Even the smell residue on clothes, third hand smoke can cause breathing issues, allergic reaction, asthma flare-ups. So, yes, even if you just smoked outside, the smoke still comes in with you. It can be on your hair, your jackets, your hands, and these babies are inhaling your Marlboro memories. Now, let's talk about health. Secondhand smoke exposure is linked to respiratory infections, SIDS, ear infection, asthma attacks. So when we say no smoking in or around the building, that what we really mean is we prefer children alive and breathing. I know it's a low bar, but hey, here we are talking about it, talking about safety. Cigarettes involve fire, hot ash, lighters, matches, so yeah, we're not doing smoke breaks next to the building because one flick of ash and one good gust of wind and one dry brush, that equals the headlines, and we're definitely not going to do that. And even when it comes to professionalism, because childcare is already fighting the perception battle of babysitting versus education, and nothing screams highly professional early learning environment, like staff puffing cigarettes next to the playground fence. Parents pull up and see three staff members hotboxing the sidewalk, and now suddenly trust is gone, reputation is gone, enrollment is gone, because parents don't separate personal habits from professional judgment. They just see you making questionable choices around their children. And now let's bring in Brenda, because every center has a Brenda. And if you don't think you do, you're wrong. She's just hiding, or you are the Brenda. So let me tell you about Brenda. Brenda worked at a center that did not have a clear smoking policy, just vague language like, please be respectful, which means absolutely nothing. So Brenda decided I'm not smoking inside, I'm smoking right outside. The front door, not in her car, not across the street, not away from kids, no, right outside the door. So parents pulling up would see Brenda in her uniform with a cigarette, blowing smoke, making smoke bubbles, while toddlers walk past her in the building. Now, here's where Brenda decided to level up some. She started going on mid-diaper change smoke breaks, so she'd leave a half-change toddler on the diaper changing station, another staff member scrambling, ratios tight, because Brenda needed a Marlboro moment. And when leadership said, Brenda, you can't do that, Brenda looked at them dead in the eyes and said, I'm technically outside and there's no policy. And Brenda was right, legally. Now morally, more unhinged, and then one day the universe intervened. Brenda flicked her cigarette into a bush. That bush smoldered, the fire department showed up, parents were notified, licensing was called, and suddenly policy was born. Because Brenda exists. Now, let's talk enforcement. This policy isn't about punishing smokers. It's about protecting children's staff, the building, and the center's reputation. And yes, protecting leadership from lawsuits. Because if a child has asthma, respiratory illness, smoke sensitivity, and you allow smoking nearby, that is a liability, a legal risk, and that is a licensing nightmare. So when staff says the policy feels extreme, what they really mean is I haven't seen Brenda yet. And now let's talk about the 50-foot rule. Because people keep saying, why 50 feet? Because science, people, smoke particles travel, wind exists, and children play outside, open doors, they move constantly. So five feet is pointless, ten feet is pointless, twenty feet is still pointless. 50 feet says, if you're going to smoke, commit to the journey. And honestly, if walking 50 feet is too much effort, then you don't need a cigarette. You need a nap. Now let's be honest. If we didn't write this policy, somebody would be smoking by the playground next to the stroller line, outside classroom windows, at the front door. So the policy exists because common sense is not common. And policy policies exist for the outliers. Not the majority. Most people know better. But policies are written for the 2%, the Brendas. So when people ask why is this even a policy? The answer is simple. Because children deserve clean air, safe environment, professional care. And because Brenda, you know, once lit, you know, she lit one up next to a tricycle. Well, on that note, um, that's all that I have for you guys for this episode. I want you all to not endanger your life over your job and end up in somebody's guardrail. Um, I want you all to just go ahead and just buy the damn cups and let the water bottles go. And, you know, don't light up next to a center. That's all I have. 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 Cuff. See you next time, probably stumbling, but still showing up.
