Don't Mess With The Mama Bear

With all of the daycare drama and a nasty case of bronchitis, I have neglected blogging. But today, oh today, I have quite a story for you. It is a tale of injustice, incompetence and underestimation, where lowly subjects enslaved by "the man" rise up not only for their families, but for the common good. (Damn! I sure make mothering in suburbia sound EPIC...)

My acupuncturist calls a parent's anxiety over and desire to protect a child "Mama Bear." She says it's instinctual like a mother bear protecting her cub, and fighting to the death if need be. This instinct in me spurred my actions in the following story (as well as others. so. many. stories. with. daycare.)

Read on...

As you may recall, a parent of one of the babies in G's class called licensing to report that the ratios for babies were all out of whack at her child's daycare.*whistle. look around the room.* An inspection ensued. New Management, also known as the Fourth Reich, thought the appropriate solution was to threaten to fire the lead infant teacher. *cue head scratching* In the end, they did not fire the teacher, who for the purpose of this story, we shall call Ms. F., but instead threatened again to fire her because Ms. F was throwing a birthday party for her own children, at her own home, and had invited some kids and their parents from the center because her child is enrolled at the center and that's where her friends are.

The reason? It is against NMFR's (New Management, Fourth Reich) policy. Which was never stated previously. 'Cause they never gave the employees a new handbook. And told them to go off of the old owner's handbook. In which outside activities/relationships with parents were fine. Anyone else notice a problem here? So, NMFR told her they would discuss it further later, which never happened.

Now, last Friday night there was a parent's meeting that I, naturally, attended. The meeting in itself was a joke. Every concern a parent brought up was answered by NMFR with "We're fixing that." The meeting ended when the parents were in an uproar and NMFR quietly slipped out and disappeared. Then two teachers who have obviously partaken of the kool-aid, handed out survey forms to rate the center. Oh me, oh my! Talk about sloppy, lazy work! The very first section was "indicate your child's program" with four options that you could check off. Each option was "offered program." Helpful, right? Oops! Sorry, tangent started there...moving on to important story details...

The agenda for the meeting had a section, which by the way was never spoken about during the meeting, saying parent/teacher relationships should be cordial, but outside activities such as birthday parties, outings, etc., are "not encouraged." K. So they aren't encouraging it. They also aren't saying you can't do it.

Sunday, was Ms. F.'s kids' party.

Monday, Ms. F. was out sick.

Tuesday, Ms. F. was suspended until further notice/a meeting with NMFR was set up to discuss things (ie. more than likely fire her). I was livid. As were two other parents whom I happen to have become friends with. Well, I had to call the director yesterday while I was home recovering from my own brand of the plague about a separate issue. I was tired. I was pissed. I had had enough of NMFR's shit. I let the director have it. In addition to the numerous other complaints, I took major issue with suspending Ms. F. over a birthday party.

Director's one argument in favor of suspension:

NMFR has policies as every company does, and must enforce them.

My arguments:

1. Yes, they have policies, but they are not stated and given to employees. I have never received a new parental handbook and am going off of old managements. Have you received a new employee handbook?

Answer: - silence -

2. The only thing stated about outside activities was on the agenda from the parent's meeting on Friday, which said they are "not encouraged." Besides the fact that Ms. F. was not at that meeting to receive it, "not encouraged" does not mean "do not do this," and was given to parents not teachers.

Answer: "Not encouraged," to the director and NMFR, meant "do not do this."

Counter Argument: It's ambiguous. I interperet "not encouraged" to mean that NMFR doesn't like it so if something happens outside of the center, don't come crying to them about it. It's also putting a rule in place and trying to enforce it retroactively. FAIL.

3. When Ms. F. walks out the door and off of NMFR's property, she is no longer an employee. She is a private citizen. As such, she has every right to do whatever she wants with whomever she wants.

Answer: -silence-

4. "Do you even know if anyone went? I didn't."

Answer: -silence-

The outcome? Within two hours of our conversation, Ms. F. was reinstated without the aforementioned meeting and with no restrictions or warnings (and I'm sure no apologies either). Coincidence? I'll leave that up to you to decide.

Moral of the story?  Don't mess with my son's care. I'll go Mama Bear on your ass.