Strollerderby
Google — Just Another Crappy Company for Workers With Kids
I’m so naive. I always think if large companies could just provide quality, subsidized, on-site childcare, workers would have no reason to “opt out” or ever even really complain about work.
Then I read about the woes of Google — yes, “voted top company to work for” Google — and how they have totally botched the whole on-site childcare thing, once again leaving mid- to low-level employees with figuring out how the hell to reconcile work with raising young kids and pissing off many employees in the meantime.
The NYTimes has a nice little tell-all piece. In a nutshell, the saga goes something like this:
As Google really takes off, they set up an on-site daycare which focuses on children learning through play. It costs $1,475 monthly for infant care, less as the kid gets older. Everybody who isn’t on a waiting list is more than satisfied.
The woman who initially set up this first daycare after she returned from maternity leave — the sister-in-law of one of the founders and high-level Google employee with, the story implies, a probably not terribly crucial job to the mega-search engine company — learns about Reggio Emilia, THE preschool philosophy of the moment (and if you’re a good parent you’ve tried hard to get your kid into some kind of Reggio program). She sets up second childcare center on the Google campus that is Reggio.
Problem: Reggio is fucking expensive — salaries, equipment, imported all-natural toys, incessant documentation of junior’s achievements via high-quality photography. Moreover, Google decided to raise the salaries of the workers at the other center to match those at the Reggio center.
Then! Google stock drops. Google realizes it is subsidizing each child enrolled in its daycare centers about $37,000 annually. Google decides to pass costs along to employees. Subsidies decrease.
Now, tuition for babies is $2,500 per month, slightly less for toddlers and preschoolers — even for people who didn’t opt for the Reggio program.
Employees cry.
Then Google decides to change the original center into Reggio one.
Interestingly, the waiting list gets smaller, something the company wanted since it doesn’t look so great to have a long waiting list for one of your touted benefits.
In a show of dedication and seriousness as an employee and a parent, the sister-in-law/Google employee/founder of these daycare centers (Wojcicki) tells a group of disgruntled employees that, despite the high cost, she intends to keep her kids at the facility. Sidenote: she’s a multimillionaire.
Employees really cry.
This is where I really get pissy with not just Google’s childcare follies, but childcare/preschools in general in the U.S. They’re just so segregated. Kids of the wealthy go to preschool with kids of the wealthy. Poor kids attend school with poor kids. Middle-class, same thing. There’s never any economic diversity and of course this carries over to grade school, etc. Am I the only one who thinks it would be nice to mix it up a little?
I mean, many Google employees can no doubt afford this school and good for them. But the kids of those families look and live just like the other kids at that school. But what about the secretary? The single-mom/dad? The janitor’s kids? Or just the mid-level Project Manager whose salary is good — no, excellent! — but can’t quite stretch it to cover the $2,500 in monthly childcare AND housing AND transporation costs in Silicon Valley. Lord knows what families with twins or more than one young kid do. The article mentions a sliding scale, but in my experience, such schemes are never really to scale and never really slide. Is it fair that Wojcicki the multi-millionaire gets any subsidy at all?
Doesn’t Wojcicki feel there’s a great value to education in making on-site daycare available to commoners — even more than “project-based learning” and organic teething biscuits and one sensory table for every three kids?
Photo: webisland.com
Go Back To Strollerderby
7 Comments
Anonymous commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amI have taught for many years in a Reggio Emilia environment. Most of the articles I’ve read, including the NY Times article, with regards to Google’s troubles portray Reggio as an elitist form of education in which children do nothing but “play” with exorbitantly expensive toys. Nothing is further from the truth. First, play is how children learn. If any of those writing these articles ever viewed the Reggio Emilia ideology in action, they would swiftly realize that they know not of what they speak. From a teacher and student perspective, it is an extraordinarily in depth, comprehensive learning adventure. A brief explanation could never do this teaching philosophy justice. One will simply have to do a little homework online to comprehend it better. With regards to elitism, we applied Reggio to all children, not simply to those of wealthy parents. Regarding the “expensive toys”, I smile when I repeatedly hear this mentioned. While I always received the basics as part of my budget (paint, paper, clay, pencils) the majority of our materials were large storage boxes or plastic garbage cans containing “found objects” that we utilized in our everyday activities (i.e. shipping styrofoam, twigs, leaves, rocks, etc.). Our premise is that art is a child’s first language. All activities are documented with, in our situation, bare bones minimum digital cameras and a few grossly outdated, basic computers. To insinuate that high end digital equipment is a part of the program is simply a fabrication. I challenge anyone to observe a Reggio Emilia environment and to not walk away with new insight and awe for this extraordinary academic approach.
Anonymous commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amDid someone say that?
Anonymous commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amOh so once again it is assumed the poor kids are the non-white ones.
Anonymous commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amYeah, around here, most of the more expensive daycares provide tuition assistance, so you do get some mix of “rich kids” and “poor kids”.
Of course, all companies these days seem to be cutting back on benefits…
Anonymous commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amMadeline, walk on over to LBCC (Pacific Coast Campus, anyway. I can’t speak for the other) and you will see a Reggio inspired center serving a very economically and racially diverse community. For older kids, try New City.
TheNewsJunkie commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amCAMamma, thanks for the umbrage.
You’re right! And I certainly had in mind the diversity of the workplace (race/cultures-wise) at Google. What I actually should have referenced were clothes, Crocs, backpacks, accompanying toys, etc.
Madeline
Anonymous commented on Jan 01 70 at 12:00 amI take slight umbrage at your statement, “But the kids of those families LOOK and live just like the other kids at that school.”
Live most likely; however, dear friends have their daughter in one of the centers, and the kids in her class are of all different races, literally.
Add your take:
Note: Babble is a supportive, diverse community. We encourage a range of opinions,
but any unduly hostile comments will be removed.
Comments are delayed up to 15 minutes


The Walt Disney Company supports Babble as a platform dedicated to honest, engaged, informed, intelligent and open conversation about parenting. However, the opinions expressed on this site are those of individual parents/writers and do not reflect the views of Disney. In addition, content provided on this site is for entertainment or informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice, diagnosis, treatment, or safety advice.