Natasha Kaplinsky takes £300,000 pay cut to spend more time with her son
Categories: Childcare, Money & work, Celeb parenting
TV newsreader Natasha Kaplinsky has reportedly decided she wants to spend more time with her eight-month-old baby Arlo.
According to Hello magazine, she's taking a 30% cut of her £1 million salary so she can hang out with her sprog.
She's quitting the 7pm slot on Five News so she can be at home to put Arlo to bed every night.
Kaplinsky went back to work part-time four months after her son was born, covering just the 5pm bulletin, and has now decided to make this arrangement permanent.
Seeing as she became Britain's highest-paid newsreader when she moved from the BBC to Channel Five last year, I think she can probably afford to take a pay cut.
A "source" told Hello: "She knows that she will not keep her big salary, and she is not worried about that. It's about getting the right work-life balance."
But it's not always so easy for the rest of us.
With a salary of £700,000 for her part-time job, Kaplinsky doesn't have to worry about paying the mortgage and childminder.
Her husband Justin Bower is an investment banker so I assume she probably doesn't even have to work at all.
But if your salary is closer to the average £24,000 then affording children at all can be difficult.
For many people going back to work part-time isn't an option because their employer won't allow it anyway.
They're supposed to properly "consider" it but they don't have to let you work part-time if they can come up with a good enough excuse.
Even if you can work part-time, then you have to figure out whether it's actually worth it.
Childcare costs upwards of £150 a week which is a large chunk out of an average salary.
It has also been suggested that children who spend long hours in daycare are more likely to be aggressive and suffer longer term problems.
So what with the cost and the guilt, is it worth going back to work at all?
But then many families have become dependent on two incomes. It's a tricky problem.
I'd like to hear how you have solved it! Did you go back to work part-time, or full-time, when your children were small and how did you cope?
Source: Hello magazine
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
jhr 6-28-2009 @ 5:51AM
£1m to read the news! I appreciate it must be very difficult for women of today to look pretty and also be able to achieve reading skills so she must be a most valuable asset. Is the whole world insane or just me? Actually, on reflection, I am not sure I would recognise her anyway.
Reply
Jon 6-28-2009 @ 5:56AM
Brilliant - but is eye candy worth £700k a year?
chris 6-28-2009 @ 7:36AM
Pompous arrogance. How can anybody be worth that kind of salary just sitting in-front of a camera. With a bit of practice and a tidy haircut anybody can do it, along with some common sense and perhaps an interest in world affairs; not sure if she has proper journalistic training other than a pretty face. Neither is the talent compared to that of football players, grand prix drivers or any sports person for that matter.
chris 6-30-2009 @ 1:55AM
Its absurb that anyone could be paid such money for reading something from a autocue.
You could train anyone to do it in a few weeks what she does, and for ten times less!!!
Susannah 6-28-2009 @ 5:53AM
SPROG? How crude!!!
Reply
Gerry Mclaverty 6-28-2009 @ 6:14AM
These people discust me most people are struggling and she gets 700k for a part time job its obscene
Reply
Nancy 6-28-2009 @ 6:17AM
£1m is a lot to read the news but then if you were offered that amount would you turn it down and say, 'Oh no! Much too much.'
Of course you wouldn't.No sane person would.
As for working or not. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't but certainly where possible in the early years the parent should stay at home because that's when the child's character is formed.
Reply
mikel 6-28-2009 @ 6:40AM
Jenny Cornish is obviously a very jealous person who doesn't like to appreciate what other women achieve on their own merits (and, consequently, for their own 'price'). To assume that because a person is married to an investment banker they may not need to work (heard about the recession??) is typical journalistic crap and completely irrelevant - isn't the article about how a devoted mother is putting her family first, organising her work life around the family life? Of course, following this line wouldn't give enough scope to try to put Natasha down and would go against the journalistic code of giving praise where it is due.
Reply
stephen john over 6-28-2009 @ 6:46AM
you must be a freind or relative.
No sane person would pay the money she gets for what she does.
No wonder C5 are in financial trouble.
BRIAN 6-28-2009 @ 7:28AM
She's not even a footballer he he
John 6-28-2009 @ 9:05AM
GROW UP! This is nothing to do with good parenting.
I think we are losing the sight of the value of money here. If you had £1 million pound in the bank, you could allow yourself £25,000 a year for 40YEARS!. Somehow we meant to be understanding of somene who after a 30% paycut still has £700,000 ayear to get by on. I don't care how good you think she is, no-body is worth that sort of money just for relaying information which you get by reading a newspaper.
MollySeagram 6-28-2009 @ 9:48AM
Exactly! Mike (7) She is putting her child first and should therefore be praised but journalists simply cannnot resist a negative swipe.
It's called market forces. Channel 5 think she's worth the money and has absolutely nothing to do with anything else.
I should be so lucky. I wouldn't turn it down.....but I'm not green eye about it either.
Steve Vandes 6-28-2009 @ 1:55PM
A partial victory for good parenting, but why do we hate our children so much in the UK? For many middle class parents, they are seen as an encumbrance, getting in the way of earning money and maintaining a career. They are farmed out to nurseries and playgroups run by poorly educated staff who 'want to work with children'! They don't learn social skills, they just have to cope with boredom, indifference and aggression, and possibly a sense of rejection by their parents. Weekend parents can never develop their child's true potential, and I know that many feel guilty about this. As for many working-class families, their children are simply feral - left to roam, or put into the care of some 12 year old sibling or neighbour. The results in all cases are the same for society.
Selfish and ignorant parenting is the cause of many of our current social ills - and it's going to gert worse as the generations move on thinking that it is the norm. Stable two parent families spending time with their children is the answer - and if you can't afford the new plasma TV or luxury holiday as a result, then so be it. At least you'll have given your kids a better start in life.
Reply
saksha ali 6-28-2009 @ 6:48AM
well said. I totally agree.
Tina 6-28-2009 @ 7:02AM
Agree in part, however we do not live in a perfect world and sadly most families require 2 incomes to provide for their children which detracts one parents time and attention from their children. We have adopted both our children and know only to well how society lets down children and it is very much a balancing act, so imagine trying to not only cope with the parenting but undoing all the hurt neglect and abuse that has been inficted as well. As a society if we wish to be pro-active we need to seriously address this problem but like everything it will be reactive attitude.
Adele 6-28-2009 @ 12:40PM
I feel I need to reply to your comment which I found offensive "They are farmed out to nurseries and playgroups run by poorly educated staff who 'want to work with children'! "
My daughter happens to be someone who works with pre-school children and to achieve her ambition devoted two years to a full time college course gaining a high level pass on completion, she also had to take an intense first aid course to enable her to cope with any emergencies she may have to deal with.
To work with children you need to show a high level of intelligence, as in todays nurseries and playgroups it is all about teaching social skills etc as the nursery nurse is sometimes the only contact a child has with someone during it's waking hours.
The fact that nurseries and playgroups exist enable plenty of everyday people to keep a roof over their heads.
There are poorly educated people in all walks of life, it certainly seems to me that you are one of them as you are clearly commenting on a subject you know nothing about!
Perhaps before leaving comments on other subjects in future, you might like to get your facts correct first?
saksha ali 6-28-2009 @ 6:46AM
I believe that for normal folks deciding to have a family is deciding to live a completely different life to what you are used to in terms of finance. I have a new born baby,she's my first. I have just completed my degree n have found a job already. I will be earning more than my husband so we have decided that he will stay home and I will go back to work. He can always take a night job but what woman wants a groggy n sleepy man taking care of her children?? so is one salary sufficient? no but I would rather eat beans on toast everyday than trust a stranger to take care of my baby...
Reply
Liz 6-28-2009 @ 6:49AM
Another case of an obscenely over-paid TV personality.Not that I know who she is, have heard the name,though.
But again, where is the justification for THAT kind of salarly.
I really think, that all TV stations, need to make a dramatic overhaul of all salaries. No wonder we keep getting repeats and NO descent New dramas.
All the money goes on salaries.
Reply
DennisA 6-28-2009 @ 7:07AM
However will she manage?
Reply
zwixxx 6-30-2009 @ 5:45AM
If I was Ch5 I'd be kinda miffed. Sign her for 1mill and a few months later she's off on maternity leave and now she's only wants to do 1/2 the work. She doesn't want to fullfill her contract so just rip it up and sign someone else.
Reply