News - 10.10.2025

Incentivized Punishment by the City of Reykjavík

On the same day that Varða – the Labour Market Research Institute – presented the results of a new study on the “Kópavogur Model” in preschool policy, the City of Reykjavík unveiled proposals based on the same ideology. The idea is to tackle challenges in preschools by reducing children’s attendance hours, using price controls to do so. This “price control” is presented as an incentive, but in reality, it is a financial punishment for full-time working parents and a financial reward for those with shorter or more flexible working hours and a strong support network.

A Dismal Discourse on Parents

In short, these new preschool models aim to address operational challenges by shifting the burden onto parents of young children. To justify such policies, various arguments are made about what is supposedly “best for children,” implying that parents are the last people who can be trusted to understand their children’s welfare and wellbeing. Parents are portrayed as repeatedly making decisions that endanger their children’s welfare and prioritizing their own interests over those of their children. The underlying message: children are best off at home (with their mothers).

This discourse is disturbingly ugly and harmful, and it can have long-term negative effects. It creates shame and distress in the hearts of countless people who every day do their best to make life work.

A Family-Friendly Society?

Parents of young children today live in a society where two incomes are essential. Part-time jobs are scarce, often lead to career stagnation, and can worsen long-term financial insecurity due to lower pension contributions. Young parents also face much higher housing costs than previous generations, while their purchasing power has stagnated for decades—even as older generations have grown more prosperous.

And yet, parents of young children live—or at least used to live—in a society considered family-friendly by international standards. They spend more time with their children than previous generations did, and most workplaces show understanding toward parental duties. Iceland’s progressive parental leave framework enables both parents to care for their children, and although the gap between parental leave and preschool entry has not yet been fully bridged, parents can generally trust that when their children do enter preschool, the quality is world-class.

Icelandic preschools originally developed as day-care institutions with multiple purposes—educational, social, and economic. They are at once educational institutions, environments for child development, and places for children to stay while their parents work. It is not possible to simply sever that last function. Preschools are one of the cornerstones of an egalitarian society—at least insofar as that ideal still holds true. Changes to preschool policy therefore have far-reaching social implications.

In Kópavogur, the increased strain caused by shorter preschool hours falls not only on mothers but also on grandmothers who step in to help. Moreover, it is not far-fetched to assume that these “financial incentives” to shorten preschool hours could, in reality, become incentives to hire private caregivers, since the fees for eight-hour preschool care in Kópavogur are roughly equivalent to pocket money for an au pair. Building a society on such a foundation is irresponsible, and well-meaning politicians should think twice before pursuing it.

“Calm Down, It’s Only a Consultation”

One argument from city council members is that criticism of these proposals should be moderate since they are only presented for consultation. As if public consultation on proposals affecting the daily lives and interests of thousands of citizens were an extraordinary courtesy! These are still official proposals from a steering committee appointed by the city council, brought forward despite similar ideas having previously faced strong criticism from parents and unions.

Some voices even suggest that unions representing working parents should focus on shortening the workday instead of opposing shorter preschool hours. To that, it must be said: most unions have already sought to shorten the workweek, and the current collective agreements are in place for the next three years. Those agreements also included a commitment from municipalities not to impose additional burdens on workers—something the city would do well to honor.

It shows little understanding of collective bargaining or the labor market in general to claim that it’s easy to shorten working hours in the private sector. Imposing price controls on parents is perhaps the most miserable way imaginable to push for shorter working hours. Parents, meanwhile, are told to be grateful for Reykjavík’s custom-made calculator, designed to help them understand how much they’ll owe in preschool fees next month.

Let’s Look for Good Examples

There are many excellent preschools in Iceland. Some are well staffed, have good facilities, and offer quality programming year-round. Others are in worse shape—some buildings are moldy, staffing is difficult, and in some cases, management issues are long-standing. Some schools have good working conditions; others, poor ones.

If there is genuine will to address the challenges preschools face, the logical step is to look to the many strong examples that already exist. Many professionals and preschool staff know exactly what it takes to create good preschools—even if they are asked to take on additional responsibilities in bridging the gap between parental leave and preschool entry. Preschool workers deserve the best.

It would be far better if municipalities and preschool administrators directed their demands toward the national government, rather than at parents, and demanded adequate support and resources. Parents of young children also deserve the best, and a society that fails to care for people during this sensitive stage of life is a broken society.

Halla Gunnarsdóttir, Leader of VR
This article was first published on Vísir.is on October 10, 2025.