In c.1974 the London Division of the Association of Teachers in Technical Institutions (ATTI) union passed a resolution which made the provision of creches national union policy, and gave official support to a campaign that many London colleges were already undertaking individually.

The Norwood Technical College ATTI branch called a meeting on 5 June 1974 to form a London-wide campaign. This was attended by ten London colleges, and another five were interested. Several colleges were already campaigning including Enfield, Kingsway Princeton, Hackney and Stoke Newington and Woolwich (Enfield and Kingsway Princeton were already able to offer some facilities.) Many other colleges were investigating what need and demand there was for childcare. The group decided to keep meeting and to form a sub-committee of the London division to advise on the creche campaign.

The second ‘Creche Newsletter’ produced by the London division of the ATTI reported that the working party on creche provision ‘has now widespread support throughout London colleges.’ 21 branches of the union had sent representatives to the working party, showing the breadth of the support the campaign enjoyed within the union.

The campaign had had a meeting with the Inner London Education Authority (ILEA) on 22 November 1974, who said in effect that they were supportive of creches in colleges in principle, but unwilling to pay for them. The group reflected that the priority was to work out how best to press for funding from ‘the authority’, especially considering cuts being made to education at the time. They first had to negotiate with the ILEA about the legality of providing nurseries in colleges. The situation in Polytechnics was different: ILEA pointed out Polytechnics were companies and were able to provide creches if they wished. They suggested Urban Aid grants would be a good way of financing the salary and equipment cost of creches, while colleges could provide the premises.

The campaign surveyed various colleges and found there was demand for creches or nurseries. For instance, at South Bank Polytechnic 23 pre-school children would have used a creche if it was available. At Middlesex Polytechnic a similar demand was found the year before, and the nursery that had since been opened now had a waiting list.  

There were already childcare facilities at Morley College, the School of Oriental and African Studies, the City Literary Institute, the Royal College of Art, the Architectural Association and the University of London Union.

Once ATTI became the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE) in 1976, the London Colleges Creche Campaign was renamed the London Nursery Campaign (not to be confused with the other London Nursery Campaign which was not connected to NATFHE).

In 1977 the Women’s Rights Standing Committee (WRSC) was created within NATFHE, which the campaign wrote enabled them to ‘continue the vital fight for childcare facilities within the general struggle for equal opportunities for women.’

In 1978 NATFHE produced a booklet entitled ‘Nurseries and Playgroups: a plan for action’. This affirmed the union’s view that nursery provision was essential to achieving equality of opportunity between men and women. NATFHE supported the TUC Working Party Report on the Under Fives’ view that there should be state provision of nursery care for 0-3 year-olds and nursery education for 3-5 year-olds, staffed by trained personnel. The booklet outlined what role trade unions like NATFHE could have in the struggle for nursery facilities from local authorities and said

‘It is as important and should be dealt with in the same way as any other conditions of service claim. … There is no reason, for instance, why a claim of this sort should not be pursued to the point of a trade dispute where support is sufficiently strong.’

The booklet suggested step-by-step how NATFHE members could push for nursery provision.

An exhibition was prepared by staff and students at the Central London Polytechnic which could be booked by colleges who wanted to start a Nursery Campaign. The exhibition showed nurseries that were already open and the kind of care they provided, as well as staff and students without nurseries and the problems they faced finding childcare.

In February 1978 they met with ILEA at County Hall and reported ‘it’s going to be a long and bitter battle.’ The campaign was told that unspecified ‘legal problems’ prevented ILEA from doing anything about nursery provision. The campaign argued that if Camden Council could provide its staff with childcare provision (from September 1978) then so could ILEA.

In summer of 1978 the campaign again met ILEA at County Hall to discuss NATFHE’s proposals, all of which were rejected. The campaign’s newsletter in January 1979 reported that the education authority were refusing to budge: 

‘ILEA’s liberal and progressive image is becoming increasingly tarnished in these encounters. Apparently the policies in the ILEA pamphlet ‘Education for the Whole Community’ apply to everyone except female lecturers in FE/HE with preschool age children.’

The campaign planned to lobby ILEA’s Education Committee in May 1979.

Due to concerns about the standard of training given to Nursery Nurses they helped the National Union  of Public Employees (NUPE) organise a seminar on 17 November 1978. They wrote that the National Nursery Examination Board (NNEB) was in danger of collapse and being taken over by the Council for Social Work Training, but under-fives should not be seen as ‘social problems’ and so nursery training shouldn’t come under social work. The seminar decided to set up a working party to ‘devise an integrated training programme and launch an experimental course’ and a subgroup on training was formed.

In July 1981, the ‘Women’s Rights And Nursery Campaign’ newsletter no. 5 produced by Inner London NATFHE reflected that they still faced the same situation with ILEA’s ‘two faces’ – one eager to advocate for better educational and career opportunities for women, the other refusing to provide nursery provision ‘which would make equal opportunities a reality.’ They were preparing a delegation to ‘the authority’ on nursery provision.

However, the same newsletter reflected that in some ways the inner London section of the union ‘have been in a happier position because of the ILEA’s policies.’ The years of lobbying ILEA hd encourage the authority to defend the preschool provision they already provided: ‘thus we have been able to defend existing college nurseries despite the financial threats.’

However, they had found that polytechnic nurseries had to charge high fees to parents, while operating on very tight budgets. Colleges of further education and adult education institutes (AEIs) had a different problem. ILEA wanted to set aside £52,000 in 1979 to fund creches at colleges and AEIs, but this was only for part-time students and they had issues extending the care provided to full time. However, the fees at AEIs were much lower than at polytechnics. One college, the South East London College of Technology managed to set up a part-time nursery with this funding but had difficulty extending the hours to all-day provision.