Would you sack nanny over this?

The thing is confirmation bias is definitely at play. People who have been abused or who work with abusers (I mean as part of their job) or survivors have atypical levels of concern about abuse.

They can be better informed, and have safe levels of awareness of risks. But they can also become a little paranoid and have disproportionate responses. Ever met a firie that won’t allow their kids to charge a laptop in another room because it might catch fire? Chances are you’d see that as a disproportionate safety response - but laptops do start fires while charging, and fires can kill you, and it is possible to only charge this supervised.

I think there’s a disconnect in how people see this. Partner could be an abuser so this is no different to leaving the child with a random stranger who asked to watch the baby. Or it was a mistake and needs to not happen again, but it’s not worth blowing up an otherwise successful relationship.

It is definitely possible that the partner targeted a long term relationship with a nanny to get access to the children. It happens. But it is far more likely, on the balance of probabilities, that he’s simply a long term partner of someone who happens to be a nanny. It is possible that he engineered or faked his homelessness to get access to the house. On the balance of probabilities it is more likely that in a time of high homelessness he simply lost his rental.

I think people are not so much overly forgiving, as weighing the transgressions differently. Personally, I see inviting the partner to live on the property inviting him into the home. Frankly, if he wasn’t trusted by the family to be around the children he would never have been invited to be there. If she’d left the child with SD (the adult one) would that have been ok? I’d have taken the not in the house to be more like you’re working and should be working. But it’s my home, and my partner lives there - so to me there’s an expectation that we’d spend time together outside of “on” hours. Lines were blurred by OP - and are easily blurred when you live with someone for 6 years. It’s never as simple as “just” being an employee.

I do think it’s a very bad sign OP, that she did this after you’d already been openly cross at her for breaking the boundaries you’d set regarding the boyfriend. It just seems like she doesn’t respect your preferences or boundaries. I think once this kind of thing starts to happen the relationship often goes downhill, the trust is so damaged.

The local laws are what is important. Where I live, I’m reasonably sure that having someone live in the yard is the same as the house unless you have a commercial rental (and are paying the extra costs of that as it affects government fees, it affects insurance etc).

If that’s not the case in the UK then it’s irrelevant. My expectation though, is that if this ends up in an unfair dismissal suit it would be viewed differently to having someone who does not live there involved. But IANAL - best getting legal advice off lawyers, but then OP asked mumsnet not a lawyer.

The employee would be homeless if she lost her job without time to find housing. Homeless does not just mean sleeping rough. The fact that a person could crash with friends or family does not stop them being homeless. There’s levels of homelessness and hopefully she would not end up on the streets, but unless people can typically get a commercial rental with zero notice and no job - this would make her homeless. I can stay with my family for a weekend - it’s not a long term living option unless there’s no real option. But when you’re homeless you have little choice.

Now there will always be cases where instant dismissal is warranted even if a person ends up on the streets. I’m not convinced that’s warranted here and am finding the whole catastrophising a little crazy.

what if the house caught fire while she was out? Well that would be very tragic. Hopefully the boyfriend would have been able to leave with the baby. What would happen if the house caught fire while nanny was home alone with the kids and she didn’t have both kids in her arms at the time? What if one was sleeping at one end of the house and the other playing in the back yard?

It’s perfectly fine to say I can’t come back from this. But instant dismissal is a huge step. And performance management by text is unprofessional. The OP should also consider whether she’s hurting herself more by instant dismissal. What’s her backup childcare option? What if it takes her 3 months (6 months?) to find a new nanny? I can’t imagine there’s a massive supply of live-in nannies waiting around for work next week. What if she struggles to find a new nanny that gels with her children and household?

Sending that text is torpedoing the relationship. If I got that I’d be job hunting. And I’d be ok giving very little notice when I left as top me it implies they’re happy to sack me now, or maybe not.

I just could not have this. Your non-verbal baby being "looked after" by some random bloke who hasn't been checked (not that that proves A.Single.Thing.) because his lazy-arsed girlfriend could not be bothered to take baby on a 5 minute walk.

Honestly the pair of them will keep pushing and pushing your boundaries until you don't know whose house it is.

I would categorically get rid. Please. It makes me shudder thinking about it.

No worries.

It's all true!

I'm horrified by the amount of forgiving people on this thread.

Do want you feel you need to do in order to feel that your children are safe. Your options seem to be:

• Sack nanny with immediate affect
• Sack nanny after a notice period
• Keep Nanny but tell her her boyfriend isn't welcome
• Make it clear that if the boyfriend has further contact with your children nanny will be sacked with immediate affect
• Get to know boyfriend and insist that he has a DBS check, if he may occasional come to your house (on the understanding that if you get to know him and don't like him, you may go back to the last option.)

Interestingly when my son went to a childminder (who looked after a number of children in her own home) ALL the over 18 year olds in the household HAD to be DBS checked to be in their home while their mum was working. I just say this, because if you got to know boyfriend and liked him and your kids did, saying he could be their if he was DBS checked would be within childcare law. (NOT of course meaning you should allow this, I genuinely think which ever option you feel most comfortable with is the best one.)

Apologies @scoobysnaxx I've crossposted you a bit there.

I also unfortunately know of too many abuse cases to ever take risks like this.

They're not always the creepy looking ones, a lot of them are the charming 'everybody loves x, he's the nicest guy' types.

They're also usually very clever and manipulative.

Quite surprised by how forgiving people would be in this circumstance.

He could literally be a pedophile and is only dating her to gain access to children. He may have even been convincing her to leave the baby with him.

I'd be looking for a new nanny.

I’ve read most - but not all - of the thread.

What I haven’t read is anyone bringing up
”common sense.”
Your common sense in allowing the nanny to move her boyfriend into your caravan.
Your nanny’s common sense in leaving the baby alone with the boyfriend.
And your common sense in considering this infraction or whatever it is you’re thinking.

My apologies - the lack of common sense.

I would absolutely sack her.

She crossed a boundary regarding the safety of your children which you'd already imposed. Not okay.

You also need a word with yourself. What on earth are you doing allowing a strange and unvetted man move in? It doesn't matter if he's in the garden shed. He still has access to your children. I'm not surprised she ended up leaving a child with him while she 'popped out for a few mins'. It was bound to happen.

You have exposed your children to a completely unnecessary risk here. There shouldn't be any 'he seems nice' when it comes to your children.

For all you know he could be a paedo who purposely got involved with a nanny then feigned becoming homeless and trying his luck to access children through his nanny girlfriend.

Some might roll their eyes at this and think it's super unlikely.

I assure you, as a therapist, I don't exclude anything. I have come across far far too many children who have been abused by people who have had access to them, even for a few minutes. Children are most likely to be abused by someone they know too.

Please don't take this chance again.

It's not okay your nanny did this at all. She needs a stern word if you're going to keep her.

For the love of God protect your children.

Agree agree agree.

HUGE boundary crossed - she has effectively lied (or been very economical with the truth) on several counts.

What else is she not truthful about….?!

I would terminate the employment, give generous pay off as a thank you for her good work for many years, but no reference.

She needs to learn from this

Apologies, ignore my last sentence. I thought it was another poster that said it.

How did you find out? Did she tell you? If so, clearly the boundaries haven’t been established firm enough, if she didn’t see this being an issue. Good nannies are hard to find these days but having the boyfriend living there and being around seems like a boundary has been crossed already.

Yes, I thought so too.

That is because if it is a paedophile, it is soooooo obvious to spot. In OP's case, nothing to see here

You can fire someone on the spot for GROSS MISCONDUCT

This is true, @Castle0, but the complication is that there's nothing to stop the nanny bringing an unfair dismissal claim and insist that it wasn't gross misconduct at all

She could even try to say OP had agreed to the boyfriend minding the DCs - after all she'd already allowed him to stay on their property - and unless OP had put her "firm boundary" in writing she'd have nothing to contradict this

However as said earlier, faced with some kind of disciplinary action and having already gone to stay with her parents, the nanny may well just not come back

she recognised his name from her safeguarding work.

that was handy

Wrong. You can fire someone on the spot for GROSS MISCONDUCT. Which this very clearly is. The Nanny had only 1 job - to look after the kids - and she failed.

Its not like the Nanny was asked to do childcare as a "favour".

IT WAS HER FUCKING JOB.

She was clearly fucking about with her BF all day in the OP's house, eating their food, shagging on their sofa and watching their tv, then realised she was late for pickup and scrambled there in the car as too late to walk.

Don't sack her. Part of this issue is you allowing boundaries to be pushed.

Think of the chaos you will cause yourself by sacking her and all the good relationships you have made will be gone - for what? A naive mistake where no one was hurt.

Do decide on the boundaries. If bf is still allowed to stay, put a time limit on it if you wish. Request a DBS or lay down rules as to what is and isn't allowed. Part of the issue is the fact he is around. So think about what you want going forward and have a meeting. Sort it out like adults and take some responsibility for not having put these in place before.

I think your response is fair. You did them both a favour and she has completely taken advantage.

This, really.

Stepdaughter is 18. Not the nanny.

Sack her immediate. Gross misconduct. No if no but no sob stories, she leave immediately

Is that not gross misconduct? I can't imagine if a nursery worker sneaked her boyfriend in and then left him with the babies while she popped to the shops, she would be let off with just a written warning. Same with a childminder. I would be outraged if my childminder had left my child alone with a stranger while she went to collect another child. Even if she told me about it after. It shows a massive lack of judgment. The trust would be gone for me.

Just curious - you say she has been with you for 6 years but mentioned that she is just 18 years old???? Do you mean 28

@TellMeWhoTheVillainsAre That would not stand up in a tribunal. There still needs to be a fair hearing to which the nanny is entitled to be accompanied etc.
Jeez, is being a Nanny an occupation that isn't subject to UK employment law?