Reduction in nanny's hourly rate if she brings her own child

forever, yes, that's what most people do. And you would surprised how little a non-partner doctor or solicitor in their 20s/ early 30s makes, especially if he or she is doing locum stuff. Probably barely enough to cover the nanny's wages. Of course the career progression will mean that eventually they will end up earning quite a bit more but people are deluded if they think those kind of professionals are raking it in.

Alternator childcare for a nanny though would be very tough to find. Most are working 7-7 everyday, so would need childcare 6-8pm. Hence many become nwoc.

I wouldn't reduce pay. A nanny will be up super early getting her own child dressed out the house for an early start at employers, works all day in childcare, then comes home late and has to sort own child out. Picking a baby up at 8pm, home and on bed by 9pm, then up before 6am to get them at alternative childcare so they can start at 7 is unfair on everyone. A perk of being a nanny IMO is the possibliltily of taking your child with you.
Choosing to be a doctor or lawyer will not give you the chance to take them to work but that's your choice, and they are probably earning x amount more than a nanny hence they can afford a nanny themselves.

A nanny would have to put her child in cheaper childcare per hr than she charges to make it worth it.

duchesse I don't think the nanny should get full pay, but she shouldn't be paid as if it is a nannyshare, because it isn't.

'If she wants to have time in the day to take her child to clubs, then she needs to give up work'

or get a nannyshare? Which a NWOC situation isn't.

How many babies of working parents do clubs and things? Unless you have a nanny it's not very likely. Most babies go to nurseries or childminders and at best they'll get out to a carer and baby group once or twice a week if they're with a childminder. Otherwise all activities are done by the childminder or nursery. The nanny's child will be the child of a working mother. If she wants to have time in the day to take her child to clubs, then she needs to give up work. The only reason the OP's children are able to go to clubs is that she is earning enough wages to pay the nanny.

You can't have your cake (ie be with your child all day + get full pay) and eat it (be able to do whatever you want with your day). One of those things has to give.

Also, a nanny will typically carry out household tasks like children's laundry, batch cooking, running errands, waiting in for parcels etc, putting a shopping delivery away, tidying (and possibly cleaning) children's room/playrooms. In a share this will 50/50 between families. In a NWOC situation the nanny will continue to do all this for the employer, but won't do it for themselves.

In a nannyshare it would be fair to alternate which house the share is based at so the families can alternate who has to get their children up, dressed and delivered before work. In a NWOC situation the nanny will always take their child to their employer's house.

A NWOC does not receive the benefits of a nannyshare, why should they pay for a nannyshare?

Years ago we had a nanny, and she brought her own child with her. Because she was also doing her own childcare, that allowed her to work, we paid her ( on a rate suggested by her) about a third less than the going rate.

I don't think a Nanny can say the job hasn't changed, Cathpip, because the nanny no longer gives sole care and attention to the nannied child/ren. And taking a pay cut (in the form of paying for child care) is a reality for all working parents!

But in our case the children were exactly the same age, so did the same activites, were at the same stage of devellopment and diet, and were great friends to each other.

You need to think about things like what happens when the Nanny's child is ill. Or your child is infectious.

It all worked very well for us.

If the nanny is taking a 30 - 50 percent cut in wages. Then the nanny is also paying for childcare.
So her child should be entitled to everything the other children do.
To say that most 3rd 4th children do not do clubs is silly. The baby will be the first born in its family. Why should it miss out? I have worked as a nanny for nanny shares and all four children were treated equally re clubs/activities they did. They all did swimming and one other regular club or activity.
I think Duchess you need to consider how Nanny shares work.

Of course the baby will detract from the nanny's attention, and of course there should be a paycut, but it is not the same as a nannyshare and the nanny's wage should not be cut by 30-50%. There is a post up thread (can't remember the poster) that explains why a NWOC arrangement is different to a nannyshare.

It cuts both ways actually- no the baby won't be able to go to its own classes but how many 3rd and 4th children do anyway? And it will be going to the youngest charge's things in the daytime including playgroups/ mother and baby groups etc so not entirely bereft of stimulation. And inevitably it will need time for its own needs- nappy changing, feeding etc. It's not realistic to say the baby won't detract from the nanny's attention- of course it will! That's not to say that it's a bad thing for the charge to have to share nanny's attention, but why should the OP pay for less 20-30% care? Or 50% in the daytime when it's just the toddler and the baby?

I'm not entirely sure tht I would want to have a nanny bring their baby actually - you are paying a fair amount of money for the service that you agreed at the start. I would find a pay cut hard to swallow though.

Yes agree with Outraged,

Do you want your children to accompany baby to clinic/doctors appointments, baby signing classes? Will nanny finish at reasonable time for her own child to go to bed? That is a parent who is late home would affect this. Can nanny do her own babies washing on duty? Make up feeds, batch cook baby foods.

Probably not, so will not be a nanny share in most cases.

As a nanny I would never want to bring my own child, especially if a baby. Not fair on them imo. I would rather be a childminder. My child in their own home.

As an employer I would not want a nanny with a baby, because purely for practicle/safety reasons a baby will often take priority.

But must work for some people. Maybe your nanny will not want to return with the baby OP. She is probably keeping all options open but may decide not to bring baby.

duchesse In most cases a NWOC arrangement is not like a nanny share, for the reasons other posters have outlined. A nanny-share and a NWOC arrangement are different. If the OP wants a nanny-share then I totally agree that a 30% reduction is logical.

Absolutely agree there should be a pay reduction. Why should she get free childcare while you have to pay through the nose?

The three friends I have had who've had nannies back after they've had a baby, two gave pay reductions of 20% and the other no hourly pay reduction (this job became an after school only job - so considerably shorter hours).

Your nanny cannot be doing exactly the same job as before unless she completely ignores the needs of her own child. So there should be some reduction in her rate to address this.

It effectively becomes a nanny share, so of course there should be a reduction. 30% off would seem logical, since she'll be looking after 2 of yours and 1 of hers (assuming it's not twins!). No reason whatsoever why a nanny shouldn't pay her own childcare costs!

Thanks for all of the replies. There are lots of things for us to consider, and pay is only one of those things (I have started another thread on this forum asking nannies with their own child and employers of nannies who bring their own child to work to give me their input on other areas that I have identified). Please feel free to add to that too if you'd like as I am realy keen to get a broad range fo opinion.

I have only just found out that our nanny is pregnant - she hasn't yet started her maternity leave. So there is time for us to consider everything. Our priority is finding cover for her maternity period and we'll go from there.

I am very grateful for your views. I think I've come down on thinking that a pay cut of around 20% is appropriate. We have always given an annual rise of 3-point-something per cent, so I don't think I could go along with not reducing wages, but not giving pay rises as that isn't what i think is enough of a reduction to reflect the changes that there would inevitably be in caring for our 6yo and nearly 2 yo.

I did not cut pay but have not given her pay rises. If I was employing a new nanny bringing her own child I would expect to pay a little less from the outset. I have to say it all worked really well when nanny's baby was a toddler but struggling much more now he is a toddler as she needs to keep a constant eye on him (writing on the wall etc which my DC never did). Change in my job means we need fewer hours which I don't think will work for her so will probably end up making her redundant. I have to say that although we will all miss her and her DS, in some ways I am relieved.

I'd expect a wage cut too. I guess there are nannies out there who are lucky to still get full wages (like those nannies who get to sit and watch telly while kids are at school instead of doing jobs around the house)
But for a nanny to pay childcare costs while she goes to work, well that's going to work out as a hige chunk of her wages so a small deduction like blondeshavemorefun suggested should be perfectly acceptable to your nanny.

agree not a nannyshare but still think the nanny should have a lower/less wage if take their own child as effectively they are not giving 100% of their care and attention to the employers children

for those of you who went back to work and stayed on the same money, you are very lucky - but i wouldnt expect it

as i said, no other job would allow you to take your child to work, and if you did have to pay for childcare you are likely to lose 50/75% of your salary (like a typical mb) so taking a paycut of 20%ish seems fair

but in the end its up to the nanny and employer

Can't speak to the money but I would certainly think very carefully about the logistics of all of this and have some detailed discussions as to how it will all work in your particular case. What happens if her baby is ill? What if one of yours is ill? Who pays for the extra equipment needed and food for the baby? What about appointments for the baby such as jabs if these can't be done out of working hours? Are there any things that can't be done anymore because of an extra child eg swimming or certain classes that your one year old (who presumably will be 2 then) where it wouldn't be suitable for the baby to go? What about driving (if she does), will that still work? If there are extra charges to go into a class, who pays for the baby? Who pays if her child damages things in your home?

None of this is insurmountable and many people have a NWOC working very well but worth working through all the issues carefully so everyone is on the same page.

I would keep it the same tbh.

I also don't agree it's a nanny share, a nanny share would equally split attention between the two children. A nanny will always be more focused on their charge than own child IMO. As they feel they are paid for that child, therefore the focus will be on them with their own child fitting in.
If their own child likes swimming, but their charge prefers dancing, then it's likely they will both go dancing for example.
They are of course closer etc to own child but in working hours work is put ahead.

I would say the current pay is average tbh, central london would be more like £12-13.50 an hr gross, so £11.20 just outside sounds ok but not top end

I was a nanny for 3 years before I had my baby and took him with me.
I did not take a pay cut.
Because:
My boss didn't want anything to change!
My situation is nothing like a nanny share!!!
Because:

• I get no say in start and finish times ( in a nanny share I would) my baby has to 'slot in' with my job.
• I get no say in activities. ( In a nanny share i would) We continue to do all the classes and activities we've always done.
• I can't take my baby to baby classes. I can't say 'ohh I'd like to take baby here or do xyz.' My baby has to tag along to the things my mb's children do.
• I'd love my baby to have his 2 hour nap at home in a cot. I can't because we're busy with activities.

• I'm not allowed to bring my baby if he's ill ( grandparents help) in a nanny share I would.

Basically my baby comes second. He fits in with the job. I accept that. That's the price I pay to have my baby with me full time.

Op - if your situation will be like mine and you want your children's routine and likes/dislikes to come first and be unchanged, I think your nanny should be paid the same. Also if your nanny is fab, and believe me a good nanny that stays with a family for years is worth their weight in gold! Then maybe it's worth paying her the same to keep her.
Good luck x

Thanks for the replies. its great to see a mix of replies from nannies and nanny employers. I think the overall view is that the nanny should expect a reduction in salary. I agree. I'm not sure how this will go down with our nanny though - I very much get the impression that a friend of hers who had a baby and then returned to her nanny job with her child has not had to take a reduction, and she might see that as the norm. Posters are suggesting anything from no reduction to a reduction of up to 40%.

I think (although I'm not sure) that our nanny is paid towards the top end of nanny salaries anyway (£11.20/hour gross outside London but within the M25), not that I begrudge paying it, as she is very good. But I would not be happy paying that rate when its not sole care. We always give just less than a week's wage as an annual bonus, and generous Christmas and birthday presents.

Outraged Thanks for separating out your view on the nany share role and the NWOC role, and the reduction that you think goes with each. I hadn't made any distinction in my mind between the two.

Blondes I always respect your opinion - what do you think about the differences between a NWOC and a nanny-share, and do you think the roles are that distinct in practice?

I have also started a thread asking NWOC and employers of NWOC for their expereinces.

Always took my children to work and never took a pay cut . However my children did all their classes and things on my days off. They had to fit in with the job.

Nannies wages vary a lot anyway the job I went back to with my baby they didn't want me to leave so no they didn't cut wages. The next job they wanted someone with child. Got slightly tricky when I had number two but I have never been out of work and I did have my mum up the road to have mine if needed.

When I went back to work with my baby 11 years ago. She just came along with the other 3. I did have mornings in between drops off's to go to a local to work group. I didn't loose any money going back but I also didn't get any more pay rises. They wanted to keep me as their younger 2 only had a year until school. They also new I already new their children and would put them first. I also new it would work as I agreed with the way the parented their children. It worked really well. The boys got to have a part time sibling, my dd got to be 4th and wait her turn for me. It was a 2 day a week job so I had the best of both. Going back would not of worked with my other job. I also decided that I didn't want to look for another nanny job as I did'nt want to put my dd through a not very nice job.