Does this sound ok for au pair role?

It would be ideal as part of a share as long as the OP doesn't need school holidays.

I wouldn't worry too much about an au pair becoming isolated in London though. I expect most socialising goes on in the evening when the au pair would be free, there are facebook groups for au pairs and I'm sure the OP would be able to introduce him/her to people in the local area. She will meet nannies, au pairs etc at playgroup/baby activities. It should be fine. She has the evenings to work, volunteer, join evening classes or a sports team if she is struggling to meet people.

It could work as part of a share though - someone whose children are going on to school but wants to keep their nanny might be happy to loan them out 10-3 for a contribution to their wages? The question is what happens in school holidays then.

I just worry an au pair might end up isolated as they'll be working when other au pairs are free and won't be going to English classes (whether they need them or not, it's good socialising) and that's not a great position to be in.

It's a good au pair job, but would be a terrible nanny job. I wouldn't advertise for a nanny OP, unless you're willing to pay a fair bit more.

Is there any law that states minimum pay for a live-in nanny?

If not, then would a live-in nanny actually get more pay - sure they could try to negotiate more pay, or not accept the job but whilst they are a worker, due to being provided with accomodation and included in family activities, NMW does not apply.

Their 'recommendation' is actually the law, so I'm a tad wary on what they're saying. Not that it has anything to do with whether what you're paying is reasonable or not, which is the crux of the issue, because you could employ the same person and call them a nanny and noone would blink.

You're well within your rights to choose someone with no qualifications or experience or speaks fluent Swedish or whatever, the difference is you'd be paying a nanny more.

No you're not being unreasonable. It's a nice job. Although I think the working week is really 32.5 hours, the lunch hour thing is a bit 'tight' imo.

What exact hours do you need childcare? You say 9-4 But not all those hours are chikdcare
You are working from home yes? And aren't home with any children until 10am?

Could you just get a nanny 10am -1pm, nanny put baby to nap at 1 then leaves. Then you can work 10-2.30/3 from home with a combination of nanny and child napping. Surely that's the same hours as working 10-12, hrs lunch, then 1-4.

A first job nanny with qualifications/ other childcare experience whilst your in house maybe £10 gross ( 10-1 only would suit maybe a parent whilst child is at school)

3 hrs a day x5 = £150 a week. It would cost you plus that with an au pair by the time you pay extra food/ bus/ English school

Get a cleaner or do your own housework

'It's absolutely an au pair job hmm I'm surprised by those saying different!

Young person from another country
Living as part of a host family
Doing childcare and light housework
25-30 hours a week
Receiving "pocket money"

That's pretty much the exact definition of an au pair.'

An au pair is completely different to a formal job, which you know, because you just posted the exact definition of an au pair! As such, they are not treated the same as an employee like a waitress or a nursery assistant. Do the people in your family get a 'lunch hour'? Pay for an au pair job is based on hours, here the unpaid lunch hour is the difference between 27.5 hours a week and 32.5 hours a week. The pay is generous for the first, but slightly low for the second imo. I'm not sure that it's fair to count the hour she has while the baby sleeps as her free time.

Not sure what difference it makes because it is an au pair job? You could equally say waitressing isn't "most jobs" or nursery assistant isn't "most jobs"

Advertized for months!!!! Butterfingers

Yes MrsHuxtable it was 20 years ago and hard work but great fun.

Au pairs are the only viable option for many, its easy to say get a cleaner and a childminder, but if you can find me a childminder willing to take on 3 children on an adhoc basis and speak Swedish to them I would be more than happy....I advertized for month for a nanny to do my adhoc hours and did not have a single applicant.

An au pair isn't 'most jobs' though is it?

I don't see the problem with an unpaid lunch hour - this is how it works in most jobs.

It's absolutely an au pair job I'm surprised by those saying different!

Young person from another country
Living as part of a host family
Doing childcare and light housework
25-30 hours a week
Receiving "pocket money"

That's pretty much the exact definition of an au pair.

Tidying up breakfast, hoovering twice a week and ironing a few shirts twice a week seems reasonable for light housework too.

I think you will have no trouble finding someone to do that role given that you are in London and offering a generous wage (I'd make it £100 to avoid NI issues).

I'm not understanding the outrage here tbh. It sounds a lovely au pair job to me. Would be a great job for someone looking to get into nannying. I am bit on the fence wrt to the unpaid lunch hour, but other than that it's all fine.

It's unconventional I guess which is maybe rattling some cages. The number of hours are not much different to a normal au pair role they're just arranged differently. Instead of working 7:30am-9:30am and then 3pm-7pm with school age children, she's working the middle hours with a younger child. This would be a preference for many. A lie-in and being finished in time to relax before going out in the evening, do other babysitting job, an evening course or even a shift in a cinema/pub/restaurant.

A 1 year old is absolutely fine being looked after by an older au pair, whilst their mother is in the house. What do you think is going to happen to him?!

NoRoom, I assume you were an au pair a while ago because the dfference is that the law has changed since then and there are now rules about what is an au pair job and what is not.

However great your experience was, it wouldn't be legal anymore so it's a moot point!

Having been an au pair, and have had many friends being au pairs, what Cinnamonbun describes is exactly what Au pairs do. I worked 7-7 for 35 pound a week, had sole charge of 2 little ones and had a super fantastic year. The family treated me like a daughter, I had everything I needed, was treated to days out and foreign holidays, and I still see the family regularly as the kids are now in their mid 20ies. Being an au pair gave me work experience and the references and experiences paved way for my current job. Its not slave labour. It is exactly what it is, experience and learning curves for all involved. My current au pair did the 2 day peadiatric first aid course from St johns Ambulance and is learning as she goes. She is part of the family and has a say. She doesnt have a paid lunch hour, she eats with us as a family. She has set times of work and time off. Its about respect and work. The main reason for having au pairs is the cost of course, but the language skills for bilingual children is invaluable. My english friend has a 5 year old that after 5 spanish aupairs (whos job spec states that they must only speak spanish when caring for the child) speaks fluent spanish. The child is fantastic, and the au pairs have all been fab. They go home with life skills, the child is bilingual. Being an au pair in the right family is a fantastic experience, but its not for everyone.

agree with civilfawlty. what you need is a cleaner and a childminder for your 1 year old, or a nursery if you prefer - or can you not afford that either??

what you describe is not an au pair role surely - why do people take risks with their children like this? a 1 year old should not be in sole care of an au pair surely?

and expected her to have an unpaid hours lunch break? where she can do what she wants - well hardly, as she has to be back after an hour.

jesus, i despair of some people really

What I don't understand is why someone else should work for so little because you can afford a nanny?

Agree with branching out. It's a nanny role, and you are being outrageous.