Minimum £72k salary required to allow me to take home same as my 19 year old nanny

The problem isn't that the nanny earns too much - it is a bloody hard job. I would think that it is a bargain for the amount of sheer effort.

The shocker is that you have to earn 72k to be able to "afford" it. It makes a normal salary of say 20-40k look like peanuts.

With so many graduates now, previously professional well paying jobs are virtually worthless once you have children.

Fio, take a deep breath babes.....

I agree that nanny salaries have gone out of control.

Sure I would pay a 'professional' salary for someone who had compelted a certian amount of training. I'm a teacher and to do that I stayed in f/t education (self funded) for 7 years after I left compulsary schooling.

I earn £24k (and thats after 2 yrs on the job and with another 4 yrs of youth work expereince, so in total 13 years of post 16 education and experience) and I look after/teach/guide 30 of other people's 'most preciuos possesions' all day.

I would object to paying a 19yr old (so could only have a maximum of 3 years of education/training/experience in total) MORE than I earn in total!!!

To pay someone else the equivilant of my salary I'd expect them to have spent at least 3 years in training and have a couple of years experience.

Our nanny (new one) has 2 yrs experience but no qualification post GCSE's. (first aid and CRb obviuosly) I dont' pay her anything like £25k and I'm not entirely sure what extra I would get from someone who expected that salary.

(btw before anyone goes into hours etc, she works 8-4pm 5 days a week, and i expect her to take a 30 minute PAID lunchbreak while DS is asleep during that time)

oooh...i take part of that back.

2 x £25,000 salary's is £50k.

because of the higher tax rate you need to earn £72k (i presume knakered has checked the figures, can't be bothered to check them)

so there is a dire need to restructure the tax system so that parents aren't hit twice with tax. Yes, yes, an old argument but the £72k does make me see red. pun wasn't intended!!

if you want to earn loads more than your childcare provider, you are in essence saying that you want to earn a salary good enough for two people - the nanny and you.

You want your nanny to earn a good salary - she is doing the extremely important job of looking after your most precious (sp?) possessions.

...well thats what i tell myself when i get the childminders bill!

50hour week or not in my opinion Nanny salaries have gone way out of control because people are not paid according to experience, a new inexperienced Nanny should not be on a salary par with a Nanny with 10+ years experience...It's outrageous!

THe question of whether to stay at home yourself is a very different one though.

I agree that the rate is generous for a 19yo, but it is a 50 hour week.

Surely in that case it makes sense to stay home & care for your own children???...There's no way a 19yr old Girl should be starting on a salary of £500 in any case! (just my opinion)

Uh dur!!! I certainly realise that. But quite a number of the wealthy people I know started life as brickies, plumbers or similar as opposed to bankers - the people I know in banking are 'comfortable' - but I don't live or work in London any longer which certainly makes a difference.

I think the thing is that childcare comes out of your net (take-home) pay. So you have to earn at least, say, 16k in order to break even on one child at nursery in the SE. Anything over £16k is what's left to live on. If you are used to a £40k gross salary (which is not a lot of money in London) then shelling out £16k of that gross income on childcare takes a bit of getting used to.

I know there are tax credits and some employers do the voucher scheme, but still, the costs make your eyes water.

SueW, I think that you'll find that most people who start off working on building sites do not earn up with million pound companies. In the same way as not every person who starts off in childcare end up owning a nationwide chain of nurseries.

Its all about choice. I was earning decent money doing a managerial job. Then I had a child and decided I didnt want to pay £1000 month to childcare. Now Im a childminder earning less money than before but I dont pay for childcare. One day Ill probably ? maybe go back to earning decent money. Whats the problem? Dont have kids thats the solutuion to having more disposable income!

My DB has his own company in the building trade (started on next to nothing salary). He and his bus partner now pay a business advisor for help. This chap has helped them double turnover and forecasts them bring a multi-million pound company in less than five years.

sue ,thats what my son is aiming for!!

arr i overlooked the london bit!
£500 a week is prob about right then isnt it?!

ladymuck..........the building site thing......annoying isnt it! my son whos 16 earns more than me a week being at college 3days and building 4 days!

But the people I know who started life as brickies then moved on and started by themselves and now employ a few people plus own properties they have bought at rock bottom prices and lived in, done up and moved on. Now they have megabucks!

I think the main revelation is that although you might think that someone earning 70k was rich, when you get there it turns out that you are not.

Well, if I ever get there I will let you know.

Depends where you live, smeeinit (love the name by the way!)

In London, £500 a week for 4 kids isn't unheard of, and also nanny salaries are always quoted in net, not gross, terms (don't get me started on that one!)

£80 a day net will be more than £500 a week gross.

How would you feel if your nanny was the same age as you? Still feel that she had a great deal? Is it just her age that is the issue for you.

I was at universtity when I was 19 so certainly not earning £25k. In fact I'm not sure that I reached that amount for many years.

But overall I think that you are overlooking the fact that the nanny's circs are such that she will never have the option of earning enough to employ a nanny herself.

My brother opted out of 6th form and got a job pyaing arounf £25k working on a building site. He's yougner than me and was very pleased to be earning approx the same salary. But again he is still left with a certain upper limit on his job prospects.

i say you find a different nanny..............................£500 a week for 4 kiddies is ridiculous!
i know several nannies who earn £80 per day to look after 3/4/5 children.
your nanny must be rubbing her hands with glee!!!

Seriously, I can see why one would make a comparison. Obv we all make financial choices and are at different stages of life, and with 4 children I imagine a nanny is the cheapest option.

It could well be true of all of us that we have less cash to sling around as we get older, no matter what we earned as teenagers vs in our twenties, thirties etc.

I earn more now than when I was in my teens, yet am worse off (mortgage/car to run etc)

In fact, I was better off when I was ten with my £2 a week pocket money!

Soapy - it was this one...

'By Wickedwaterwitch on Sat 10-Feb-07 10:05:46
It's going to feel like winning the lottery (well, a small win, £900 a month gross ish) for me when dd goes to school. In 200andbloodyEIGHT!'

But I might have missed the point a bit, because it wasn't the OP

But I still think this raises some interesting issues. I mean, why is it that childcare is so expensive? Why can't it be tax deductible?

Why are couples unable to make ends meet once they have children?

Personally I have a plan. What if you got a more generous tax allowance for each person in the family, including the children. This would allow you to actually take home more of your salary.

Stay at home mothers could transfer their allowances to the husband's salary, and working people could at least get something back towards the cost of bringing up children. Let's be honest, it is still going to be very expensive.