UPDATE! The old nanny v the temporary maternity cover nanny!!

Yes I know, I can spell normally I promise!

spelling was more like the Guardian

I of course meant 'God I sound like the Daily Mail.'

Katymac that is a very interesting point - I imagine the 2nd nanny would have to be on a temp basis if you were going to offer the job back to first nanny and therefore maternity rights would be different?

margoandjerry, I am speachless that chauffeurs are tax deductible! I work as a headhunter and we put some very senior bankers and private equity investors into positions where they will earn millions of pounds. They all have beneficial tax arrangements which means they pay much less as a percentage than your average Joe battling into work on the tube everyday, trying to pay a huge mortgage and childcare costs and contribute to the economy.

I think you need to offer the very wealthy tax incentives otherwise they will just leave the country (brain drain in the 70's anyone) but the govenment could try and make life just a little easier for honest, hardworking professional. Good I sounds like the dailt mail!

Susie, I'd sign up to that petition. I work for an investment company which specialises in people with very high net worth. My marginal rate of tax is higher than theirs because I pay my nanny's tax out of my taxed income. Chauffeurs, by the way, are tax deductible.

Just to be awkward what would happen if you had a nanny who got pregnant & took the full maternity leave. Then you took on a second nanny who got pregnant & took 6 months leave - who would get the job back?

Thanks for this Eleusis, very helpful. It is indeed the idea of paying for a temp nanny that is terrifying me to be honest. A nanny is going to be a stretch for us but a sacrifice I am prepared to make as I think it is the best care for a young baby!

I only get stat. maternity leave so I have been effectively with no pay for 6 months...things are tight! I agree it does seem a bit mean unfeminist but it is a reality for a lot of women unfortunately.

Shall we start a petition for chilcare costs to be payable out of gross income? Surely it must have been done already?

Besides, we aren't talking about prenant and unemployed. We are just talking about not hiring an inflated price temp nanny to cover maternity leave. She can get another job when she is finished with maternity leave quite easily. And I wouldn't ever let her go because she was pregnant. I am just saying that I couldn't hold the job and pay a temp nanny for 12 months of leave.

There are plenty of people who have it worse than nannies.

I'm sure that will be of great comfort to the nanny who finds herself pregnant and unemployed. If you were in a similar position yourself I'd have thought you'd be a bit more compassionate towards other women.

I was in fact diddled in a simlar fashion when I was pregnant with my first child.

The thing is childcare is barely affordable for so many of us. Then the government turns round and treats working parents like profitable businesses. I just can't afford to take any financial risks. I barely scrape by as it is. And I can not take the risk of having to pay even higher prices for childcare. I simply can not swing it.

I am not a small business. I am a parent. I find it outrageous that Gordon Brown taxes me like I am profitable when in fact he is the reason I'm not.

Trying to think up ways of avoiding holding jobs for pregnant workers seems pretty mean to me - how would you feel if your employer tried to do that? Aren't these rights that feminists have fought for for ALL women, not just the highly paid ones?

Ziopin, sorry about the hijack. Keep us posted on the pending departure of your soon to be x evil nanny. You know we are always interested!

Ah yes. That's true Piggy. As with any job negotiation you have to weigh what you are willing to offer with what the market of potential nannies will accept. You could always put it in the contract and then if she queries it and says it's not okay, you might have to be willing to make it permanent.

But, permanent seems a bit misleading since surely the children will grow and then you won't need a nanny. So any nanny job seems to have it's limits in length of service.

Think I'll stick with my holiday maker visa applicants, who can only work here for 12 months anyway. The down side is sometimes you have to say good-bye when you don't want to.

Whilst I agree with pretty much everything Eleusis says about hiring a nanny and about nannies in general I would just mention that a one year fixed term contract might put some people off applying for the job. A lot of nannies I have come across are looking for something a bit longer term (although I entirely accept that the fixed term can be renewed)

Just a thought.

Yep, Susie. That is my understanding. Of course, I am not a lawyer. So you might double check it. But I would write a 12 month fixed term contract with a 3 month probationary clause. Also, think about how much notice period you want. 4 weeks is standard, but you can put less if you want. The probationary period usually has something like a week's notice required on either side.

If this is a live-in nanny then you should also have a set of house rules. And it's nice if you can organise a welcome pack for her and put it in her room for her arrival.

And sorry for hijack Ziopin!

Thanks for all of this - flowerybeanbag, Eleusis and nannynick. Becoming an employer for the first time really is a minefield!

I had not really considered a male nanny, funny isn't it although I can see it being a huge advantage with 3 energetic boys for example. I have actually found a lovely young nanny who speaks Italian (big plus point for me as trying to bring dd up bilingually)

So just to be clear - a fixed term contract expires after whatever time you set it for. Maternity pay is unaffected but you don't have to hold the job open for the nanny to come back to of the contract expires during that time?

I must start reading up about this!

Could always opt for a male nanny - though they could get 2 weeks off for paternity leave

Another option is to employ someone who is here on a holiday maker visa. She can work for 12 months and that is it. So you aren't making her redundant but her right to work here has expired.

Eleusis I was just concerned that someone reading your post may think that employing someone on a fixed term contract avoids maternity responsibilities.
As I said, I was posting for the avoidance of doubt and giving further information about fixed term contracts in case someone might consider this as an option- if they did they would need to be fully informed about the rights of fixed terms workers. As I am sure you are.

She has no right to bring her baby back to work. And it doesn't give her grounds to sue for anything... and I'm sure she has looked into it.

I'm not suggesting you avoid paying maternity pay, but it will keep you from having to save the job throughout her maternity leave. A fixed term contract ends when it expires. And the employee getting pregnant does not extend the length of the contract. This is perfectly legal.

Obviously I have missed this but a question. If previous nanny was so bad why wasn't she sacked?

I would get advice about maternity pay. Doesn't sound like she deserves a wodge of cash and if she can't bring her baby...

She won't sue you for constructive dismissal will she because you won't let her bring baby?

And here about rights of fixed term employees, for further information.