Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Paid childcare

Discuss everything related to paid childcare here, including childminders, nannies, nurseries and au pairs.

Original poster

When you advertise for a non-smoking nanny, would you accept one who smoked but not smoked when working?

67 replies

nannynick · 12/04/2008 18:00

I've been wondering about this for a while... smoking is I feel frowned upon these days, particularly when it involves people who work with children. Many nanny job adverts request a non-smoker. But I expect there must be some nannies around who do smoke... though they don't smoke when working.
If a nanny applied for a live-out job which specified a non-smoker, how would you deal with it if the nanny then said they did smoke at their home.
I am wondering what parents feel is meant by non-smoker.

How should this be phrased in the Gross Misconduct section? If the employee is found smoking while on duty, that I feel could be grounds for Gross Misconduct. If they were found to smoke while not on duty, could they still be sacked under Gross Misconduct?

Should point out that I am a non-smoker, have never smoked and I expect never will smoke. So I am rather anti-smoking.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
LadyMuck · 12/04/2008 20:18

I ended up with this - job was for a non-smoker, nanny claimed to be a non-smoker, and whilst she never smoked in my house, or to the best of my knowledge in front of my child, if she was coming to babysit she would reek of smoke.

So my issue was more about trust rather than whether or not she was a smoker. I felt that she had misrepresented herself, and of course if someone lies about one aspect of their cv, there could be other areas of concern too.

AbbeyA · 12/04/2008 20:14

If I advertised for a non-smoker that is what I would want, she won't be able to get rid of the smell.

madamez · 12/04/2008 20:13

Were I employing a nanny I would ask for him/her not to smoke in front of the DC. Because I don't, though I have the occasional sneaky fag when I am away from DS or he is in bed, so it would be extremely hypocritical of me to refuse to employ a smoker.
I think that anti-smoking paranoia has been racked up to absurd levels these days: smoking round children is bad for them, sure, but so is traffic exhaust, processed food, lots of other aspects of daily living that we mostly all survive.

Also, I really dislike this idea some people have that an employee is property and what he/she does when he/she is off-duty is any fucking business at all of the employer's. If someone is drinking or drugging to the point that their work is actually affected then there's a problem, but moderate recreational drinking (ie drinking on Saturday when you';re off work from Friday to monday) is up to the individual.

edam · 12/04/2008 20:11

I don't think it is right to stipulate what someone can and cannot do when they are not at work, though. Especially if what they do is entirely legal. Very dangerous idea that employers should be able to control their workers' every waking moment - we are going backwards to the Victorians (Titus Salt, anyone?).

jura · 12/04/2008 20:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RachieB · 12/04/2008 19:18

I am a Nanny and also a parent I am very much aniti smoking!

If i was looking for childcare, i would not accept anyone who smokes

as mentioned above you can smell it on their breath / clothes / hair / car etc even if they havent smoked one recently!

imananny · 12/04/2008 18:32

well i would def FAIL the booze test but pass the drugs one with flying colours!!

Original poster
nannynick · 12/04/2008 18:26

agreed, alcohol and drugs are also problems. Though a job advert may not ask specifically for someone who does not drink or take drugs.
It may get to a point where employers regularly get employees to pass alcohol and drugs tests. I expect this already happens in some other work industries.

OP posts:
amidaiwish · 12/04/2008 18:26

i do know people who just smoke at the pub (in the old days) so i would accept this, however i wouldn't accept someone who claimed they wouldn't smoke while working.

fleacircus · 12/04/2008 18:26

Toxins remain in breath, skin, clothes etc whether they'd smoke round my baby or not. So no way.

imananny · 12/04/2008 18:25

excalty my point nick

Twiglett · 12/04/2008 18:23

I can smell people who smoke even if they haven't had one for hours .. it sticks to them and their clothes .. a non-smoker is a non-smoker

southeastastra · 12/04/2008 18:20

er easily! they may even wear a patch or have gum during work times. i'd be more worried about drink or drugs than smoking.

Original poster
nannynick · 12/04/2008 18:18

In 2001 a salesman was sacked from his job, because he admitted he smoked at home source. Appears he never took it to court source.
I do wonder what rights someone who smokes has.
Given that society seems to be heading more and more towards anti-smoking... perhaps employers will be able to state that an employee being discovered smoking, be it at work, or in their freetime, is grounds for dismissal.

As a non-smoker, I don't understand how someone can smoke at home, but get through a 10 hour day without smoking.

OP posts:
imananny · 12/04/2008 18:08

smoking is a disgusting habbit - unfort my dh smokes

i guess as long as nanny doesnt smoke around children/during working hours, and was honest with employer then shouldnt be a prob

thing is, if they smoke normally, could they survive 10/12 hrs with no cigerettes?

hercules1 · 12/04/2008 18:02

If I were to have a nanny I wouldnt want one who smelt of fags when they came to work. If they smoked at the weekend that's fine.

NotABanana · 12/04/2008 18:01

No way.

I can smell it a mile off and hate it.

Swipe left for the next trending thread