Would you employ a nanny without qualifications in childcare...

OldLadyKnowsNothing - You're completely right. My Mum left childminding because she was having difficulty because new clients anted her to have qualifications, even though she'd been doing the job for years! It's ridiculous and the same in other situations.
[Unrelated to childcare] My old kayaking club have no coaches now as in 08 the qualification systems in paddling changed so that everybody has to now become a coach on the new system. However they've merged canoeing and kayaking, so now the old canoers/kayakers have to learn the other discipline, which means paying for courses to gain the qualification as local coaches don't have these qualifications yet. This also means that old coaches have to work their way up through the coaching levels from the start again, as you cannot be a level three coach without having first been a level two, and previously a level one. Therefore paying for more courses, which brings more money to the BCU, who organise paddlesports, and therefore more money to the government.
It'd be like the government saying you can't do an nvq 3 without a 2 and a 2 without a 1 (which I bet they do in the future at some point).

It's all about money and having a little bit of paper. It's stupid!

But I think for younger people, having qualies is important. In my situation, I'm 19 and have over a thousand hours experience, which I think is good for somebody my age, but I'd rather have a qualification as it ust gives me an extra leg to stand on, if that makes sense?

And on academic background, I've never understood why people are allowed to work with kids when they are actually complete idiots! When I was volunteering there were girls who could barely answer the simplest of maths questions. I was sitting in the staff area at the school I was at and one of these girls, who had been working with year threes, had been moaning and complaining because she'd had to do fractions with the kids and she found it hard to answer the kids questions in relation to a cake (like a 3rd of a cake, half, etc). What the hell? I could never trust a person to teach my kids if they coudn't understand what they were teaching themselves?

I'm interviewing nannies this week. First nanny is unqualified but has experience working in an orphanage(!) - she is however educated.

The others have some kind of childcare quals on their CV's but I'm not bothered by qualifications tbh. I want someone competent, kind, genuinely likes children, is enthusiastic and displays tons of common sense.

Darn! I went to bed and missed my G&T.

Of course there is no such thing as a perfect nanny, nor any other kind of employee.

I'm no longer in childcare, but it pisses me off endlessly that N/SVQs were originally introduced to validate on-the-job-experience, ie give bits of paper to people who were already doing the job, but now inexperienced folk are gaining S/NVQs at college with bugger-all experience. Yet you now seem to need that bit of paper to prove you can do a job you've already been doing for twenty sodding years. There are jobs I could do/get two decades ago, from which I am now excluded, because I don't have a bit of paper that says I know when to change a nappy (I know there's a lot more to childcare than that, I'm ranting, OK? ) and I find it personally insulting that I'm expected to jump through hoops like that.

And breathe

with our money

[pours drink at the nanny state nanny advice. someone was paid to write that]

yes.

I have had an unqualified nanny with loads of experience - but, with hindsight I can see her references weren't that great. neither was she.

I've had a qualified nanny with quite a bit of experience - she was great

and I;ve given an unqualified nanny her first proper nanny job. she had excellent references from her first job where she'd nannied in a family of 4 kids with a sahm - and I instantly warmed to her. she was totally brilliant. we miss her loads.

Athene, is there such thing as a perfect nanny in your opinion?

It was my ex boss you coined that term not me just for the record.

im an eductaed nanny

12 GCSE's
4.5 A Levels
BSc. (hons) Psychology

& NVQ level 3 early years care and education

Neuropsychology - I'm doing one of my degree courses in that - totally worth it.
I think any education is a good foundation to working in childcare really - children are so curious - how can we encourage and enhance their development without knowledge?
I think a well rounded academic background plus childcare quals are a good foundation to build on with experience but as you say nannynick - parents can recruit who they like.
G&T sounds good but sadly still on duty

I class myself as an "educated" nanny. I have an LLB, plus several post grad Science, Maths and Psych classes under my belt. Knowledge is power and I aim to keep learning for learnings sake. In fact I'm aiming to do a Masters in Advanced Pediatric Nursing, and then specialize in neuropsychological development. It will take years but will totally be worth it. I'll keep nannying as time allows though, as I love it and after 12 years I cannot imagine doing anything else until I am a qualified PNP.

'educated nanny' - now that could mean several things. A past discussion on here revealed that many of the nannies who post on Mumsnet, actually have quite a high level of non-childcare related education (GCSE's, A-Levels, HND, Degree etc.).

I think that if you were in your mid 30's and didn't have a childcare qualification, then saying that you had 20 years experience of caring for children, could certainly get you jobs... where by a younger person could not claim to have as much experience.

As the in-home childcare market becomes more regulated (as I suspect it will over the next few years), childcare training will become more necessary. However, I expect there will still be some parents who will recruit who they like.

I'm level 4 and parents hate it at interview.
They seem to automatically think that because I have a lot of child related qualifications I'm going to act superior or something like that.
In my experience parents want different things. Some want qualified others just want somebody they can boss around and will nod blankly. Most I've met want both.
As for experience - it seems to be the older you are the more chance you have of getting away with this one. I have eight years experience with children in all manner of childcare settings but because I'm 23 I'm always told it's not enough where as if I were older I suspect this wouldn't be the case.
I like the fact I'm a so called 'educated nanny' and believe nannies should be qualified but if you're happy with somebody you've interviewed who doesn't have quals then trust your instincts as you know what's the best fit for your family. No qualification can teach that.

I'm surprised that Government site isn't saying we should all be getting NVQ Level 4. Seems to be the what our current government wants from it's childcare workforce.

Surprised the OCR wasn't mentioned on here so far (or did I miss it). To be registered, a nanny needs to meet minimum requirements... which currently is training like the ICP, which is only a module... not a qualification in it's own right (in my view).

Lola - some parents will employ a nanny without formal training, while others will not. It is like some families want a nanny to be registered, or want a nanny to be able to drive.

Yes, number 6 is a fallback for a lazy nanny who is inclined to pull numerous sickies. I have never not paid a sick day. But, it's there in case I need it.

frannikin - I've done the ICP and in my books I class that as a short course, not really a qualification.

For a young inexperienced nanny a qualification is a plus, but imo nothing beats first hand experience. My 24 years of experience has covered nannying, nurseries, creches, childminding, brownies, reception class assistant and of course bringing up 2 children of my own. I don't have first hand experience of special needs but have done 2 short courses on this.

Having a qualification can show commitment and dedication, but I knew a few girls who did the NNEB because they weren't sure what else they wanted to do (which peeved me at the time because the year I applied there were 200 applicants for 40 places and I wasn't one of the lucky ones). As you did say, once you have a certain amount of years experience under your belt that shows a career choice rather than someone that's just doing the job whilst they decide what they really want to do.

I have an unqualified nanny and she's great. She is doing a distance learning qualification in her own time.

Yes, I would and do. I was more interested in employing someone who would care for my kids than having pieces of paper to say she had passed a test.
Our nanny has been with us for 4 months now and is great - the kids like her and that for me is the main thing

I didn't mean to write so much.

I suspect athene means that she puts SSP in to deter nannies from throwing sickies and pays in full if it's genuine sickness and she's feeling nice!

I would say no because a basic qualification is now very easy to obtain - the ICP takes 12 hours and you answer some (multiple choice) questions and there are accredited distance learning courses out there. It would just seem lazy to me if a nanny had had the opportunity and hadn't done it because they assumed that they knew everything IYSWIM. Althouugh 'standards' in childcare and 'best practice' change all the time so I'd at least want to know that at some point the nanny had been told something correct and it wasn't all potentially harmful old wives tales. It needn't be an NNEB/DCE/NVQ, although those would be the preferred option for me.

I've outlined my reasons for why nannies should have training before but a brief recap:

A nanny with 5 years experience can have 5 years experience working with 5 children aged 2 years old. A nanny with 5 years experience and a qualification may have only worked as a nanny with 5 children aged 2 years old but will have come into contact with, trained to work with, and have a theoretical background knowledge of, children from birth to 8, thereby increasing the likelihood of them spotting a developmental problem/knowing age appropriate activities.
A nanny with a qualification will not have learnt everything through trial and error. Some things, like employer/employee relationships, only come with experience but with an unqualified nanny you never actually know what they haven't directly experienced and therefore haven't learnt. It could be something major.
A nanny with a qualification shows dedication, commitment (possibly more important without the years of experience because if you have 10 years then you're pretty committed) and a certain level of professionalism regarding their chosen career.
A nanny with a qualification is more likely to be able to carry out observations should the need arise (eg. suspected developmental delay/additional needs) which can speed up the process of diagnosis because the data has been gathered.

It worries me that nannies can work without any basic training . I personally don't think unqualified nannies should be insured (the companies are taking one hell of a risk there!) and I don't believe any nanny should be working without insurance. I know others disagree - this is just my opinion - but the training is there, it's not expensive, it's not a massive time commitment, so why not do it?

So on second thoughts I might if the nanny was prepared to do an ICP or equivalent. But it would very much depend on the nanny.

What do you mean by

1. Write SSP only in your contract. And pay sick time at your discretion.

yes!

Actually, Lola, are you an employer or a nanny?