Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original poster

... to not particularly want to share the nanny with a stranger over the school holidays without some sort of financial contribution?

145 replies

zebedeethezebra · 31/07/2012 14:28

Our nanny works for us 3 days a week to look after DS. She works for another family on the other 2 days who have 3 children.

Other mum says she can't get childcare for one of the days that nanny works for us. She has requested that our nanny look after her 3 as well as ours. She has offered to pay the nanny extra but has made no offer to contribute towards our costs (more than £100 per day for the nanny plus the swimming lesson that DS will have to miss).

She hasn't bothered to call me to discuss this, just has passed it all via the nanny.

So I've requested that she either pays us £50 or reciprocates the arrangement some time. Whatever extra she gives the nanny is none of my business. I've also said to the nanny, who looked awkward, that other mum should phone me if she has a problem.

But I'm really annoyed. I don't even know this other mum. Surely she cannot think she can share our nanny with no offer of a contribution. Quite frankly I think she has a cheek. Now the nanny will have 4 children to look after. DS will enjoy having some company, but won't get much attention (and we're trying to potty train).

I would never have requested this from her without offering to pay.

What do you think?

OP posts:

girlsofsummer · 02/08/2012 11:24

totally agree with justfabulous

DontmindifIdo · 02/08/2012 18:53

JustFabulous - but the advantage of hiring a nanny to look after just 1 DC is that you have 1:1 attention for those days - as nursery would be cheaper. If you are chosing as an employer to have the more expensive childcare option, you should have the 'better' childcare provision. (I say this as a mum who doesn't use a nanny as I can't afford it for 1 DC compared to the cost of nursery - if I had 2 I would reassess as it would be the same daily rate as 2 in nursery around here).

I understand it's a very different job to many others, but the principle isn't - you are employed to do that job, not another job at the same time.

It can get blurred because being a nanny is often closer to being part of a family, but some boundaries should stay in place - the desire to 'help out' family B shouldn't be at the cost to family A who are paying for a certain level of service. If you pay for something, you should get it.

elvisaintdead · 02/08/2012 19:40

Nanny is contracted by you that day and therefore she should have asked you if it was ok first. If you said no, then she says no to the other Mum, simple as that. For me the reason someone has a nanny rather than a childminder is because the nanny is in your home, caring for only your children and can follow your routines and rules. You pay a premium for that option as opposed to childcare when the routines and rules of others need to be taken into account, and you are losing the thing that imo you are paying for with this arrangement.

Whether it's for 1 hour or 1 week it makes no odds and caring for 4 kids as opposed to 1 means a lot less time and attention for each child (and I speak as someone with 5 DC).

If you said yes, then you should get a reduced rate for the inconvenience - as things stand the nanny gains because she gets extra £, the Mum gains as she gets her childcare sorted and you lose because you are paying the same as usual for a less favourable option.

YANBU and I think you should insist on a reduced rate from your nanny.

JustFabulous · 02/08/2012 20:05

One day though. If people are really that self absorbed that they can't help someone as a one off, then it is a selfish world.

DontmindifIdo · 02/08/2012 20:18

Why should people help random strangers unless they want too? I would offer to help out with a friend's childcare crunch, but not a random stranger. You might think that's selfish, but that's normal behaviour for most people.

The other family might be people the nanny is close too, but they are complete strangers to the OP. Most people are only helpful (in a way that negatively effects them) to people they know.

confusedpixie · 02/08/2012 20:19

Glad you said no. I agree that it's taking the piss, both from the nanny and the family! My Bosses in both jobs would be royally pissed off if I were to agree to this (similar set-up, three kids one job, one potty training toddler in the other job). I do feel sorry for the nanny though as I've only recently grown a spine so to speak, and can imagine not handling this situation well if I'd been in it a year ago!

HighJumpingHissy · 02/08/2012 20:21

It's one day A WEEK that this other mother is expecting.

Quite right that she ought to pay for HALF your child care AND the cost of the swimming lesson, unless you can move that to another day, as due to HER lack of childcare you are paying for shared use AND missing out on a paid for activity that you would not miss if she had her own childcare sorted and left yout nanny arrangement in place.

I would assume also that the other mother would be paying for the mileage incurred too.

As it goes, you have cancelled the whole thing.... Good for you OP. That ought to teach the other mother to talk to YOU first before tailgating YOUR paid for child care.

TheSurgeonsMate · 02/08/2012 20:23

I've got sucked into this conversation despite my utter lack of nanny experience. I met one once at a singing class.

On a one off basis, (assuming properly handled by nanny with accommodation on fees etc) you can just as easily see this as nanny offering something different for the day. Visits and outings are part of life. And you're doing her a favour, not just the other team.

MeDented · 02/08/2012 20:30

It's the swimming lesson that would be the sticking point with me, no way would I want my child to miss that because someone else had childcare problems. Selfish maybe but it's hard enough juggling children, activities and work at the best of times without having to accommodate strangers. Just tell nanny DH had forgotten about swimming lesson and you are not happy for DS to miss his lesson so unfortunately you can't help on this occasion.

TheSurgeonsMate · 02/08/2012 20:41

To be frank, I was just ignoring the swimming lesson. I agree that could be important in this case. I was responding more to the 'spirit of the thing' discussion that has started more recently.

Popcornia · 02/08/2012 21:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheSurgeonsMate · 02/08/2012 21:23

You could go to jail . That's it, I really am out of my depth. I'm hiding this thread.

QuintessentialShadows · 02/08/2012 22:17

Just who is selfish here?

The mum who is paying her usual fee for her child to get 25% of the attention he usually has, missing a swimming lesson, and has her child cared for in the house of strangers?

Or the mum who pays the nanny a bit more for an extra ad hoc day when she is not supposed to work for her, "allowing" the other child to be in her home? Just so she get her childcare problem sorted? Without talking to the nannys employer that day?

If I was op, I would have said "no". Not because I did not want to help out, but because the other mums entitlement!

Original poster

zebedeethezebra · 07/08/2012 17:30

In the end I said no, not because of the money, but because I was concerned that it would be unsafe.

DS is not familiar with their house, and I thought that if nanny was busy with the 2 older boys demanding attention, my DS could, for all I know, be raiding kitchen cupboards, pulling kettles over and god knows what else, without her noticing. Plus he wouldn't get his nap and he'd miss swimming. For 10 hours, to be in someone else's house with little or no attention from nanny (when he is used to having all her attention) is too much without some sort of breaking in process, which we don't have time to do, for a one off.

Plus I have never met other mum's older children so I do not know how they behave.

If it had just been the other mum's youngest (who is the same age as my DS and who I have briefly met on one occasion) I probably would have agreed to it. But not with these 2 older boys who I don't know in a strange environment.

I just didn't think it was in DS's best interests.

OP posts:

iloveACK · 07/08/2012 18:22

I totally see where you're coming from & don't blame you for saying no at all. Just hope it doesn't cause any sort of upset between you & your nanny. It shouldn't, obviously, but could do if she's annoyed at not getting her way or it causing hassle with the other mum.

EightiesOlympicGolds · 07/08/2012 19:34

You were absolutely within your rights, and FWIW I would have done the same.

Prarieflower · 07/08/2012 19:41

He couldn't have gone to another house anyway as it would no longer be classed as nannying but childminding in a setting which hadn't been OFSTEDed.

LadyKooKoo · 07/08/2012 19:43

How old are the other children? If they are all under five then she isn't allowed by law to look after all of them.

Prarieflower · 07/08/2012 19:52

You are only nannying if you care for children in their own home.

If you're caring for children in a different setting you have to register with OFSTED for exactly the reason the op has identified-it's a building she knows nothing about,isn't insured,has had risk assessments carried out for,hasn't been approved by OFSTED,hasn't had CRB checks done on other residents etc,etc,etc.

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 08/08/2012 00:07

Seems reasonable, OP

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6