To think this person should never have bothered having kids?

[doubleshotespresso]

See below link to a local forum with an advert for a part-time nanny all round slave

Doesn't she sound lovely?

www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?25,1385026

And I'd still like the OP to explain why she thinks the mother is a disgrace but has no comments about the father.

Dog walker, housekeeper, cleaner, tutor, nanny and driver. Self-employed. For £10/hour in London. PMSL.

I was a live in nanny, I did all of that and more- I'm not really shocked by the list of jobs, it's basically being the adult of the house for three days.

Luckily I loved my family and them me, I didn't mind doing it all, it was made up by additional holidays and a lovely home with fab people.

Wage is a bit shit, but if people point that out at interview they may well raise it?

Agree with OldCatLady and other people writing similar.

I live in a low income area - I would expect to pay at least £15 ph asking for these qualifications/duties. I would also expect to pay petrol and a per mile top-up for car wear and tear.

The sad fact as there are so many people (especially those from other countries) who would work for this wage, and parents willing to exploit that fact. I really don't understand having so little respect for the people who you leave to care for your children.

I don't think the rates are okay when viewed from a daily basis. It is not a daily rate of £125 is it? It is a 12-hour shift. I think the alleged "downtime" is irrelevant - I suspect there will be PLENTY for nanny to do!

And I was on circa 18k, not in London but there's no way I could translate that into an hourly wage.

Often mum would be away on business so technically I worked 24/7, part of the job.

Mum(and dad!) were lovely people who weren't slave drivers, and were fantastic parents.

MrsLion Don't you know that mothers (not fathers, mind, just mothers) who outsource any of the drudgery precious moments of caring for their children are hatchet-faced, hard-nosed, self-centred bitches whose children will grow up with abandonment ishoos and who must be head-tilted and sadfaced at until they remember their duty.

hatchet-faced, hard-nosed, self-centred bitches

Well, as it happens I am - but that's nothing to do with my career or childcare choices!

I think the bottom line is that a qualified teacher could do 11+ tuition in London on a (genuinely) self employed basis for £40 per hour. She (or he) could do 2 hours after school tuition five days a week and earn slightly more than the advertised post. If I were a suitably qualified teacher I think that's what I would do, and not bother with the dog walking, light housework, laundry, cooking nutritious and delicious meals etc for 36 hours a week when I could earn the same money in 10 hours.

One or two things in the ad made me think that the poster is from the US and perhaps doesn't realise the HMRC stance on employing nannies (term used loosely, obviously).

There will only be plenty for the nanny to do if she/he is expected to do additional work that isn't in the job description.

Clearly these people need to do some more research on employment law, tax and NI, but leaving that aside there is nothing in the ad to suggest they are slave drivers.

I reckon they plan to pay cash in hand..... Then it is up to the nanny if she declares her income, thus turning it from gross to net.... Not saying this is the right thing to do, but probably what they are planning.

Plenty of people around keen to earn £1500 per month and not declare it. As a net salary for 3 days work it is not so bad....

So really the only charges that can be laid at their door are:

• should have checked out the legal and tax side of things before placing the ad.
• may have underestimated the going rate for the job and therefore won't find suitable candidates.

Oh yes. I forgot. Thanks for reminding me OhTheHugeManatee

Except, Quintessentially, that means the nanny - quite apart from being expected to break the law in order to receive a reasonable wage - will not have a legal, traceable work record, and if she does not pay NI, etc, it will affect her eventual pension.

I agree that it's done a lot, but - as you say - that doesn't make it right.

And self-employed also means no sick pay, no holiday pay, no notice if the family decide to bugger off to florida for six months, no security at all.

They are utter exploitative shitlords, IMO, but almost certainly think of themselves as naice people providing an excellent opportunity for someone.

Yy, only paid for hours worked. But, as pointed out, self-employed means you can subcontract to whomever. Bet Kara wouldn't like that.

This could be a heart surgeon on call whose partner is away working for the Red Cross. This could be a 2 dad family. You can't tell from the ad.

Maybe they aren't ignorant about NI and employment law and are trying to pull a fast one. However I think putting your tax evasion plan in a small ad is a bit of a cardinal error.

People are reading things into this ad that aren't there, apparently based on their perceptions of people who have nannies.

cinnabar i referred very early on in this thread to the parents in the plural. It makes little difference if it is the mother or father (or both) advertising here, I never indicated I thought it was any worse because the mother might be going to work. Every household where parents work outside the home have the right to help regardless of who or both decides to return to work.... My issue never was their intention to source help, it was their list of requirements for £10 an hour that I found incomprehensible.

I still do.

Great post ArcheryAnnie, the lack of commitment from this family towards somebody they intend to support them so solidly was what made me so annoyed.

I just sped read the responses since yesterday... I still maintain that this role could and should comply with current legislation and is a tall order with the expected teaching expertise for so little money. The rate for the area and job spec is woefully low.

Maybe they would be better arramging for a regular nanny and a separate specialist tutor?

So, if you meant parents, why did you put "this person" in the title?

Not have you explained the .

I totally agree ArcheryAnnie, the "employers" dont want the hassle and commitment with an employee, they seem to want to prefer to keep it outside the law. This does not benefit the nanny at all long term.

(I know a nanny who is paid cash in hand and only declares some of her salary to keep her benefits and her taxes down, and her employer is quite happy with the situation because her fees are lower than other nannies - she has no qualifications though and is not ofsted registered. Plenty of people do it this way....)

Because generally writing an advert is an action carried by one individual or one person. I doubt two of them typed it out FGS.

The sad face because it read to me that it was a very deluded expectation and that the children (& I suppose family as a whole ultimately) would suffer. As i said previously it makes me sad as it speaks volumes on the conditions and expectations many nannies face...and also the lack of guidelines surrounding decent childcare. That all makes me sad.

Sorry- was responding there to Cinnabar

Usually people don't state their intentions to break the law in a small ad. Generally they do that when they are unaware of the law.

There are plenty of guidelines about employing nannies. This person is a bit of a numpty because they didn't read them. However I think its a bit of a stretch to call them an exploitative shitlord based on the ad.

If there are teachers being exploited in jobs like this that is a different matter. However you are taking one person's small ad which may or may not attract respondants and using it as evidence of general poor treatment of nannies by people who shouldn't have children.

I could place an ad for dragon trainers at 2p an hour or £2million an hour. Doesn't say anything about the dragon training market.

The thing is OP, the way your first few posts read, you weren't expressing concern and sadness for the nanny's rights and working conditions at all.
You came across like you were expressing contempt for someone who wasn't doing all the childcare themselves.
You've changed your angle slightly as the thread has progressed.

Experienced, well-qualified nannies have a lot of negotiating power as they are in very high demand.
And that's what the advertiser wanted. She'll soon find out and have to raise her offer.

So not really sadface stuff IMO

you are taking one person's small ad which may or may not attract respondants and using it as evidence of general poor treatment of nannies by people who shouldn't have children.

Exactly.

I'm genuinely offended by your assumptions. We treat our nanny with respect, and friendship, and trust. We love her.