Using ( not resident) nanny during lockdown?

[Ladyinamask]

So found out today my SIL and BIL are still having the nanny take care of their children . Nanny does not live with them btw.
I am rather horrified but not completely surprised they do this. Not key workers but both highly paid and quite frankly extremely arogent at the best if times.
They live in a rather nice part of West London by the river so hardly a remote hamlet with no known covid cases nearby.
Is this against the rules or is everyone still doing this?

I’m a weekend nanny but my employers came back from France and I’m sure they both bought the virus back in March as they have all been ill with the symptoms and I have had mild ones not working at present we all live in the Middle of nowhere Your health is more important

@Biscuit

The guidance has never prevented nannies from working. It has even been amended to spell out precisely that they can work! It isn't our interpretation. It is government guidance. It honestly don't know how it could be clearer that the government has said it is fine.

Just like the government guidance is very clear you can have essential repairs. Or go to work. Or go shopping.

And just like the government is clear that you can't have family BBQs or go to the pub.

@Biscuit0110 can you please tell us which part of the clearly written government rules that we are interpreting wrong? I'm actually baffled.
I honestly think you're just trying to wind us up now..

Person A: 'can I eat that piece of cake please?
Person B: 'yes of course you can'

Person A: eats cake
Person C: 'you weren't supposed to eat that cake, the guidelines clearly say not to'

Hi, I’m a nanny (have been for nearly a decade) and many of us are still going to work as we cannot work from home. It’s not against the rules but equally many of us are on furlough if the families can manage without us.

@Biscuit0110 you clearly want to misinothe guidelines, I'm just not sure why?

OPS bounced.

*OPs

*misinterpret (that was a weird autocorrect)

I am a nanny and working as are most of the nannies I know. A lot have been told if they don’t go in then they will be replaced. Others have been made to live in and isolate with their families in order to keep their jobs . It’s a very grey area and we have been told that as we can’t do our jobs from home we must go in despite parents being at home albeit working . So your relatives aren’t the only ones by far !!

You sound jealous and they sound like they live in Chiswick.

@nannygoat50

I'd be interested to know if the majority of your friends employers are both working full time? I can just about get my head around someone deciding to use a Nanny in this scenario but I suspect that there are many out there, where this is not the case.

How could the government continue to work if nannies weren't allowed to work in the child's home? How many kids would BoJo actually be juggling through this? What would Jacob Rees Mogg be doing if the nannies weren't allowed ? Maybe he would gave to change a nappy. So no nannies still allowed to work.

Yes the majority are working full time but from home.

OP - why do you care?

And FWIW - no rules are being broken.

The OP says neither parent is a key worker. That surely is the point?

Parents could furlough the nanny AND work from home themselves like most of us e.g. MPs, CEOs, solicitors, accountants, techies.

Whilst it's not illegal it goes against the intent of the guidelines. Whilst the parents may think 'it's just one nanny' they don't control what she does when she's not working... She could be fickle about social distancing when out and about like so many of us!

I see this as no different to the thinking of the two senior government health advisers who have recently resigned their posts because they didn't think their recommended guidelines included them. I'm sure they were more careful than the general public so why not take your family to the countryside every weekend or have your GF visit!

@randomchatter

Have you read the guidance on nannies - see point 12

www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do#can-i-travel-to-someones-house-to-look-after-children

It is in the spirit of the guidance because it is literally stated in the guidance that a nanny can work. Why would the government spell this out and yet expect people not to use this because it "wasn't in the spirit of things"? It is nothing like any of the examples you give.

To be honest, many people I know with hard core professional jobs have a nanny and lots of others who don't could acquire one now if they wanted to do so because they were unable to do their jobs with preschoolers in tow.

Randomchatter

Show me one CEO still doing a meaningful job while s/he (and maybe or maybe not a partner) work full time including all-day calls and meetings while caring for more than one very young child at home. It's simply not possible, unless your employer or job is very flexible or your workload is reduced. Of course, if one parent is furloughed or able to be flexible, then the nanny should be furloughed - but that's not an option in every case.

In those cases, having a single sole family nanny come is not against the letter OR the intent of the guidelines, they are extremely specific.

Going to a second home or having a partner to visit is against both the letter and the spirit of guidelines, so of course it's different - and because it increases risk for no net benefit, unlike a single sole family nanny in good health visiting a home on foot, which increases risk a tiny amount, while safeguarding two jobs in the coming recession.

It is also far more immoral to claim public funds to furlough a nanny if you are on full pay. The over £2k per month I pay my nanny should be spent on PPE or nurses or whatever, not used to line my pockets in return for me working less sociable hours. Anyone who claims public money for this whilst on full pay is despicable.

I’m curious what their jobs are?
My objection is if they are going to work unnecessarily, or are they working from home with nanny keeping the kids amused?

@Stuckforthefourthtime

Show me one CEO

I can show you several that I currently work with remotely. I could point you to more who family and associates work for!

You know, in this crisis you can be 'special' and retain the services of a nanny thinking they stop existing when they leave your home; take your family to the countryside residence to commune with the trees at weekends; or you can take this seriously and protect more than just those you see in your bubble.

If a CEO can demand work from their remote workers who don't have nannies, then surely they can do the same - many do!

@randomchatter

So why are the government totally ok for a nanny to come to your home?

This entire thread just evidences how many people have misunderstood guidelines, added in a bit of what the tabloids made up, then interpreted both as the law and added in some of their own restrictions for good measure.

Not every business was instructed to close.
Not everyone is entitled to be furloughed.
Not everyone can afford to not work /be furloughed.
Many people are not going to have homes to isolate in for much longer as their earnings at 100% only just cover their bills.

Virtue signalling is all well and good if you've no worries financially.

In the 2 weeks I spent self isolating so as to remove the risk for our nanny of any residual risk in our house (we wfh, get deliveries - no shopping at all), I got 5 hours sleep a night and worked through all weekends. Perhaps you can tell me how long this is sustainable for, taking into account that I have preschool children and a job that requires critical detailed thinking.

@randomchatter

Basically all you have is anecdotal evidence of these super-ceos to try to beat up working mums who are doing their best, following government guidance specifically about nannies and not claiming government funds that could be well used elsewhere.