Seriously? This is The Times idea of an average family being squeezed for cash?

[ItchySnoof]

How fucking out of touch are these people? Given that some families literally can't feed themselves?

Genuinely thought this was a joke

Some people are genuinely struggling to pay for food and rent

Some people don’t even have a home and would love to have the luxury of “struggling to pay rent” I can’t believe you would post this.🙄

In other words, there is always someone worse off for whom someone else’s “struggles” seem out of touch. If we decide nobody can talk about their worries because someone has it worse, nobody would ever be able to talk.

My sympathy and interest stopped at "hedge fund manager" to be honest.

@OneTimeThrowAway

It's the target demographic though isn't it?

People who read the times don't want to know how to feed a family for peanuts, that's not their lives

I read the Times and my life is absolutely nothing like that

I also thought it read like an Onion article though I couldn't get beyond the first couple of paragraphs without a Times subscription (so I didn't).

Many rich people don't know they're rich. Or not how much.

In her book 'unjust rewards' Polly Toynbee tells that most of the mega bucks city folk she interviewed thought they earned 'a bit above average' and when she asked what average was they pitched it around £75k. That was when it was really £25k.

this is why 'squeezed middle' worked so well as a story. Everyone can identify themselves as squeezed middle. Even if the sacrifice involves getting a new Tesla.

That’s disgusting on many levels.
First it’s dripping with privilege to say your going to cut back on cost of living by sacking a servant (a nanny is a servant only affordable by the wealthy). Secondly, what happens to the nanny? She is now out of a job and instead of her employers being gutted because they could not keep her on, they’re actually bragging about making her unemployed and homeless (as nannies live in) during a cost of living crisis. Thirdly, their solution is to exploit a young immigrant by having an au pair at a quarter the cost...based on the above use of the word “swap” I think it highly likely they intend to exploit the au pair and expect her to do full time nanny duties which are at least 100hrs per week. Which is an abuse of the au pair program as au pairs are supposed to do only 25-35hrs child care a week as that is in return for housing while they study and learn a new language.

Seriously misjudged.

@EmpressCixi

That’s disgusting on many levels. First it’s dripping with privilege to say your going to cut back on cost of living by sacking a servant (a nanny is a servant only affordable by the wealthy). Secondly, what happens to the nanny? She is now out of a job and instead of her employers being gutted because they could not keep her on, they’re actually bragging about making her unemployed and homeless (as nannies live in) during a cost of living crisis. Thirdly, their solution is to exploit a young immigrant by having an au pair at a quarter the cost...based on the above use of the word “swap” I think it highly likely they intend to exploit the au pair and expect her to do full time nanny duties which are at least 100hrs per week. Which is an abuse of the au pair program as au pairs are supposed to do only 25-35hrs child care a week as that is in return for housing while they study and learn a new language.

To be fair, you've assumed quite a lot there!

We earn a decent amount, from the business we created from scratch, and from which we are about to retire. But we also employ six people F/T on above local wages, and two more for the hours and tasks they fulfil. It is perhaps tone deaf of the Times to feature this family so prominently but there are plenty of people (and we don't brag because that would be rude and insensitive) who will adjust their spending to changing economic circumstances. Less wine and more lentils, perhaps.

Not one of those nonsense health coaches? The preserve of rich and idle women.

@CaMePlaitPas

My sympathy and interest stopped at "hedge fund manager" to be honest.

Mine too.

What is a ‘health coach’ anyway? Someone you pay £75 an hour to tell you to do the things you know you should be doing anyway?

Families like that are on a different f*ing planet.

The whole article is ridiculous. I don’t believe half of it. Makes the Times look unreliable imho.

I will admit to coming from a similar financial bracket to the woman in question. A lot of it is really tone deaf but the issue with the nanny and au pair is likely to be more nuanced. At 3 children from a lot of well off London families are sent to the school hours nursery attached to the pre-prep their parents want them to attend. So at that point they don't need a full time nanny and many families would switch to an au pair to do pick ups/drop offs etc. Its really common for nannies to leave when the youngest child goes to nursery and most experienced nannies will expect this. (The woman in question may well find it isn't so easy to find an au pair now though.) I switched from a full time nanny to giving my housekeeper extra hours to do pick up when my youngest went to nursery but my nanny had 9 months notice, had expected it as it happened in pretty well every family she had worked in and had the flexibility to plan where and how she wanted to work for her next post (not in London and not live in so a big switch for her).

Do they say it’s the average family? Or just one families experience?

@Mellowyellow222

Do they say it’s the average family? Or just one families experience?

No they aren't claiming its an average families experience, but some seem to want to limit those who can contribute to articles even though the experiences of people across the country varies.

Like LondonMummy, when my DC went to pre-prep and we didn't need a f/t nanny, my nanny used the school gate to find her next job, with another family that had a young baby and horses. So she shifted from nanny, to nanny and groom. She stayed with them several years IIRC.

@GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER

What is a ‘health coach’ anyway? Someone you pay £75 an hour to tell you to do the things you know you should be doing anyway?

It’s a hobby job.

@mjf981

The whole article is ridiculous. I don’t believe half of it. Makes the Times look unreliable imho.

It's not ridiculous, and while you don't believe it, it sounds entirely normal to me.

They are going to rent a Tesla?

Depending on what they are going for that alone can be £600 -£1000 per month

I would hardly call that cutting back. Unless the Audi is costing £1200-£2000

Wouldn’t he get a company car and take the tax hit. It would probably be less than renting a Tesla

Maybe that is why they are struggling.

“We’re struggling financially so I’m going to be a health coach”

Fucking height of privilege there

Just paying less for someone to do the same job

That's the MN demographic!

Au pairs after Brexit?