Charge more for children who don’t go to bed?

[Alwaysforgetthecrackers]

I do babysitting/childcare over the summer in a busy, tourist area.
The majority of the time I’ve always had 1-2 children and when I arrive, they’re in bed sleeping and stay asleep for the evening, parents give me the remote, kindly say I can help myself to food and all is great.
I recently sat for someone who had three very active boys, they were still up when I arrived, wanted constant snacks mum asked me to make and tidy things away. They all had different bedtimes, mum wanted me to play games with them, put them to bed etc, little one fought with me on this and eldests bedtime was literally just before they returned home, so I spent the rest of the evening getting him snacks, tidying after him, playing games.
I’m ok doing this…it did make me wonder though, should this be the same charges as basically sitting with the child already in bed?
Also, nice as this mum was, she initially queried the price being a bit expensive, whereas all
others have been very appreciative

Probably because you didn’t put the kids to bed and they were checking you’d at least fed them?
I was never fed by a babysitter as a child, and as a babysitter I was never asked to or expected to feed a child.

@Qanat53 ? What’s that emoji for?

@Luckypinkduck Luckily they’ve not woken up, but most of the times I sit, the baby/toddler is in bed and I only see them on the monitor next to me

I never used babysitters past bedtime as my child doesn't like being put to bed by strangers. Anywho, if there is an adult watching a child for 3-4 hours it's only logical to expect that the child would need to eat at some point in their presence.

Well said. And she isn't "sitting on her arse" - she, for this particular family, had to do a huge amount. I have four children and, after the fourth, ended up getting two baby sitters to make it a reasonable "do-able" job for the evening until the eldest could be trusted with help from the 2nd - as 17 and 15 year olds!!

Ummm if you're a babysitter you generally expect to deal with kids 🤷🏻‍♀️

That’s not logical at all. Babysitters are sitting whilst the child is asleep. Generally of an evening whilst parents are out. So definitely not logical to think they’ll need to eat.
If you have someone watching your child during the day when they need feeding and entertaining, that is a childminder, or a nanny, not a babysitter.

You would think it’s a question you would ask when agreeing the job.
Ages of kids
Will they be asleep/settled? (Some prefer kids meet person in case they wake up to a stranger in the house. Can imagine this is potential big issue for some kids.)
Some families have later bed times
allergies/medical conditions
etc
when will u be home?

Taking job without asking basic questions, especially about conditions that upset you, is not respecting the job.

What have your qualifications got to do with it if you are expecting the kids to be in bed?

Yes I agree, you should charge less if the children are in bed. There's no way sitting watching TV is worth more than minimum wage

@Mysinglepringle Its not just sitting watching tv though is it, it’s being put in charge of the most important thing to you

Which you've said consists of sitting watching TV. Dont get me wrong, if there was a house fire and you carried the children out one by one on your shoulders, you'd be in for a massive thank you and bonus. But if not, it would be worth minimum wage.

I used to do agency babysitting. I would not expect parents to have the children in bed before I arrived. Awake or asleep is the luck of the draw, but it’s reasonable to charge a supplement for additional children.

If caring for "the most important thing to you" deserved an uplift on the usual market rate for such services, then surely teachers, TAs, nursery staff, paediatricians, children's nurses and all those who look after and care for children should be paid a lot more than (where relevant) the adult equivalents.

So foster carers and paediatricians should be paid a lot more than carers and doctors providing services for adults. Because they're caring for the most precious thing in the world - children 🙄. Anyone who cares for children should be able to rinse those who have parental responsibility for them.

In real life, it doesn't work that way. People are paid a rate for their services based on their skills, qualifications and the relevant market for those services.

And yes, my children are "the most important thing" to me, but no that doesn't mean I have to pay through the nose to ensure that they're well looked after. If I hire a babysitter for an agreed rate, my children and I are entitled to assume that that babysitter will provide competent care. And if they don't, then the babysitter is negligent like any doctor or teacher who failed to provide competent care would be.

My anecdotal experience is that people with easy, straight to bed, kids are more likely to have friends offer to help. My almost three year old goes straight to sleep at 7.30pm and sleeps through.
A close friend of mine offered to babysit for free as she only lives a 10 min walk away, and as she put it: "I'd just be watching netflix in my own living room anyway".

I am extremely grateful for this and it's massively reduced the frequency with which DH and I have to pay £50 for a professional babysitter when we go for a night out.

To be fair, when we needed daytime care for our son at short notice, due to an unexpected nursery closure, we did get a professional and massively upped the hourly rate that we usually pay.

The babysitter is responsible for the safety of the children, regardless of whether they end up being needed by them or not. How can you put so little value on your children's safety?

@MrsSunshine2b Its pretty shocking

Because she's watching TV?

And if something was to happen, she would be responsible for that and have to react fast to deal with it. Lots of professions, you are not working nonstop, but you are on hand if needed and take responsibility for any situations that develop. It's shocking that you think that's a minimum wage responsibility.

This is exactly why we have babysitters arrive while the children are awake and put them to bed.

Our children usually sleep through but I would hate them to wake up with a nightmare or not feeling well and have to deal with a total stranger.

We pay £14/hr and expect the babysitter to feed them (food we have prepared) and put them to bed. We have had 3-4 regular babysitters over the years who all seemed to enjoy working for us and came back regularly so it doesn't seem to have put them off

You can charge what you like!

Fire brigade sit around till they are needed, and we don't expect them to work for minimum wage.

It's not a question of putting little 'value' on your children's safety.

Those who offer their services to care for children need to be able and willing to do it to a reasonable standard. That's on them, not the parents, regardless of how much they're paid.

It's also entirely separate to the question of what is a reasonable price for babysitting/nannying/childminding services.

Does someone who pays their nanny £150k per year value their kids more than someone who pays their nanny £45k? Is it a pure monetary assessment then? The more you spend on your kids, the more you value them.

So a family earning £1 million who can afford to spend much more on their children must value them more than a family earning £28k, right?

In reality, if the 'value' parents place on our children is determined by how much we pay those who care for them, there would be no market at all for any childcare services since we simply couldn't pay anyone enough. This argument - "Oh if you valued your children, you'd pay their nanny/babysitter more' - is completely illogical.

All parents can do is i) select someone who seems competent and caring to look after their kids, and ii) pay that person a fair amount for the services they provide.

Obviously, what is 'fair' depends on the circumstances. Nursery workers, for instance, are in my view grossly undercompensated for their work and imo should be paid a lot more.