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

£15 per hour is not much.

£15 per hour for 3 with what was effectively day care AND some cleaning is way too low.

At £15 an hour, you’re a cf for moaning that the children are awake. That’s your job… to babysit. As a pp said, I would be offering the families with sleeping children a discount, not trying to charge others more. How lazy can you get that you’re moaning that you have to do your job instead of sitting on the sofa and stuffing your face?

Haven’t read all the posts- but for £15 an hour I would fully expect you to engage with the child. Unbelievable

I work for an agency. The hourly rate before 6pm is slightly higher than after.
It's the luck of the draw whether children are awake or asleep. Depends on their age and circumstances.
To expect to sit and do nothing for £15 an hour is an awful attitude. I expect at the very least to put children to bed and read to them. Older ones I play games or watch films with. I'm amazed you've found so many families with children who are in bed and need no interaction from you.

I think that’s about right. It’s what I normally pay (and I’ve never not tipped). Usually kids are asleep already. Sometimes they need a story and bed. Mine are small though, 1 and not quite 3. Sometimes the little one wakes and it’s a pain in the bum for the sitter but that’s what I’m paying for.

You aren’t the maid though. There’s no cooking or tidying. I’d expect sitters to put anything they use in the dishwasher or at least next to it but I’d make sure any snacks and bottles etc were grab and go.

Dramatic much?!

But that's not what she's doing, is it? She isn't complaining about that incident - she's asking if in the future she would be reasonable to charge more in that scenario.

These are vehement, defensive responses, and usually that means that people feel guilty. In this instance, they have either themselves exploited someone like the OP, or feel the need to defend their right to do so (or something similar) in the future.

These are people who are wealthy enough to take a family on holiday and, along with all the other luxuries they're happy to pay out for, want to hire an experienced and reliable human to look after the people they value most in the world.

But they won't pay on a fair sliding-scale which acknowledges that some childcare is more demanding than others, and that the work is only available for a few months per year. When they go back to their well-paid, salaried jobs, with sick and holiday pay, the OP will likely be stuck in a low-employment ghost town trying to feed her own family.

Sounds like entitlement to me.

I used to charge the same as you when I was at uni (I had first aid, PGV, and experience - but not as much as you). I would do additional charges for more children and for things like making them dinner, school pick ups ect. I used to make good money doing it too. It was probably closer to a nanny in some ways over a babysitter. I would definitely charge more for multiple children tho.

I think it sounds perfectly fair to charge more if you are sitting for 3 children and expected to make their supper, play with them and out them to bed . World of difference between that and one child who is sleeping .

I suspect all the posters who are saying to charge the same have got children where a higher input is needed .

It may also depend on whether the person sitting is a qualified child care professional or next door's teenager after a bit of pocket money .'

I'd charge more for more than 2 young children... you're probably not charging enough!

This

Then you need to stipulate that the times booked need to be paid, regardless of when they go out and return, if they over run then you will charge per part hour etc on top. Most meals would easily fit in a 3 hour window, so they can book you for 3 hours, cinema is going to be a minimum of 3 hours and a drink and meal pushing 4 hours.

But again, she's literally complaining about a situation of her own doing. Yyou can't honestly expect to believe that someone who is a Teacher, a Mother and has 30 plus years experience, really, honestly believes that all children aren't always fast asleep and in bed by 8pm?!

If she went into thinking she would never have to look after awake children then I'm sorry but she's pretty naive.

She either needs to run her business properly or not at all but she can't keel chopping and changing and adding over complicated pricing structures to cover any eventuality that requires her to do more than sit, eat and watch Netflix.

@Alwaysforgetthecrackers Bin her, I used to work for myself and anyone who queried price usually ended up being complete pains in the bum.

Utter cheek of her. She won’t value you.

why can't she? Literally every other business works on the basis that different services cost different amounts, and that you pay per head.

If you go to a dentist, they don't charge you the same for cleaning as they do for a root canal, and they don't charge the same if your brother comes along and wants some work done too.

Why should she not use the same system?

The only reasonable explanation is that there are unconscious biases going on - in this case, sexism and class prejudice (aka middle-class entitlement).

Charge differently. I’d expect to pay more for a child that was awake.

I think the parent’s expectations of you were a bit unreasonable for a service advertised as babysitting. It would be fine as a baby sitter to say (in advance) you don’t do meal prep or other household duties. Bedtime routine and cleaning up after the kids (or telling them to clean up) seems fair enough, but only to the state of the place when you turned up, not tidying whatever mess they’d made all day.

The bedtime thing is hard, though. Agree with PP that it’s probably best done as a discount. An alternative would be something along the lines of an hourly rate for children in bed and an hourly rate for children who are up, so it depends on the kids’ bedtime. But it could get complicated and it would encourage parents to tell you their bedtime is earlier than it is, making the evening harder work. twodowntwotogo’s approach looks clear.

You’re charging 25% over NMW. I can see why some parents might expect a bit more than sitting around on the off chance things go wrong, even with a first aid certificate, etc. But it all depends on what the market will bear. Since your clients are tourists and constantly changing it shouldn’t be too difficult to trial a new pricing structure and go back if it doesn’t work.

Is this the first time this has happened, though? Is it worth getting in to this much detail because of a one off evening that was harder work than the others?

I can't understand why it's any different to many jobs. There are times when you're busy and some not so much. Do police, for example, get a bonus for a heavy night?

The difference here is that you can choose your jobs. Family too difficult? Don't sit for them again. You certainly don't take on a job hoping you'll avoid doing what your main role is... in this case looking after children.

I also don't think £15ph is bad seeing as it's almost certainly untaxed.

The issue here is that the family was hard work and the mum short-changed you by not paying for the hours she booked.

It's not really to do with sleeping/non-sleeping children. One well-behaved older child who stays up late but is reading, colouring or watching TV upstairs will probably be less trouble than a couple of sleeping toddlers/babies who might need re-settling.

If you think you've set your rates too low for your experience/the area, then you should definitely look to raise them. £15ph isn't a derisory amount and some people have said it's about market where they are, but if you think you can change more, you definitely should (and bin the difficult families).

I also don't think £15ph is bad seeing as it's almost certainly untaxed.

None of us know, and I would not approve if it were the case.

But if it is, let's not forget that the client is benefitting from the lower, undeclared rate as much as the service provider.

People do love to brush over that fact.

I think it’s reasonable to charge £15 for two children and an extra £2.50 for every extra child. I wouldn’t expect much ‘ putting to bed’ for children above 6 or 7 - I’d expect them to get in their PJs, brush teeth etc and I’d go up to put the lights out. Under no circumstances would I be preparing snacks or washing up.

But I wouldn’t expect children above 6 or 7 to be in bed and I’d be happy to chat, watch tv or play a quiet game (not a pre bed noisy game). If the parents started giving me instructions I’d just set out my rules. They can cancel if they wish - you’re there to babysit, you’re not a maid.

When I used to babysit most kids were fine as they’d been read the riot act by the parents. Just make your expectations clear - and maybe establish bed times before you take the booking.

Even if the children are already asleep, there is no guarantee they will stay that way.

So what's the charging structure for a child who sleeps for half hour, wakes up for two hours, sleeps for another half hour and so on?

Or a baby that wakes up and isn't easy to re settle?

Or a 10 year-old that doesn't go to bed till.10pm?

The OP is the one who set her pricing. Someone has paid that price why are they in the wrong?

Why am I entitled to point out that this is all her own doing?

Why are you not able to understand this?!

I own a child's nursery. I'm opening a second one. I also run my own childcare agency. She wouldn't last more than one job working for me if she complained that children were awake.

Difference is I pay my staff fairly, well and charge appropriately, e.g. one flat rate.

She's obviously working cash in hand and has no interest other than making extra money in the easiest way possible then moaning about her own pricing.

I've not once said she shouldn't increase her price but was pointing out she's overcomplicated something she has.no real interest in or desire to do well.

She is the sort of person that gives early years workers, baby sitters, Nanny's and childminders a bad rep for being greedy and lazy.

I think we know who on this thread has kids that are up late into the evening, playing video games, eating non-stop snacks and refusing to go to bed when told, don't we?