To ask DH’s cleaner to help me as well

[Suefr]

We are a large blended family with 5 children in total, but no joint children. DH’s children (secondary school) are slightly older than mine (primary school) but we all get on well. His children come and stay with us on alternative weeks and his system works well for us.

As I am a SAHM I do most of the housework and cooking, and I am fine with this. However, a few months ago I became annoyed at the amount of housework I was expected to do and the lack of support from DH. In particular, he was annoyed that I wasn’t ironing his clothes and I was upset at being treated like a maid.
As a compromise, DH hired a neighbour’s cleaner to help. She can only do 1 hour twice a week. She comes to our house when she finishes at our neighbour’s. In these 2 hours she will wash and iron DH & his children’s clothes, and tidy his office and their bedrooms. However, she will politely decline any requests I make for help. I have spoken to DH and he has fobbed me off, telling me that she is helping us out. But it’s obvious, she is there only to help him out and not me.

OP complained about particular tasks that she didn't want to have to do for him and his children. He got a cleaner to do those tasks so that she wouldn't have to.

I'm confused as to why you think that's vindictive and controlling.

She didn't though, did she? I've addressed this a million and one times! Go back and read what she actually wrote...

If it was actually about helping her and not point-scoring like a petulant child he'd have allowed the OP to make use of the cleaner's time in whichever way she felt would help her best. He didn't though. He expressly forbade the cleaner from helping out in ways the OP asked for. Like a footstampy brat.

Why should OP dictate the cleaner's time and her husband get no say?
And where did he expressly forbid anything?

I certainly understand the point of view of the cleaner.
My mum had many cleaners, and she always tried to have them do "extra tasks". If they agreed one day, because they had some spare time, next time there would be other additional tasks. And complaints if they did not have the time or if they did not stay a bit longer to get everything done.The extra tasks would become part of their duties.

A given amount of paid time and a specific list of tasks is the only fair way to hire a cleaner. They look at the the tasks and at the time, and if they are happy with the offer they take the job. If on some days it takes them less time, so be it.

I have worked as a cleaner several years and I would say that for 3 to 4 rooms, plus ironing and washing for 3 to 4 people, done twice a week, two hours split are just about right.
Maybe at times there will be 20 min per week to spare, and that's fine too.
Jobs are taken with time to spare, it's normal and fair.

It seems to me that the OP tried with the cleaner first, who understably declined, and then tried to have her husband force the cleaner doing more than agreed.
I think the husband did well refusing. What is he supposed to tell the cleaner?
From now on, in the same time you need to do the same plus "stuff" my wife will decide day by day? If I was the cleaner I would refuse, committing to vague duties is not a wise choice. Way better to get in, do the job agreed, and get out.

To be honest, if this whole set up looks like some contractual situation, it is also because of they way the OP frames it.
She said that the cleaner work is not helping her, or them, but her husband only..
So it sounds like she sees her husband's and children' rooms and clothes as not part of the shared housework. They are her husband stuff to sort.out.
The actual housework to share is whatever she and her own children actually use as well (or perhaps just the common areas and the cooking, but not her children rooms?).

I don't doubt that it must be otherwise a family, which is most important thing, but when it comes to housework this setup reminds me more of a flatshare.

OP you are a CF, l read your post again you do very little for your DH and children although he is supporting you and your children. He can expect a little more from a SAHM, you have time to help your DM but resent what you do for him, get a job and your own cleaner.

I didn't see anything about him forbidding the cleaner to help her. She asked the cleaner who said no. She whinged to her husband who said she was already helping (which she is and has said she can't do more hours).
OP didn't want to iron his shirts so he removed that chore plus some extra cleaning. Instead of being grateful she's moaning becomes she thinks the cleaner should do more and she should sit on her arse for 6 hours.
However you look at it she has less cleaning and ironing to do. She has more time to do other things.
If she hates doing housework or can't cope she should get a job and then she can pay for a cleaner to do her share of the housework.

Sigh. I can't be 4rsed to address the same issues yet again 🤦🏼‍♀️. Read through the comments and/or stop tagging me please. 🙄

You seem to be making things up. There is nothing in the OP to suggest that he expressly forbade anything, nor that he is a footstampy brat. The OP complained about being asked to do all the housework, despite being a SAHM with two children (not her DH's children) at school. She particularly doesn't want to iron her husband's clothes so he has arranged for a cleaner to do this and deal with his DC's clothes and bedroom, leaving her solely to deal with her own housework and that of her children. He is even doing his own laundry/ drying, which would usually be the 'job' of a SAHM with 6 hours free a day, and seems unfair on him as he is fully supporting her to look after children who are not his own, If anyone is being 'a footstampy brat', it is the OP. If the OP objects to doing the majority of the housework, she can always get a job and they can pay for someone to do more of it, as several posters have already suggested.

Sigh. Here we go again... There is every indication that he forbade the cleaner from doing her stuff. If you read the post, it is a complaint against the way her husband has approached the issue, not about the cleaner. The cleaner has been asked by the husband to do any areas he and the children habitually frequent. Petty and footstampy and really quite sh1ttily transactional in a romantic partnership, as opposed to a business partnership. The fact that he very nobly puts his own washing in the washing machine like some sort of superhero only cements his sh1ttiness. Again, partnership no...?

The OP doesn't say she refuses to do his ironing just that the husband complains that she doesn't. She probably doesn't do any ironing. There's nothing is the post to suggest that she's petty enough to pick out his ironing and refusing to do it.

Where do you get this "6 hours free a day" from? You've glossed over the fact that she does the cooking (for the whole family, note - not just her and her children) most of the housework in a large house (presumably, to house a family of 7 including 5 kids half of the time) and also cares for her parents. Also that it's 2025 and women these days are allowed to have a life outside the home, separate from their husbands. Why should she not be entitled to that as well?

6 hours is actually not that long in which to do althe housework in a busy household, all the cooking and looking after her parents, which presumably involves travel time. I assume you wouldn't begrudge her taking time out for lunch? Or having a life of her own at all beyond the repetitive drudgery? Or perhaps you would... If there are additional tasks to be done from time to time outside those 6 hours it wouldn't be unreasonable, nor unusual for the husband to contribute. Men worth their salt do that all the time.

We don't know why she is a SAHM but it's probably reasonable to assume it's an arrangement they discussed and both agreed upon when they moved in together so it's highly unlikely he is being exploited in this situation, nor is he employing her under contract to do 6 hours of housework per day, though he appears to be behaving as though he were. His behaviour is controlling. He is behaving like a footstampy brat.

She possibly could get a job if both she and the husband wanted her to (who's to know it isn't him who wants her to be a SAHM?). Or she could pay for one out of the maintenance her ex pays her (so current partner isn't it supporting her and her kids entirely). The fact that she doesn't suggests to me not that finance isn't issue, but the husbands expectations of her and the way she is being treated as a skivvy . She has every right to complain about that. I would too.

Yes but despite all that whataboutery the DH still has relieved some of the pressure, assuming she was dealing with his laundry and the children’s laundry.

And, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Also, when does he get his life that you wouldn’t begrudge, if he’s working full time and dealing with housework in the evenings?

And we're back to the original point upon which you were commenting - it isn't about him relieving the pressure, it's about him separating out support for him and his kids, sidelining his wife and her children in what most reasonable people would expect to be a shared relationship. If it was about relieving the pressure he would allow her to decide where the pressure needed to be relieved.

We don't know that he wouldn't be amenable to a suggestion (for example) that OP does the ironing and the cleaner does the kitchen instead.

what we have currently is a situation where (numbers made up) there is 15 hours of household jobs a week.

OP currently does 10 hours of them and leaves the other things (whether due to time or inclination is not clear).

DH has paid for a cleaner to come in for 2 hours to do some of the things that OP is not currently doing. Yes, he's chosen the things that bother him most.
There are still 3 hours of things that aren't done.

Your suggestion seems to be that OP should pick the 2 hours of things that bother her most and ask the cleaner to do them. But from DH's perspective that will likely mean that OP will pick an entirely different 2 hours of things to him, leaving the things that he most cares about still left. So he's fully financially supporting OP, paying for a cleaner, and he still can't get his shirts ironed unless he does it himself. Where's the partnership there?

Exactly, it appears from the OP it’s the jobs for her DH that get left, that’s not a partnership is it?

He fully finances her and the children.

She has said her brother is not pulling his weight with the parents, so she needs to address that, with her brother. It’s not her DHs issue to resolve.

Well, no it doesn't. If the cleaner is making up cleaning hours that are currently not being met, thereby adding to the overall cleaning hours, then it doesn't matter which areas are done by the cleaner and which are done the OP - just that more cleaning gets done. You've entirely made up the hours, and the idea that there would be 3 hours of work left undone, and that that would be his areas. Again, the OP has not at any point said she objects to doing housework for him and his kids - in fact the opposite is true. She's said the arrangement works well. It's him who's making it his and hers. She hasn't even said she objects to doing his shirts. We only know that they are not currently being done to his satisfaction, for whatever reason (time?).

There's no indication that the OP isn't cleaning The Controller's office and his children's rooms. In fact, the only thing he's complained about is the ironing of his shirts, which lends weight to the argument that he's instructed the cleaner to work on his and his kids' areas to the exclusion of hers to make a point like a petulant child.

Where does the OP say jobs for the husband aren't being done? He's complained about his shirts not being done, not his office and kids' rooms. We don't know that it's just his shirts that are unironed, and not hers as well.

He doesn't fully finance the children. Their father pays maintenance.

You're right, she should address the issue with her brother, but to suggest that her husband should therefore ignore the fact that she's caring for her parents and expect her to tend exclusively to his needs to the detriment of his wife's parents care us ludicrous. It would make him a Supertw4t. That, again, would add weight to the argument that he's doesn't give a toss about the OP and how they could work as a family unit.

well now his shorts are being ironed and he’s been kind enough to take the pressure off his children’s room and office then she’s got more hours to help her parents.

She says she’s happy to do most of the housework, so she just continues that way.

Maybe her cleaning isn’t below par, so he prefers to pay someone.

And you're still missing the point about his and hers, and partnerships.

Another long list of sighing and masses of assumptions! Even with just the OP's account of the situation and not the DH's, your assumptions are simply figments of your imagination.
No one has said that a SAHM doesn't deserve a life and she has far more time to pursue her own interests than the huge majority of parents, who need to combine work, raising children and housework.
I do agree, however, that marriage is a partnership. He is keeping his end of the bargain, providing everything financially for the OP and even her DC, who are not his, while she does not contribute in the financial sense. Meanwhile, she doesn't even do his laundry or his DC's. Hardly the behaviour of someone who sees marriage as a partnership. These are the action of someone who wants to take everything from him and to give very little and complain a lot.

Presumably your SEN child is in school. So what else do you do with the 25hrs + you have to yourself?

Dinners may take up to 5 of those hours, your parents 5-10?

That leaves you with 10 hrs + a week to tidy and clean for a 4-5 person household (+ 2-3 children EOW). That seems plenty to me, given you don’t have to do your husbands laundry

And so are you, why does his ironing get left? Why would he arrange for his areas to be cleaned if they were already being cleaned.

He provides the financial input to the home, OP gets maintenance for children, not for OP.

She does say she’s financially supported by him. So she’s not being a partner with finance is she.

So to be clear.
The current arrangement is mutually beneficial (DH gets his clothes ironed which is important to him; OP doesn't have to do his laundry or tidy up after him and his children, thereby helping her to feel less like a maid and reducing the overall housework burden)

Your proposed arrangement is that OP gets to dictate what the cleaner does which will be of definite benefit for her, but likely none to DH.

And the second of these options is more of a partnership than the first?

I'm not going to respond to your points since you clearly haven't read and digested the OP's comments, much less mine.

I've no idea. Perhaps because she doesn't have time? Perhaps because she's exhausted? Does she iron her own shirts or has she just singled out his shirts to remain in the ironing pile?

Neither he nor she has said that his areas aren't being cleaned and there's no reason to think they're not. He's only said his ironing's not being done. They've clearly had a disagreement about this, and he has dismissed her feelings about the situation, so there's every indication he's had a hissy fit and said in a huff "Fine! I'll be responsible for mine and my kids areas and you be responsible for yours!". That's evidently fine by a lot of people here and I would agree if they were flatmates. They're not. They're life partners.

This whole business about finance is a red herring, unless you take the view that she coerced him into supporting her and her kids against his will and that she's refusing to go to work in spite of his wishes. I don't. They are a family, and they have arranged the circumstances to suit them.

Anyone would think she sits about all day watching day time TV and eating chocolates and contributes nothing to the household. She does cook for the whole family (not just her and her own kids), she does do most of the housework in a house big enough to accommodate a family of 7, she does look after all the kids when they're not at school. If you're suggesting he has a right to demand more purely on the basis that he pays, then they need to acknowledge what it is - an employer/employee arrangement and she should have a contract, be paid at least minimum wage with which she could contribute to the family finances. And then they should get a divorce.

I've addressed this elsewhere. Several times.