Where is the respect for nannies?

[Caramellatteandchocolate]

I have been a nanny for 15 years. I have had mainly very sucesfully positions, but the odd one where families have been completely out of order and generally lacked respect.

Having read through a number of the the threads I have to ask where is the respect for nannies? We generally work much longer hours than the parents, we look after what should be the most precious thing in a parents life, but yet constantly have to put up with mothers being petty and unreasonable, is it a jealously thing or what?

Many mothers are quite rude to there nannies and very unreasonable, think that they can treat them like something the have trodden in and expect them to be slaves around the house!

Many families don't think twice to paying late, coming home late and not apologising or offering to pay the extra or offer the time off, yet if the roles were to be reversed the nanny would be given a stern talking to. If a nanny is unwell they are often made to feel guilty for the inconvienience is has caused, when we ar all human and occasionally can't work.

As a nanny we have no protection and is the only job where people get taken advantage of and treated with such little respect, it just wouldn't be allowed in other professions cause people would have grievances made against them.

Most of us do a fantastic job, please remember a happy nanny means happy children!

I just don't understand it when people employ somebody, they make a commitment to each other that affects both parties equally. There seems to be a hire and fire mentality out there among some people that is based on the whims of the employers because they consider the nanny to be beneath them in the pecking order and dispensible.

OP that's a massive generalisation. I was brought up by a series of nannies some of which were like family to us. We treated them well and they us. We also had 'nannies' that were useless and rude and gave the majority of good nannies a bad name. The good ones are still friends today (many years on)
I then worked as a nanny for a while for 2 little boys - their parents treated me with respect and the kids too (better than they were with their parents)
I am now in a position where I'd consider a nanny for my DC and wouldn't dream of treating them any way but well but I also wouldn't accept those that take the piss. Not all nannies are equal and neither are the parents.

Wow this has most definitely hit a nerve with many people, seems to be many mothers!! I wonder why that might be?

I do very much agree there are good and bad nannies and families, most of my positions have been very good due to mutual respect and many other factors.

It has been very interesting seeing peoples reactions to this topic, I was interested to find out what the view was on such a subject.

Thank you all for the comments.

I think there's a difference between hire and fire and thinking they're dispensable commodities, two a penny and you can just go to the shop and get a new one.

When our last nanny left I was beside myself. Replacing her as been a nightmare.

BUT if her replacement isn't up to scratch I won't hesitate to fire her and that has nothing to do with respect.

It is a job which needs to be done well. The nannies who take the mick need to realise that too. And respect is something which is earned, not a right, unlike employment rights which should always be heeded.

This whole issue is so emotive and people who separate the business aspect where you respect a right to be paid fairly and in time from the emotional respect you accord your nanny tend to get flamed and accused of not respecting nannies or treating them as humans.

The other point I meant to make is that many nannies have neither had a nanny as a child nor employed one. Being in the rather unusual position of seeing all 3 sides the toughest one is actually being a nanny. And because of that I treat mine well for their happiness. I won't however let a bad nanny impact on my child cos that's no fun either.

I just wanted to add that I feel very strongly about the profession not being regulated in any way. Why is this allowed, it's so wrong. It should be regulated not just for the nanny but for the protection of the parents and children. I very much think if this was to happen it would have a massive impact on the poor standard of care many nannies provide, and would allow there to be a more professional understanding between nanny and family.

I do agree the two sides of the jobs have to be separated, between business and the emotional side, cause at the end of the day it is a professional agreement, but very often a friendship is formed in conjunction with the job, which is a bonus all round but it's also very important for both parties not to take advantage and cross the boundaries.

I think you're right Caramel, it should be regulated. There is sadly a cash economy in this country which is growing and creating a lot of problems all round. Where children are involved there should always be a contract. I was very surprised when my employer didn't seem to want one, then when she changed the arrangement at short notice I realised why!

OFT I've seen it from all sides too but I'm not sure I agree. I feel it's harder as a parent (possibly as this is my current position), as a nanny if it all went wrong I could always walk away (within the terms if my contract) but as a parent I can't I have to do what's best for my child, and the inevitable 'what ifs' of this world. I understand that this can lead to some parents being unreasonable and this is wrong but most are not and a good relationship can be had on all sides. My cautionary nature as a parent employing a nanny is exactly from my experiences as a child with an awful nanny (almost some amazing ones) I would hope that I can employ somebody on the basis that I worked as a nanny but I do understand the complexities if this relationship if it goes wrong too.

I think as a parent I find it easier because I'm in control and have made the whole deal as fair as possible plus I'm confident I'm being reasonable, but then I've not employed a bad nanny to put me in a bad position.

I would love there to be a minimum level of compulsory registration but it will never happen. It's up to nannies to mobilise and join something like BAPN or register with OFSTED until it becomes the accepted norm so anyone who doesn't have it stands out.

I think the problem with the current ofsted regulation for nannies is that many of the nanny agencies suggest this to boost your chance of employment as many families now have child care vouchers available to them. Talk about as purely being a financial advantage rather than from a care point of view.

Hmm I've never come across this in any of the jobs I've done, my bosses have treated me with the utmost respect.

At least it imposes some standards wet CRB and 1st aid. Plus it's publicised the need for insurance which many nannies just weren't aware of until it was compulsory.

In my view, regulation is unlikely to be a way forward as some parents will not want the government interfering to that extent in what happens inside their home. Regulation could also mean more paperwork for employers and nannies. If you look at Childminders and Nurseries, a lot of the regulation is done via paperwork - such as Ofsted checking they have certain policies and written procedures in place. Good paperwork does not equal good level of care... someone can be great at paperwork but bad at care, just like someone can be great at care but bad at expressing things on paper.

Parents can employ who they like. If all parents wanted their childcarers to have formal qualifications, first aid to certain standard, continuously updated access to police records (the CRB could provide that, but don't currently do so - the ISA scheme was put on hold by our current government), their nanny to have liability insurance, then all the parent needs to do is to state that in their requirements and not interview anyone who does not meet those requirements.

Parents currently get a choice, whereas if there was compulsory registration or regulation, then that choice is removed. Nothing to stop a parent currently stating the minimum requirements they require for someone to apply to do the job - except for the CRB check as parents can't get that done (there's something to write to your MP about... when will parents be able to criminal record check their employee?)

Maybe what would be a first step would be for all childcarers to have an ID card, which could then be linked to criminal record database thus providing constantly updated criminal record data. Problem is, some people won't want an ID card, plus the cost might be quite high - who would pay?

I agree nick I think most parents only want you to be registered so that they can claim back some childcare costs. People do not want the government interfering.

This is the kind of semi-literate, self-centred response to a job advertisement that gives the profession a bad reputation, in relation to what Frak was saying to trying to take employers hostage. I have disguised it a bit for reasons of anonymity but kept the sense of it. If I tried this on in any other sector I think I'd expect to get shown the door fairly rapidly. I get a lot of emails like this.

---

"Yes if you cant change your job and go part time I was thinking of my friend covering the Wednesdays as I do not work 5 days, i have my own housey things to do Wednesdays ... Im not sure what the average is. Among my group of friends we average £10 per hour net. With both my jobs at the moment I get £10ph net. In my job I was with for three years (and with taking my son for all the hours) I was on £10ph net and no cooking or chores.
With the highest Nannying qualification (NNEB) I guess Im as qualified as it gets. I would be interested in what you would think I should be paid ...
I think it is highly important we have a good relationship and think we can work as a partnership. Then if that was all good then we could work out hours etc. ... Im wondering if maybe I could do the five days (if I could take a few mornings off to do my own thing during termtime). This may work better rather than a full day off?

---

So, let's analyse this response.

1. This applicant is asking for the equivalent of £500 a week net, which will costs me £38,584 a year (out of taxed income) if I were to employ her. After employers' NI contributions, this is roughly equivalent to, say, the salary of a midwife team leader, community nurse team manager, a specialist health visitor, and higher than the top of the main pay scale of experienced, qualified school teachers. It is about the same pay as one of the new speciality doctors, and slightly higher than the top of social workers' pay scale. Yet she apparently can't spell, her grammar is very poor, and she claimed she was not in a position to send a CV because of computer problems (even though she emailed this to me). I think I was supposed to meet her and then hire her on the spot without paperwork, and ignore the obvious literacy problems, even though part of the job was supposed to be supervising children's homework.

1. It should be noted that the applicant intends to bring her own child to work as well, but still be paid at the full rate even though her attention will be divided during the day. None of the highly paid jobs I have listed above allow you to take your own children to work (unless you pay for them to attend a workplace nursery, of course).

1. She is effectively asking me to change my own job and go part time in order to accommodate her preferences, even though this was only advertised as a full-time permanent post. Her response to me saying this is not possible is to get a 'friend' to cover for her or take lots of mornings off. She talks about 'days off' as though this is some sort of entitlement, rather than responding to one of the main job criteria, i.e. full time availability. (You would be amazed how often I get nannies saying to me that they don't work more than four days a week and that I should fit in with them).

1. Even though she is asking for a substantial salary, she has limited her duties and opted out of most of what is normally considered to be part of a normal nanny job, i.e. cooking for the children, cleaning their bedrooms, laundering their clothes and so on. Consqeuently there is no added value offered whatsoever.

1. She has studied on a two-year course as a teenager some years ago, effectively to A-Level equivalent standard, and is not aware that a range of further qualifications have been introduced over the last decade, including foundation degrees, Early Childhood undergraduate degrees, short courses in a number of related subjects, and higher level NVQs. This is not someone who has engaged in any professional development at all since her initial qualification.

1. At no point does this applicant express any obvious interest in me, my children, or my family whatsoever. Nor do I learn from this what she likes doing with children, what her childcare philosophy is, or what her particular areas of skill are. She comes across as basically a bit of a passive babysitter, and I am sure she tries to be more than that. However you wouldn't know it from her application.

You can see why sometimes it comes across as though certain nannies are either lacking in knowledge about how the rest of the world approaches job applications, job performance, and why sometimes people see them as only really interested in their rate of pay and little else, despite their protestations about loving working with children.

Ironically I am someone who never overruns hours, is scrupulously fair about pay and conditions, always backs nannies up in front of the children, and says thank you regularly, not to mention personally nursing them if they are ill and seem to need a bit of TLC. And there are many, many more out there like me.

I am given to understand that some London nannies demand a car as well. Is that true?

Boffin you should provide your potential employees with a form to fill out with specific questions and a job spec as most professional organisations do. An email is an email, not a job application.

It's the tone of the email I find astounding. 'if you can't change your job to suit me' and the idea that she's doing you a favour by rearranging her plans to have a few mornings off instead of a 4 day week

That's presumably at a fairly early stage in the hiring process given you said she hadn't even sent a CV yet.

I think as with all professions you get people who are good, meticulous and professional at their jobs and people who are not. Some nannies give other nannies a bad name as some doctors, teachers, lawyers etc do. It does not mean that all of us are illiterate, lazy and do not look for CPD opportunities.

That email is particularly bad...I am embarrassed to read it to be honest. Although the nanny may feel she can 'chat' with you like this using an email whereas you do not feel it is appropriate way to communicate. I don't know if I would read into her not asking about your family - I have worked for families before where they are very private, once I was not introduced to any of the children until I had met both the parents (and a set of grandparents!) twice and then given a trial. Perhaps she is just being respectful not asking too many personal questions at an early stage. Then again - maybe your instincts are right and she just doesn't care!

Some nannies do ask for a car to use during work hours - I don't know any nannies that tend to have the use of a family car outwith their hours unless it is an emergency or favour. I however, do not work in London.

I don't think regulation is the right way forward either - it is a very personal thing and if a good, set in stone contract is set up then there should not be any problems.

checks for spelling and grammar - probably made a mistake anyway!

NannyW - I got the impression that the nannies wanting cars were 'young gels' who saw nannying in London (well Chelsea really) as something they were doing 'between' social events and while they were looking for a millionaire. Hence a car was an essential piece of equipment they woudl use both while doing the job and after work while socialising.

I kid you not.

Actually, I think the form thing is a really good idea. What do the nannies on here think? Would they feel alienated by that or would it screen the decent ones in and the wierd ones out?

MoreBeta, I had a nanny come for an interview last time we were advertising who demanded a separate car for personal use at the interview as she 'didn't want to have to buy her own'. When I said that this would be a taxable perk and cost her something like £2k a year she suggested I add this on to what I was paying her. She didn't quite get the nanny applying for a job thing either ... I think she was under the impression I was applying to be her employer. ASAIK she is still unemployed two years later.

Boffin - I suspect her trust fund is keeping her in nice style though.

I hear in some quarters this is the sort of thing trust fund girls with no qualifications think they can just rock up and do without much commitment or thought.

I would have thought being a nanny was far too much work for a 'trust fund babe.'

I think the problem with the pay is that nannies are not nec encouraged to think through what the net hourly rate equals in gross annual terms. Most parents would be shocked, I suspect, to work out what THEIR OWN hourly net rate of pay is. Also, the cash in hand situation really aggravates the problem...but we are digressing...

If you expect a professional nanny you should treat her like one from the outset - a proper application form would be ideal to weed out the trust fund babes, the overchargers and the bad spellers.