The Curse of Boff strikes again - this nanny has decided after a fortnight in post that petrol is too expensive

[BoffinMum]

New nanny started two weeks ago, all going well, but then she resigns out of the blue.

This time, the cost of petrol and her 50 mile commute is blamed. She said she hadn't thought about that before taking the job.

I had a 'WTF???' moment as she was specifically asked about this at interview and by the agency.

Agency is being super and they are cross with her for messing us about, and they think she is being wimpy. So do I. She works 47.5 hours a week, so it's not as though her hours are mental for a nanny, either.

[cross]

So are most of the nannies applying for jobs with us and demanding £££££.

Think it's called trying it on.

You sound very stressed have you tried to advertise in the local paper or gumtree.

I've done my fair share of research in Nanny wages and it seems that the average offer (on Gumtree and agency vacancies in London) is around the £400 net a week mark for a live in. Going down to £250-£300net and up to £1000net (why, certainly, I would love to go and live with Saudi Royalty to look after their children :o. no joke. Genuinely found a royal vacancy!)
But the average working day was 8am-8pm so 12 hours, with 2 nights babysitting (lets say 4 hours per night for arguments sake) so for a 5 day week this would be 68 hours (blimey!) so....mental maths, mental maths.... this would work out to be £5.88 an hour (net) for a £400 week (£7.75ph gross).

So (before tax) this would be £27,196 pa to the nanny.
The cost for the employer would be £29,973 pa (inc. employers NI) so...a employer paying a nanny £400 a week would actually be forking out £576pw in total.

£27,196 is not a bad average wage, especially as living expenses are paid.

BOFF what kind of wages are your perspective Nannies demanding?

(Oh, and i hope everyone enjoyed my maths there. i'm here till sunday)

JennyNanny - in AWE of your maths. Most nannies here ask £8.50 an hour when the employer pays tax and NI on top (sorry can never remember difference between gross and net). Am two hours south of London.

Matesnotdates - My mother was a maths teacher and I attended her school. I had a very lonely up bringing with just me, a pencil and my maths books :o

And £8.50 a hour net?
On my previous 68 hour assumption that's £578 pw net. That's £38,206 pa (before tax) for the Nanny and a whopping £839.28 pw in total for the employer to fork out.

Good god, that's a lot of penny sweets.

jennynanny - my dad was a teacher and I attended his school. It's just not a good look is it? You have my sympathy....

I wish you hadn't done the maths on the £8.50 an hour pay bit though (buries head in sand about outgoings).

I was forever Mrs Martin's daughter despite the fact my mother had remarried and taken a different name.
Ah well, I never got the scorn for accidentally calling a teacher "mum" :o

And your head-in-sand scenario is proof that maths never improved a situation!

There are accurate averages from the nannytax survey which put salaries between 21k and 35k, according to location, live in or out etc. That's gross not including NICs.

Problem is younger nannies see £x gross average and want it. They don't understand that there are nannies with lots of experience out there who warrant the top of the payscale and they just can't see why they shouldn't command the same wage. There are probably more nannies with 10+ years experience than less than 10 years experience out there and in most jobs experience gets you more money.

Parents are advertising jobs with a wage, not a salary range and per week or per hour not per annum. The set wage is probably the cause of the see-it-want-it and why nannies with little experience seem to progress so quickly. Negotiating an extra 50p per hour net might not seem like much to the nanny but it could be £5 a day, £25 a week, £1300 a year and all too often it's net.

:( boff

matesnotdates: do you live in an area where it's all part-time jobs though? That's what girls ask for down here but full time jobs are like gold dust so it isn't as expensive to the families as they're only having a day or two's care iyswim? It's still ridiculous though, especially as the girls down here take that cash in hand or self employed so trying to convince families to take you on employed is difficult even if you are asking for less net hourly!

Oh Boff thats pants.

Well, we've been getting some CVs where the nannies clearly think they are choosing us, and we are applying for the privilege of being their employers. We are not in London, technically we are 'rest of UK' or 'country'. They are expecting £400 pwn plus perks for a four day week. They would not expect to do full nursery duties for that, either. Frankly, if there was a deal like going that I'd apply for it myself. Closely followed by HappyChappy, I should imagine. In fact I see us trampling over each other in the rush.

As an interesting point of comparison, my DD went to Cambridge University, lives and works in London, is roughly the same age, has a full time job, and earns more than most of her friends from university, and she is on considerably less than that. Out of her wage she has to pay her accommodation and fares to work. So to ask for that kind of money in this area is just completely unrealistic. The agency have been saying that they spend hours explaining to these girls that the hourly rate only really applies for p/t or temp nanny jobs, and for f/t jobs people pay less per hour and agree an overall gross salary, but they tell me the girls simply won't believe it, so there are a lot of them unemployed at the moment. I think the agency people are as frustrated as I am.

Anyway, some good news. My last-but-one nanny is working here today, helping me catch up with things, and she has asked whether we would need a tea time nanny from September. I said we might well. We're having a think while she's on holiday, and will decide if we all want to go down this route in July. This could well be the answer!

HappyChappy, should I be asking you about temping in June and July???? Could we get on well enough for that????

Recken we could call me and we'll have a chat

There was suppose to be a comma there but missed it
recken we could, call and we'll have a chat

Got three more interviews to do and then may well call.

confusedpixie - you are right, it is mainly part time nannying down here.

boff - I blame the Times. They did an article a couple of months ago about 'the rise of the super nanny' talking about how you could earn £60-80k nannying for the super rich.

60-70k my arse!

I KNOW! We get The Times and I hid it from our nanny....

confusedpixie nannies cannot legally be self employed and cash in hand is dodgy for the employer.

When I started as a nanny most jobs were full time but they seem to be like gold dust in the present climate.

I will allways negotiate on wage depending on travel cost and hours offered but at the end of the day I must earn enough money to keep a roof over my head and pay my bills.

I will be looking for a new job around september or maybe January due to my charge starting School and would love more hours and a bit less travelling but will have to go after what's available

I think we should do a little press release pointing out some of the home truths about nanny unemployment discussed on here!

Sunshinenanny, do you think it would help the situation if nannies were allowed to be classed as self-employed service providers?

Btw many of us can't earn enough at the moment to cover our costs - I would need to earn something like £75k even to begin to pay my way, and virtually no jobs in my field pay that. If I went up to HR and argued that I needed a higher salary because of my overheads, they would point me in the direction of typical pay rates for my job, and tell me politely to like it or lump it. You can only charge what the market will bear. No other profession I know routinely makes arguments about personal overheads when attempting to justify pay demands. It comes across as rather naive to non nannies.

I've been a nanny for 26 years (there are a few gaps where I "helped out in family business" and "travelled") but most of my jobs have been long term, 18 months being my shortest, 5 years the longest. I have excellent references.

I don't earn anywhere near the wage that younger nannies are asking for!

I am very lucky, I have amazing employers (I have to say that, MB is on here! Luckily it is true!) they are very laid back. I can come and go as I please. As long as my charge is happy and well cared for. I have quite a bit more than my stated holiday, which is a bonus. I have a very nice flat and a very nice car, so I do get a lot of perks. I do, however, work very long hours.

Would I like more money? Of course! Doesn't everyone. But like you say BoffinMum if we price ourselves out of the market, then it will take longer to find that next position. If you work for two years on £26k (£2100 a month ish) but then take 6 months to find a new job, then you will have earned £52k in 30 months which will take it down to £21k (£1700 a month) so why not take a job for £21k and stay employed constantly?

Right, off now, am being groom for my 15 year old previous charge (looked after him from 5 months - 4 years, he clicks his fingers and I come running, BUT he does give the bestest cuddles ever! This is why I do this job!) then back to theirs for supper and over night then spending the day with his twin brother, who is not so great with the cuddles but knows how to say the right thing! Then on Wednesday off for busmans holiday, looking after 9 year old twin ex-charges who I looked after from 6 months to 4 years, for 3 days!