Hired or Fired? Nanny candidates...

[WhatTheWhat]

We have two possible nanny candidates, are they Hired or Fired, in your view?

Job is looking after little boy twins (1 yr) sole charge three days and shared care of the twins plus older sister (3yrs) on two days. Total hours 60. Salary is at the top of the local range. Position is live-in or live-out, but no change to salary either way. Must be able to cook. Nursery duties only. We'd like our nanny to stay with us for several years.

Candidate One: energetic, seems keen on the job, wants to move to our area to be near family, has held two long-term jobs, great references, wants 'at least' the top of our salary band, wants the hours to be reduced to 50 per week, isn't entirely happy with the shared care element, it's not entirely clear whether she can cook - the thing she made at interview was pretty vile, but who knows whether that's usual, seemed to be good at playing with the kids.

Candidate Two: mature candidate, has experience with twins, really keen on the job, happy with the salary, happy with the hours, not yet sure if she can cook as awaiting final interview, happy to live-in and rent out her place, happy to work on a shared care basis, not very sparky and seemed more of a 'soft-play' kind of nanny than a 'finger painting at home' nanny. Although she said she really wants to work closer to home, the agency has said she's not the type to job-hop. Great references and one long-term post. Currently unemployed and working in a hotel.

So: Hired or Fired?

Neither sound ideal but candidate one no. The job spec and hours ime are non negotiable . If you start like that what next.

Candidate two may be ok but depends on what you mean by soft play nanny. Are you implying she has fundamental differences on child care approach in which case keep looking.

Second one. The first one already has issues and wants to change non-negotiables so I don't really see why you'd even consider her tbh.

Yes I also felt the op wasn't wildly impressed by the second either. May be best to keep looking.

I agree number 1 sounds like it wouldn't work out. Number 2 sounds definitely possible.

Waves at Katie - you gave me good advice re our nanny which hopefully has fixed issue.

Did I? Glad to be of service

agree nanny looks unsuitable to your needs. btw what did she do at the interview?
nanny 2 - do you think her approach is more of watching the children rather than actively play with them? or is she not arty crafty as muchas you would like her to be?

Thanks all.
My only reservation about number two is that she didn't really seem very enthusiastic, and she'll be looking after two active little boys. Needs energy!
Number one is tricky - she seemed to have lots of energy and at one point we felt almost ready to offer her the job there and then, but she really put me off with her repeated questions about the job hours changing - despite me saying more than once that she had to assume it would not change. Chances are that the hours will in fact reduce over time, but I certainly can't promise!
They were both nice people, although in very different ways.

neither... moi instead ;)
twin experience!

Ahh. If only... ;-)

Number one sounds even worse on your further description.

What has no 2 child experience been? I wouldn't gauge too much from style- one of my ex nannies seemed very low energy but managed anything thrown at her (ESP with fractious babies). The more high energy nanny struggles with two kids so don't read much into that.

I definately wouldn't go for number one. She will leave as soon as a 50hr / top salary job comes up.

Ask number two to plan an activity for the second interview and see what she does/ how she copes.

Good idea Ebb. And that's exactly my fear with number one. We definitely don't want someone who'll hop it pronto when something else comes up as it does take our kids a while to accept new people and they will not be happy.
Gigondas, No2 has lots of experience, but it was all a while ago - for example she's had two long-term posts, but nothing long term in the last 3 years. She had one fixed term post of a year, job-hunted for 6 months and then started working in a hotel.
She does not come across well upon first meeting, so I suspect that's why she's not found anything local to her. However, she warmed up pretty quickly during our first interview and I found her quite nice company. She has the advantage that she really seems happy to muck in, cook meals (including family meals) and even help out round the house a bit. Whereas No2 seemed slightly more the 'don't expect me to put your cup into the dishwasher' type.
God, No2 sounds awful, when I put it like that. She wasn't awful, but she did have very firm views about how she likes things.

I'd keep looking if I were you. Neither candidate sounds ideal.

Discard number one as she sounds high maintainance and may start to resent the hours! if they weren't for her why did she apply for the job!

Don't be put off because the second nanny has not had recent long term posts! The fact that she has stayed in two jobs long term means she is probably reliable and to be honest you don't suddenly forget how to look after children just because you havn't been working with them for a while.

Some people just don't interview well but are brilliant when it comes to actually doing the job. and others can talk there way into any job but turn out to be a nightmare.

When I started as a nanny; Being able to cook was a forgone conclusion and you could allways ask her previous employer about her cooking skills.

This mature lady sounds great to me, she has experience with twins is willing to fit in with your needs and forgive me but she is employed at the moment even if not in her first choice of work, which proves she is motivated and not lazy.

You could always set a few trial days before offering her the job on a permanent basis. Good Luck

Keep looking - neither of them sound well suited for the post.

Though could you not do 4 days with No1 and do one day by yourself - not shared care?

Frankly, I'm surprised she went along with cooking during an interview - I suspect most nannies wouldn't go along with that.

Neither.

What do you ask them to cook at interview?

I was a bit surprised at this! I've never been asked to cook at an interview

Keep looking the only time i have ever been less than 100% happy with a nany the police ended up becoming involved.

Neither but 2 if you're in a pinch.

I asked a nanny to cook once at second interview/trial but she was newly qualified so it wasn't really a given that she could and her ideas on nutrition seemed a bit odd at first. It was a good thing I did tbh

Out of the two the second sounds better but not ideal, can you interview a few more?

i vote number 2 or keep looking

Keep looking or number 2.

Cooking wise, ask them what sort of things they have made in past jobs. Maybe try the cheese sauce cooking challenge - doesn't take long and if they can make cheese sauce, they can learn to make other things in my view.

Why did number 1 apply... did they get an interview? I would hope not as they clearly didn't meet the job criteria. I am wondering if the job advert and job description need to be looked at. You mention an agency - did the agency send her... why? She does not want to do the hours!

nick - why cheese sauce??
frak - i hope you didnt mean that anyone not qualified cant cook. cooking is certainly not something you need qualifications for imho.

No I mean that she was 18 years old and had never lived away from home. I wouldn't personally hire someone unqualified without a fair amount of experience and therefore I'd expect them to have cooked in previous jobs/could just ask referees.

I don't think cooking forms a part of a childcare course these days, unless you're at the place we do not name, so conversely unqualified candidates are actually more likely to be able to cook because they're more likely to have had to.