what's so off putting about employing a nanny with their own child??

[glitternanny]

I am stuck - really stuck.... maybe you kind MNers can help me understand...

I'm job hunting due to a reduction in hours with my current families and I have my own 18 month old son. He's been coming to work with me since he was 12 weeks old - I had a very short maternity leave partyly due to my commitment to my job and he is very very easy to look after, always has been.

I returned to work to one job I had and a new job where their youngest was just 3 months older than my boy - which was very challenging, they are now the best of friends.

I love my jobs, my charges love my son - him being with me just makes my day busier and in some ways harder but I am always the professional - I am very committed to doing the same job i would do without him with him there with me and more often than not I completely over compensate having him with my by ignoring him and leaving him to his own devices while doing my job.

My charges and my bosses (who often work from home) can back this up completely.

Also my son isn't with me for 1/2 the week (approximately) as his dad works shifts and when he's off my son stays with him.

I've never taken a drop in salary, I've rarely taken time off because of my boy and have his dad and grandparents/friends on standby if I need to.

SO WHY wont you mums consider someone like me?

I appreciate you are paying for your children to be looked after, but I am doing that - I'm still the nanny I am without him - I'm just busier when he's there, he's not with me all of the time, he's just part of the package.

OR mums want a salary reduction of 50% (my latest interview where the family totally loved me but want me for 1/2 my current rate even when he's only with me half the time I'm there) yes I'm lucky to have my boy there but this isn't a nannyshare, I am still working by your rules/requests/routine/preferences etc - I don't get to do my own thing like I would if I were a SAHM

I'm now trying to find childcare for my son so I can carry on working, which given that I'm leaving my house every morning at 6:20 and I'm not home until 6:30 (and that's only if my employers trains are on time etc) its really hard.

What can I do to make myself more employable? To get parents to at least meet me so I can get them to love me rather than seeing I come with my own child and am instantly dismissed.

I'm a great person, I am excellent at my job my charges love me and my bosses give me excellent references, I'm reliable committed and professional.

Would be

Mini has said she means parents in general, not a nanny who wants to bring her own child. She's not been misunderstood, she isn't denying it. She doesn't want a nanny who has her own children.

'I think the bonding thing has everything to do with whether NWOC brings own children'

You might think that, but that isn't what mini said and I don't think it's what she means.

See - I find it weird that a nanny with her own children wouldn't bring them to work and I would find that a bit off putting. Why would you send your own children to be looked after by someone else, so you could look after someone else's children. I guess the only exceptions would be if the grandparents were doing the childcare and the parents really needed the money or if the children were at school and the other parent was doing the after school care.

because people need to work chipping and maybe they can't find a job where they're allowed to bring their own children or they have too many to bring....come on!

Do you find teachers who don't give up their career to home school their kids weird?

Domestic servants!!!!!!! Unpleasant way of describing a nanny!!!

Legislation uses the term Domestic Servant, for example Working Time Regulations 1998, regulation 19

The only time that wording has been used in this thread, was in reference to sex discrimination legislation. I have a feeling it was actually removed when the Equality Act came into force, if indeed such wording existed in earlier sex discrimination legislation.

So Seb101, please do get over the use of the wording... it is a legal term, which is used to describe work such as that done by nannies.

TBH I am of the mind that if you want to go out to work, you need to organise childcare for your child just like everyone else does. If this doesn't appeal, then stay home.

I even worked in the same school as one of my children attended at one point, and I was expected to organise childcare when there were staff meetings, parents evenings, extra duties and so on. Can you imagine how ridiculous it would have been to have my little one kicking her heels in the corner with a colouring book while I was trying to attend to my job properly? Can you imagine how detrimental it would have been to her own development, to be put last while I put other children and their families very obviously ahead of her needs, right in front of her eyes? I am all for children learning to be patient, and not be centre of the universe, but the idea that hoiking them around regularly and endlessly with you while you work is in some way 'proper', or even superior parenting needs to be heavily criticised, IMO.

Either you are shortchanging your own child, or your employers' children. And if you don't believe that is happening, then you have your head in the sand.

In terms of not employing nannies on the basis that they have children, I am not sure this is even illegal given that the same discrimination would presumably apply to male nannies. However it stinks. Nevertheless if this is the reality of the job market then a clear statement of how childcare would be organised, for example if the nanny's own children were ill, would presumably be reassuring to any (prejudiced) employer. You have to remember how flaky many nannies are, and how this lets down the rest of the profession.

Boffin, don't an awful lot of childminders have their own children though? And daycare places often give reductions to staff children.

Maybe NWOC should carry some specific title different to nanny or childminder.

Well, seems like Mini should not be entitled to her opinion but Outraged should :) funny logic.
I also don't understand why nanny job should be different from other jobs and should allow bringing children with you. why doesn't it make sense as an argument? Is that because the job implies interaction with children? If yes then teachers should be allowed to bring their children to sit in a class while they teach.
Outraged, I am not scared by people's opinions but I find your tone scary.

Whereas you dont consider your setup as a "nanny share", I am almost certain that employers would.

I always took my children to work with me. Both jobs said they wanted someone with own child . Worked fine however my own always came second to the minded child but it was only three days a week.

I think each to their own its not a right to take your child to work it's if the person you work for does not mind.

Never took a cut In wages as nannies all earn different anyway . I have two jobs ATM they pAy three pounds am hour different,

mik she's entitled to her opinion, but it is a prejudiced opinion and one that probably can't be acted on legally.

It doesn't make sense as an argument because it's a bit 'cut off your nose to spite your face'; 'I can't do it therefore you shouldn't be able to (even if it actually could work quite well)'. If you don't want a nwoc for one of the many logical reasons given fair enough, but to not allow something that could benefit everyone just because you're not allowed to do it is, imo, illogical.

Quint IME most nanny employers know the difference. You can certainly have a nanny share with the nanny's own child, but it does come with a distinct and separate set of terms.

bloody hell!!!

why don't you come fit my work houses with cameras then see what kind of nanny I am!

my work kids quite often don't want me involved in their games! so I tidy and get on with chores and do extra jobs!

it is NOT a nannyshare

I won't be having more kids in the near future as my bf moved out in january

all I am is a single mum trying to earn a living

strangely ive had a lady with 4 kids offering me a job but sadly her work changed her days but she wants to know if im ever available!

starting to wish I hadn't posted this now

Of course its a nanny share. If you bring your own children its no longer one to one care that the employer is getting.

Most mums try to earn a living but they understand that in order to do their job they need to have childcare in place. Some employers of nannies are happy for them to bring their own children in exchange for a cheaper rate but why on earth would you pay the same rate for someone who is effectively doing two roles not one.

Oh for the love of all things furry - it is not a nanny-share. Nanny-shares are completely different.

It is no longer one to one care - but then it isn't if the family has more than one of their own children... that doesn't make it a nanny-share either.

OutragedFromLeeds Sun 30-Jun-13 21:00:45
because people need to work chipping and maybe they can't find a job where they're allowed to bring their own children or they have too many to bring....come on! Do you find teachers who don't give up their career to home school their kids weird?

No need to be so snipey.

'People need to work' - so they pay someone to mind their child and get paid to mind someone else's child - completely pointless unless you have free childcare and you can't even claim it's because you 'need to work for your sanity'.

Teaching is not nannying - completely different.

Sorry chipping, just it seemed a very silly question! A nanny in London earns approx £12ph, childminder is about £6ph, even if I'm paying for all my childcare it's still worth going back to work. Or maybe my DH is unemployed or I have free childcare part of the week or something. The reasons someone chooses to go back to work are not really any of your business and to judge it as weird is quite unfair imo.

The principle with teaching is the same. They're leaving their child to go and teach other children. Why not give up work and teach your own?

Outraged

You think it's a silly question, it doesn't mean it is a silly question (and actually it was rhetorical).

By the time a nanny has paid tax & NI and then childcare for their own child/ren (plus petrol & other expenses etc) out of the net amount, there can't be that much left over. It seems weird to me to work as a nanny and then have someone else looking after your children (unless it's the other parent or grandparents). This can't be good for your childrens state of mind either - my Mummy would rather look after another child than me...??

The reasons someone chooses to go back to work are not really any of your business and to judge it as weird is quite unfair imo

I wasn't speaking about 'someone' I was speaking about 'nannies in general' - so I've no idea why you feel I shouldn't comment on it or have an opinion on it. We are discussing nannies with children - it is one aspect of it. I'm entitled to find it 'weird' that someone would choose to look after someone elses child and put their child in care.

The principle with teaching is the same. They're leaving their child to go and teach other children. Why not give up work and teach your own? - That's a ridiculous comparison. It is nothing like the same thing.

I was doing long days as a nanny I took mine with me and then my husband would come and get them at 430 worked well as only had two for bath time.

No way was it a nanny share my own would do all the swimming and dance classes on a non work day . They would have to sit and watch the minded children at classes. I very much fitted in with them so not a nanny share.

Fair enough chipping

It just seems to me, imo, in my view (I'm aware this is not fact!) an unnecessarily judgy comment, but you are of course entitled to judge anyone for anything.

'my Mummy would rather look after another child than me...??'

This ^ is ridiculous though. Are children of office workers worrying that their mum would rather sit in an office all day than be with them? Nannying is a job. 'I have to go to work to pay the bills' is as good an explanation for the DC of a nanny as it is for the DC of an office worker/zoo keeper/traffic warden.

(Why is the comparison with teaching ridiculous? I cant see it.)

Outraged Are you always so rude? I happen to know, for a fact, that this is exactly how one child feels about his Mum nannying for a family while he goes to nursery/grandparents. It is entirely different to a parent working in an office - he knows she is looking after two other children and he thinks she loves them more because she would rather be looking after them. It is sad. It is not at all surprising a child would feel this way.

You can't see the difference between what a nanny does and what a teacher does, the way a nanny works and the way a teacher works, the environments they work in...really?

Where have I been rude?! I've said sorry for being snipey. I found your comment judgy (my opinion, not a fact I've specified).

I don't think I'm being unreasonable to find 'weird' a judgy term tbh. You know there will be nannies on here who have to work and leave their children in childcare, to call their choice weird and then go on to emphasise the damage they're doing is, imo, quite insensitive and, dare I say it, a bit rude.

I'm sure there are kids out there who are upset that their mum goes to work in an office. There are kids whose mums are nannies who are well adjusted.

I can see the difference between teachers and nannies, but I think the principle is the same. That's just my view though. I understand that you disagree. I'm not looking for a row.

We had a nanny with own child as our first nanny. It worked fine for a while, when I had just the one child and before her little boy started nursery. I think it probably made it easier for ds to adjust to having his little sister around as he was used to sharing. However when the nanny's little boy started nursery it became fairly obvious that it wasn't going to work any more as ds's experiences became much more limited. Before that the nanny took them to lots of soft play centres and play dates, but because she had to drop off and pick up her little boy that wasn't really possible any more. Then when dd arrived it became obvious that it was just a bit too much for her, and to be honest it was getting a bit much for her little boy too, like the OP he had to get up very early and with nursery hours it was obviously a bit much for him.

Luckily it was a mutual decision, and she took a part time job after us. Our next nanny was younger, had her own car and was totally focused on my two children. I was happy to pay her more than the previous nanny because the 'service' was better (she was also generally fabulous), although the nanny market seemed to have dropped a bit in price by that time in any case (and I'd had a promotion too).

So in general if I had the money to choose my preference would be for the nanny who presented with the least potential complications, and a bring along child is quite complicated. I would certainly not expect someone with a child to be charging top dollar.

glitter - are your DH's shifts regular? If so, could you look for two jobs? One for the days when you don't have your DS with you and one for the days when you do?
When we were considering getting a nanny, the agency really tried to sell us a NWOC whose DS was 20mths (I have a 3.8 DD and a 12mth DS). The main thing which put me off was the moral dilemma I would have had that I want a nanny to completely prioritise my children - but wouldn't want her to child to come second. If I have a nanny without a child, that's not a problem. An example being that I don't want my DD to be in the front seat of a car but nor do I feel that I could insist that a nanny put her own younger child in the front seat of a car as, if an accident were to happen, DD would probably fare better than a younger child were to.

Another concern was how the nanny would follow my guidance on discipline etc. I would want her to treat my DC and her DS the same yet it would be confusing for her child if he was treated one way by her at our house and another way at home. I know I'm quite lax about some things and quite uptight about others and, whilst I can't think of any examples, know it has surprised some friends and that they can get away with some things in ours that they can't at home and vice versa.
The other concern was the practicality. Ideally, I would want a nanny to stay with us until DS starts school in three years. A nanny with a 20mth old would be able to benefit from the 15 hours free funding in 16mths time at which point our relationship would have to terminate as she wouldn't be able to drop our DD off at school and do her DS' drop off (as he'd go somewhere different). If there was some way of making it work, my DS would spend a lot of time in the car.

Basically, its a complicating factor which has to come up at interview. To be fair, there are other complicating factors which a nanny may have (going through relationship troubles/ close family member in ill health requiring being taken to appointments etc) which would actually cause me more problems but which wouldn't necessarily come up at interview and so I wouldn't know about.

its no way a nannyshare

I don't get to do what my bosses want done with the kids and what I want to do with my boy.

im here promptly at 7 every morning and I do my job - if that means my son misses his sleeps at the times he would have them then so be it.

I can't say no we aren't doing toddlers today I want to take my boy swimming!!

its my bosses rules routines and wishes im following not mine -> not a nannyshare

my ex boyfriend doesn't have set shifts sadly and it works about 8 days a month I take my son to work with me.

Least having written this thread the parents who are contacting me I better placed to ease any concern raised here over my balance between being a nanny and a mummy

I think what it boils down to is the fact that some parents (and entitled to their choices/opinions) don't want a nanny who has their own responsibilities in addition to the ones they will be giving them as their employer, whereas some are more than happy for nwoc as they can see the benefits. Each to their own and good luck with your search.