Nanny quit before starting because questions I asked her referee

[machinemum]

After weeks of searching, interviews etc I found a nanny I really liked and got great vibe. She came to the house twice and we talked very openly, as you do, and early last week got to an arrangement to start Monday morning, turning down some other really great girls. Friday afternoon via text message she says she cannot work for me. When I call frantically as starting work on Monday she says (via text no call) that the questions I asked her referee were completely inappropriate. I am shocked. I had great chat with her referee we spoke and laughed and shared. It was all positive and kind. Is this excuse? I know she did have a few reservations about the job, such as I may move in new year so wanted to be honest I could only commit to the end. Should I just move on trying to find someone else and forget it? Or should I find out what the questions were that were considered inappropriate? Racking my brains trying to retrace the conversation. Not like I asked her favourite position, just general things about responsibility, trust, did she socialise, strengths and weaknesses. I thought the protocol was that you do ask fairly probing questions about someone if they are going to have sole charge of your baby and be in your family, possibly staying over. Very confused. I feel let down that the referee 'warned' her against me.

I think that as part of an informal chat all of this is pretty reasonable - whatever the legal side of things might be.

Off on a slight tangent... I had never used Mumsnet before. I then posted a question myself, then read this post. On the basis of the judgmental lambasting both this lady and I have received - and others for other posts -I won't be using it again.

Maybe the truth hurts but from what I have observed Mumsnet is populated by some very negative people who seem to take consistent pleasure in telling other people how dreadful and out of order they are. The same culprits are at it all the time. Maybe they are perfect but maybe they are just miserable people with nothing better to do.

No wonder women have such a tough time when there are some out there so keen to damn everybody else. In my experience Babycentre - which I have used before - is much nicer and more positive. Support each other ladies!

Checking an employees references is not an informal chat. That must be understood.

The rest of your post would be better suited to 'flouncer's corner' rather than nannies etc. You could repost or asked for it to be moved if you want to.

I agree with OutragedFromLeeds Cat111

Plus, you've been here since February and posted a few threads.

Cat111 is this not you posting in 2010 then? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/959196-to-want-a-bit-of-space-before-my-mother-turns/AllOnOnePage

And is the bad response you're referring to the fact that PPs suggested you let your au pair serve her 2 weeks notice as stated in her contract?

No need to derail OPs thread with your flounce Cat, theres a specific place on MN where you can go to do that and br happily recieved. Best of luck

I don't understand the op's reference to anal sex or why the asterisk. Just seems bizarre to me.

Anal sex question was a joke. The asterisk links it (like a footnote) to a comment at the bottom saying it's a joke.

Erm - I was just trying to be supportive to the person posting...

But since you mention it, said contract is something Au pair says she has signed with her agency. We haven't signed anything like this. This is why I asked for advice.

Wow. 2010 was two children, starting my own company, my husband nearly dying, taking over his company and moving house several times ago. No wonder I had forgotten. Not sure what you've been up to JubJubBird but you obviously have time to cross-reference ancient posts to knock people down. Hope that makes you happy!

cat anyone can search anyone stops trolls takes 30secs to put name in search and then can find out if 1st post/newly joined etc

slight hijack, but cat you were not seeming supportive and your words of not wanting to feed and water some poor teenager in a foreign country probably pissed a few off, we are supportive to those who post on here when they deserve it

back to op, yes you went over the line but i do like cadmuim red suggestion, text and say sorry

I think that telling somebody they are being 'pretty reasonable' is supportive... but maybe not on this forum!

It's not helpful when it isn't true though and the OP wasn't being 'pretty reasonable'. That's not just opinion, it's the law. She crossed the line and the people telling her so are being helpful because hopefully she won't do it again. Being supportive is fine, but not when it means lying to someone. She needs a nanny and if she carries on the way she's going she isn't going to get one.

I agree with you that if you want 'awww babes that sucks' hand holding then netmums or babycentre are better. If you want actual advice, use mumsnet.

Judjud the spy

Hmm - I disagree. The probing questions were asked of a former employer - not digging through personal friends.

Q: What's her boyfriend like
Only gets a meaningful answer if the previous employer had some opportunities to meet the chap. From which you can deduce if the boyfriend is likely to interface with your kids, and in what way.

Q: So she's religious
Only gets a meaningful answer if the religion impacted on her ability to do the job. Otherwise why would the previous employer have any view on her religion - other than easy-to-filter-out prejudices.

the boyfriend question is totally irrelevant - do you take your partner to work? My nanny mentions her dh but there is no suggestion he would ever come to work with her. Firstly he's at work and secondly why would he? Only time it might be remotely relevant is if you were interviewing for a live in.

As for what she does in her spare time - again none of your business. this is something you could have gauged in her interview. if you thought she sounded like a hellraiser you would have that impression anyway.

the other parent brought up the religion so i don't think you did anything wrong there, although if you immediately said 'oh we're jewish' after she told you nanny is muslim, the referee may have taken that as you not being happy with it.

You have to remember that your nanny will be your employee and not your friend. That friendship may come through your working relationship through time but you need to approach it as the professional relationship it is.

You're free to disagree obviously, but you are wrong. There are laws that cover this. It's not a matter of opinion. You cannot as an employer quiz your future employees referees about their religion or their partner. You just can't.

It's not about a 'meaningful answer', it's about an unacceptable question. It doesn't matter whether the answer is 'her boyfriend is the greatest man who has ever lived' or 'he's a serial killer'. It's the question that is the problem.

That was to Wolf btw.

Love that I'm apparently a spy now .Anyway, I'm sure cat's gone off to get the support she needs, somewhere she can talk about the nasty MNetters and how horrid they all are .

Wolf do you mind sharing what line of work you're in? I'm just trying to imagine a professional setting where it's acceptable to ask about a prospective employees love life/relationships!

OP, look what's done is done and I'm sure you know now that employing someone is actually a fairly formal process in many ways. There are some rules that should be observed even if you would like to know various things.

If you're still reading, I'd like to make an off topic point which is that when you find your new nanny, it may help if you try to see yourself as an employer. You are not friends and you may sometimes need to ask them to do things differently or even have differences of opinion with them. That can be awkward if you're treating them like a mate.

This is not to say that a friendship can't develop over time and a real fondness with a nanny. But it's also the case that you can be completely different people and not personally hugely close but still think they're a fantastic nanny whom your children really love having around. I hope you don't think this is patronising - I'm just trying to say a little personal distance can make like easier for all concerned.

Ah JubJub, I think you misunderstand. I wasn't asking for support. I was trying to support the lady posting in the first place - although obviously I was misguided

I would hang around on Mn more but I'm afraid I have limited time to listen to catty sniping and character assassination...

Oh good grief, was one flounce not enough for you?

MN is actually an amazingly supportive place for those who ask for it. I could weep over some of the touching threads that are happening on here tonight, honestly. But when you post asking for an opinion that's exsctly what you're going to get; an opinion. And no, cats, they're not all going to be the same opinions as yours.

I have no problem with the fact you suggested that OP was being 'pretty reasonable', but I do have a problem with the fact you derailled someone else's thread to whine about the fact people disagreed with you on yours.

Offer your 'support' all you want, but what you did was unnecessary.

If her referee heard you mentioning that you might need the nanny to stay over some nights, I can see how that might raise some alarm bells especially if they are religiously conservative (from whatever religion - not just Muslims). To be fair to the OP, the interviewee mentioned she was religious first and the OP just asked what religion in response to that, I don't see how that is offensive or inappropriate.

'the interviewee mentioned she was religious first'

No, the referee said that. As an employer you need to remain within the law regardless of what the referee might say. Her religion isn't relevant. The correct response was to move on when the referee mentioned religion, not ask which religion she is.

Can't scroll up - but I understood the context to be

Q: does she socialise
A: no - she's very religious

(So brought up by ex-employer).

It is ambiguous if 'socialise' referred to the nanny nightclubbing or to playdates with other DC.

I'm an accountant. My office has genuinely never met DH in 5 years. However, my DC know their nannys husband relatively well. He's sometimes joined them on trips out - and once gave them all a lift home when they got caught in he rain. In the case of a CM - their partner and any other children living with them would get vetted as part of registration.

MUM: But Officer, where are my children?
OFFICER: There is no way of knowing Ma'am.
MUM: Oh my God.
OFFICER: Your nanny belonged to a very rare sect that regards children as sacrifical offerings to the Gods. She may have taken them to the Antarctic.
MUM: NO!
OFFICER: We'll try and get them back Ma'am, but her partner was a notorious drunkard and sex offender running extensive paedophile rings across the world. Either way it doesn't look good.
MUM: I can't believe this!!
OFFICER: Where did you find your nanny?
MUM: Off the internet.
OFFICER: Off the internet?
MUM: Yes. It's cheaper that way.
OFFICER: And you didn't think to check any personal detail with anyone?
MUM: NO! For God's sake officer, don't be so ridiculous!!
OFFICER: Why not?
MUM: Because... well because ... because it would be a bit ... unprofessional?

MUM bows her head in shame as she realises her argument is ridiculous.
OFFICER judges her for being a stupid moron.

Machine you're being ridiculous. None of your little joke (which I hilarious by the way ) would be uncovered by asking a former employer her religion and all about her boyfriend as part of getting references.

You need to look into how being employer actually works. I thin personally you'd be better of with nursery childcare rather than an employer/nanny relationship!

Well, now you just look stupid.