Minimum £72k salary required to allow me to take home same as my 19 year old nanny

[knakered]

Nanny nick has done the "big sums"...so we need to earn £72k to to take home the same as my nanny - lets not get into disposable income...4 kids/mortgage etc...vs living at homewith parents ..ho ..hum..

No. I'm already at work. My main problem is that if i don't work, I don't get paid. So when dd is ill, I'm at home with her and I'm still paying for her nursery place, even when she's off with chickenpox like this week. She's ill quite a lot, so it's become a major issue. I wouldn't be restricted on looking at work within 40 min commute so there's be more choice and possibly better money.

With nanny, I wouldn't have to worry about that. Also, as nanny knows dd already and how nursery schedule their education, dd would lose nothing by being at home. She's also be able to go on day trips, swimming, etc that the nursery aren't allowed to do.

Lots of pros, money is the only con.

oh sorry HD i was on the wrong dreel completely

omg Fio your cm was heaven sent too

i was going to say cm too HD

they are about £3-4 an hr

Girl who will be nanny already minds dd for us after nursery. That's how discussion came up in first place! . To be frank, if it was anyone other than her we wouldn't even consider it.

We had 3 under 4 and then it's hugely cheaper to have a nanny. So you could have a good few more babies quickly to justify the cost may be? Even if most of your salary went on the nanny it could mean things are set up so that baby number 2 slots in without any increased cost whereas no 2 at a nursery would suddenly double the costs.

Xenia, I have proposed that course of action. Frosty response so far!

I know one US lady who didn't want children with her new husband (already had them etc) but was prepared to let her eggs be harvested. They found a host mother who carried the babies (it was twins) after IVF and her new husband got the children he wanted without her having the pregnancy she didn't want.

We had a nanny last year who took home just over £900 a month, this cost us about £1200 a month, before extras like paying for music groups, soft play etc...on £25k you would take home around £1500 I think? That depends on pensions etc obviously - you wouldn't have much left!

xenia that is totally ridiculous

she didnt want to be pg with her dh so another woman carried her babies? for gods sake. i bet her dh was delighted (not) that his dw didnt want to carry his babies

only in america

dd she raise the children?

'host mother' rofl

Yes, it's legally and technically possible. I don't see why women have to have children inside them to have children if they don't want to. Not too different from adoption surely or what men do!!

It's how some gay men have children. If you're also buying eggs it's best to buy those from a clever good looking college girl and then implant them in someone not so bright but prepared to be pregnant for 9 months.

In this case she wasn't a friend, just someone I read about. Yes, she raised the children but worked. I think she's a film star and I remember reading they built an annex on the house and they had a full time nanny and the father spent a lot of time with them too so she did have her own genetic children but was as little put out with it physically over the 9 months than a man is. Seems perfectly fair to me.

happydaddy, it can work out the best option around illness etc to have a nanny. we ended up in this situation because DS was ill so often in his first 2 years we were paying about £200 a month for childcare we didn't use and losing wages into the bargain
(our childcare bill was more than that but thats based on us losing 1 1/2 weeks each month which was abotu average)

Also we found a nanny gave us more flexibilty in terms of hours. I was working odd hours and so I might be working 3-6pm one day. A nursery place had to be for a full day for under 2's so I was paying for 10 hrs and only needing 4hrs. Our nanny was hapy to do 35 hrs a week on a flexible basis. So if I had a short day she would work 2-6pm.
She could also stay past 6pm if neither me or DH was able to finish work on time.
She could take in parcels, pick up the odd bit of shopping (tea and milk etc) and used to handle DS laundry during the week.

Downsides; once DS got more healthy it was alot more expensive.
There were issues about job responsibilities to go over
tax etc
not having the house to yourselves (she wasn't live in but even so having another person in the house was a bit odd at times - I think this depends very much on you and the nanny in question however)
I needed to work/study at home occasionally and I found it very hard as she wasn't great at understanding that even if I was at home I wasn't around to help with DS - I also worked late nights and would try to catch up on sleep the following morning - that rarely worked with DS in the house.

On £300 a week you would be paying £6/hr for a standard 50 hr week (thats what an agency told me was normal for a nanny) or £7.50/hr if you only wanted 40 hrs. Now round here thats a bloody good wage, for £6 you'd get someone with 2-4 yrs experience and basic training, for £7.50 you'd get a full 3 yr diploma and 2-4 yrs experience. But I know its very different in other areas.
Tax is a biggie though, if you plan on registering with the IR than you need to budget about 20% extra for that.

Thank sunnyjim, lots of good advice.