Nannies: market rates (bit controversial)

[Tanzie]

Having read on another thread ("Paying Nannies when sick") gripes from UK nannies about jobs going to girls from accession countries who will work for less, (and do more in the way of housework), is this not just pushing the market rate down for qualified/experienced nannies?

I am not in UK, but I would look at it as providing more affordable childcare, provided you can find someone trustworthy and reliable. I lived in UK briefly about 4 years ago and a nanny friend of mine was earning GBP 25,000 and got a flat thrown in with it. This is more than I was earning at the time and could never have afforded this sort of money for someone to look after my children.

I am not suggesting slave labour from Central European girls, or paying them an au pair's "pocket money" for what is essentially a nanny job, but paying them a reasonable wage and providing free accommodation means that a lot of people, who could not afford a nanny or nursery fees, will probably be able to get back to work.

Of course, there will always be those who want a Norland nanny and can afford one, but it seems to me that your average Mum would welcome these Central Europeans with open arms...

I'll run and hide now...

Who defines what a "fair wage" is? Who's to say that Euronannies aren't getting a "fair wage"? If they are content with their pay, what is the fuss about?

Ameriscot2005, I was hoping we could get back to what i belive was my 1st question to you re qualifactions.
I asked if you you would sit back and NOT defend your qualifactions, if you have any. I am not trying to be rude here, just mearly looking for an answer

My dh had v posh english nannies as a child and then went to boarding school, looked after by nannies in the hols. When I met him at uni he still had his old nanny drive over 60 miles each way to make his lunch and iron nice creases in his jeans. His sister couldn't even cook frozen peas when she was 18!

I think part of bringing up children and seeing to their development is ensuring that they are capable of doing their own laundry, cooking their own meals and cleaning their own bedroom. How can this be the case if a nanny won't ever use the dishwasher or do the laundry? I wouldn't expect a nanny to be a cleaner but I would expect him/her to teach basic cookery and daily domestic chores as part of their role.

What are the kids learning if their carers are portraying these essential chores as demeaning?

Ah such a shame. I missed all the mud slinging yesterday. That'll teach me not spend time with my DD instead of coming onto mumsnet! (just kidding, of course)

And now that I have spend a fair amount of my morning reading it al, it's over.

Oh such a shame.... I can't believe I missed it.

However, can I make one (belated) point? I rreally do take offense when people start equating the value of my children to a fair nanny salary. People who make sacrifices (whether in the form of less experience, no qualification, or a bit of a language barrier) don't do so because they love their children any less than the person who can afford to shell out £300 net per week. They do so because it's all they have.

My nanny does a bit of housework (keeps the kitchen clean and does the laundry for DD and me and DH). Why do I ask this of her? Because it permits me to see DD when I come home from work. It is not make a slave of her, IT IS BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE MY KID.

ALright, I'm so late to this thread, I should just let it go...

triceratops I agree, the nanny shouldn't do everything for the child, but you wouldn't believe how many parents expect the nanny to do EVERYTHING for the child. I was amazed in my contract in my current position that it was written that my charge help keep his room and bathroom clean and tidy.
Alot of nannies do help around the house I for one cannot stand working in a mess so no matter who left the dirty dishes lying around I would clear them away and nearly always my charge offers to help.
And before anyone asks why am I not looking after him and posting on here. I have been given the afternoon off by lovely mumboss as she wants to take her son out for the afternoon.

You've lost me there, SN. What have my qualifications got to do with anything?

I don't think I asked you to defend your qualifications. Like other posters, I don't think qualifications are the only or the most important factor to be considered.

What I think I asked was what a British nanny offers to a family that a foreign nanny doesn't in order to justify her higher fee. It's a reasonable question, and it's a question that consumers are used to asking when faced with any choice - what are the plusses and what are the minuses?

Better late than never, Uwila!

OK, slightly different tangent, and sorry, haven't read whole thread.
When I am at home for a day with DS, I find it v difficult to get any domestic work finished - some things we can do together, but it's just as likely to get interrupted. The only way to get jobs done is to make DS entertain himself for a while - not always a happy situation.
SAHM's quite rightly, IMO, claim that housework is not necessarily included in day-time parenting, and either split responsibilities on the grounds that time is as valuable as ££ as a contribution to the household and husbands carry out a share of domestic work in the eve - or someone is paid to do cleaning etc. Or the SAHM does have to do everything, and feels v put upon - rightly IMO.

SO why is a nanny supposed to be able to do all these things, and why would you want them to, when they are paid to be with kids, not leave them to entertin themselves while nanny makes supper for the family or empties the dishwasher? And if the child sleeps, is that not a time the 8-6 nanny takes (heaven forbid) a lunch break?

I employed a nanny, English, as it happens, but not at all posh. A cheery common sense S London single Mum with loads of childcare / first aid qualifications, and experience.

Uwila I am sorry if I offended you, what I was trying to say is that I cannot understand those people who can afford £300 a week choosing to pay less for what I personally percieve as inferior childcare. I know some people do choose to do this. I am now £8000 in debt due to having a nanny (to my parents so it is interest free!) because it was the only way we could cope.

I never paid near that amount (just under £200 a week net) but had amazing childcare because I treated my nanny well, made sure she was happy and didnt expect the earth. TBH I wouldn't have cared if she did nothing other than look after the children and extra work (housework) she chose to do.

I did used to get angry at other parents (her nanny friends used to moan about them to me ) who may have paid more than me, but who treated their nannies apallingly.

I don't think many husbands would be well pleased to come home to chores when their DW has been at home all day.

Also, I don't think SAHMs generally work flat out from 8 - 6. Most SAHMs have a "social life" during the day, meaning that domestic tasks get squeezed into a few hours.

But that does not mean that the hired help should only labour for the same number of hours, and get paid for the whole day.

Beetroot - oh I thought the crux was that European nannies are not only cheaper but do all the housework...sorry...off again now, my nanny-employing days are over, anyway!

Don't think all the housework was claimed.

Here is where I asked you about YOUR qualifactions

How dare you mock our training!!! May I ask what you trained to do, because I am bloody certain you worked hard it also!
Do you have qualifications (up to date i might add) on 1st aid, child health, nutrition, safety issues? I know I do, and I work hard to get more qualifactions every year, in my own time, for work related use.

So please do not sit there and insult everyone of us!

But what have my qualifications got to do with anything?

I've had three nannies, one english and two australian. First one totally qualified and knew loads and great with kids but £350 a week, plus tax and national insurance brings it up to £500 per week - so roughly £2150 a month.

So in order to pay nanny I had to earn roughly £36K a year before tax, as I am obviously taxed on my earnings before they pay for nanny.

So much money plus the classes my nanny insisted on, the organic food, the money for outings etc... It is just one huge output of money and all the time I am doing one of those soul destroying city jobs..

Then two australian nannies, paid them £400per week but didn't pay tax or national insurance so much cheaper. But of course they were travelling through and weren't hanging around.

Personally I am happy to be out of the minefield of childcare, its an unregulated, expensive confusing mess with both employers and nannies having totally unrealistic expectations of the other.

Well i came across to me that you were slandering nanny qualifactions, I wondering what gave you the right to do that?

Do you have any idea how many hours the nannies study for, how many work placements we go through, working hard for no pay on that.
Som many nannies keep their education up, even while working. I , myself will be returning to collage this year to do forign languages, Physcology and advanced maths. This is on top of my day job, and my other courses I attend.

I dont want people slandering my education, I have worked damn hard to get it!

Crunchie, that wasn't really meant to be directed specifically at you. There are monay example (on this thread and others) where a nannie's salary is argued to be higher because they are looking after my most prized posession. True enough to call my kids my prized posession. But, that does not necessarily equate to higher salary. In fact it should serve better to support the argument for a lower salary. I mean, the more I pay the nanny the less I can give to them.

I'm sorry if I'm going back to conversation that ended last night (or rather in the wee hours this morning), but I'd like to add another point. This thread seems to have an awful lot of nanny explaining to parent wht their job description out to be and what the parent ought to pay them for it. At some point, we have to look at the bigger picture and accept that a nanny's salary has to come from the parent's bank account. So long as parents are expected to pay SO MANY associated taxes on their own salaries and yours, then of course they will struggle to pay the salary you feel you deserve. This isn;t to say that your job isn't important. We desperately need you just get through a normal day. It's just that this is a very expensive place (Greater London) and our jobs don't necessarily fund your in the style that both you and we would like.

Personally, I think the answer lies in tax breaks... but then how will we fund those? With higher taxes? Or sacrifice other services or currently on offer from the UK government?

I was slandering nanny qualifications, was I? What did I say that caused you to conclude this?

I'm not sure that nanny qualifications were slandered. I think the point being made (and not only by Ameriscot) is the qualifications are not the only requirement for a job. Qualification are a bonus, in my view. They might help you get the job, but they certainly won't guarantantee it. And, they are most certainly not as importance as experience, and good references. Also, I personally would rank a nanny who speaks a foreign language and is willing to teach it to my children as highly as qualifications -- probably higher, actually.

And, as for what qualities are worth how much pay, it seems to me that is up to the employer to decide (in any of work).