Nanny employers, how do you feel about Ofted inspecting your nanny in your home?

[AtheneNoctua]

Following on from the below linked threads, I am shocked and appalled at this level of inspection invasion. My nanny is not Ofsted registered. But if she was, I would tell Ofsted to meddle elsewhere.

Ofsted nanny inspection - what do I need?

Ofsted comming tomorrow for a chat,

I believe if your employers decline, you can be deregistered by ofsted. For some families this would mean they can no longer afford you, so you lose your job. Ridiculous!

Yes it would be ridiculous, that's why it wouldn't happen. Where did you get that idea?

The whole thing is rediculous, MrA, so I have a hard time accepting that Ofsted wouldn't do anything that was rediculous.

It was mentioned by nannynick in a previous post that if you refuse they may start legal proceedings to deregister you. And I know of more than one nany employer who can only afford their nanny because of the voucher scheme. Therefore if you were deregistered they would have to find someone else, surely?!

Well if OFSTED can't inspect you then you would be deemed not to meet the requirements of registration.

It's not that intrusive though - they look through paperwork and tell you that you should have some stuff, to which you say 'no this is my employer's house' and then they bugger off.

If the parents refused permission the inspection would have to take place outside the home.

Personally I think the whole thing is ill-conceived and poorly implemented, but I don't think scaremongering will improve the situation.

SuperDuperJezebel yes if you refuse to have an inspection they may well withdraw your registration, but that is different from parents saying 'how you inspect my nanny is your business, but you are not doing it in my home'.

So, if I only hire nannies who are not Ofsted registered, then Ofsted will never have the occassion to request to come knock on my door. My nanny is not registered and will therefore not be contacted so this is all hypothetical for me.

And the point about vouchers is a moot one really since they are ending for anyone who would be in a financial position to hire a nanny, even with them. So, your nanny friends whose jobs depend on the parents' getting those vouchers should probably keep an eye on the job market.

The registration of Home Childcarers haa always been a bit of an issue I feel. Nannies don't have to be registered, parents don't have to take Childcare Vouchers if their employer offers them. If parents choose to take vouchers they can only be used for approved childcare - thats the deal. For a nanny to be approved they need to meet requirements of the scheme. If parents won't permit Ofsted entry to the property, then the nanny could in theory go to Ofsted's Manchester office for the Suitable Person Interview. Ofsted don't have entry rights to a private home, unless it is a property registered as a nursery or childminder.
Nannies can de-register at anytime as far as I am aware.
Over the next 10 years I expect there will be more regulation of childcarers but it will be about the suitability of the person, not about the place at which they work. By regulating individual childcarers, childcarers will be able to move between childcare jobs easier, as some checks won't need to be redone each time as they will be constantly updated. It will be many years though before most childcarers are on the ISA register and nannies are exempt from compulsory registration.

I would say that they can inspect the nanny as much as they like, but not in my home with my children present. If they then took steps to deregister the nanny I would go legal, as it's high time there was a test case IMO.

I don't necessarily think that over the next ten years there will be more regulation childcarers. It's difficult to imagine any more regulation for childminders and nurseries. And nannies are often employed by people as a means to set the rules themselves and not be subject to the current nanny state when it comes to something as personal as how their kids will be raised in their absense.

There are many points on which Ofsted and I do not see eye to eye... the imporatance of my 3 (not 4, but 3) year old learning to write and read for example. Or the importance of my 6 year old not having having too much sugar and salt but AOK to pack her full of nutrasweet at lunch. I could go on and on... The point is I employ a nanny because I want to make the rules. It is none of Ofsted's business. Why should I take on the responsibilities of being an employer if I'm going to give up the benefits?

Also, regarding the expected trend, I think the current government has gone nanny state mad. And I think the current government is going to be replaced with a Conservative one in the not too distant future. So, I have every expectation that the level of nany state invasion into our lives is soon to be scaled back... fingers crossed!!!!

I do agree that a change in Government would be nice... as this one does want to control far too much of our lives. However the wheels are set in motion, so can they be stopped, can it be reversed? Childcare has been controlled by Government for over 50 years now, so previous conservative governments didn't stop it... though they may have changed priorities a bit.
Wonder how the political parties would respond to making the removal of Ofsted from regulating anything other than state schools an election issue?

I think that the minute anyone proposes loosening up regulation there will be a public outcry by a very vocal minority who will drag up every nasty case in the last 50 years as proof that there should, in fact, be more regulation and then the government will do a spectacular U-turn and we'll end up with another useless layer of bureaucracy.

I don't think Ofted's current regulation of nannies stops parents making the rules at all and extending it to cover all homebased childcarers would just mean that parents wouldn't be able to leave their children with someone blatantly unsafe, which IMO isn't necessarily a bad thing....

Inspections of nannies is a bit , especially at their workplace, but then it's the logical time to do it because very few nannies will be able to go to OFSTED to do the inspection and OFSTED don't work weekends so if they want to do their job and check the nanny then they kinda have to go to their workplace, no? That doesn't mean they're inspecting the place they work - they're just inspecting the registered person. Although I do wonder what they would say if before you would allow them access you wanted to vet the inspector I actually support the ISA scheme for the reasons nn points out but it's not going to come in soon enough. There's way to much confusion (mostly on the part of Ofsted) about what being a registered nanny means. I think the level of interference is being criticised for the wrong reasons, unless you object to the government checking that people working with children are safe to be around them, which would be frankly odd but you might!

I think a big problem is that OFSTED is a large organisation primarily aimed at inspecting schools, and this doesn't translate well to a childcare setting. Therefore OFSTED starts making up arbitrary aspects of practice to inspect, in order to be able to make a judgement. I think my favourite one of these is whether childminders have notice boards in their front halls, for example. That has nothing whatsoever to do with care or indeed education, yet it is expected.

I'd rather there was something like a "Royal College of Care" or similar that regulated standards and could strike people off if they were negligent - this could have lay representation on the Board to ensure it didn't just turn into some sort of protectionist guild for carers. I think it would be a lot easier to make inspections discreet and relevant if the focus was on the care side of things rather than the educational aspects, and would get away from the OFSTED model of everything basically having to look like a school to get good marks.

At the moment I don't think there is sufficient recognition of the art of care as opposed to the science.

I think the existance of an organisation that oversees childcare and education which serve the pulic is a good thing. This applies to schools, childminders, and nurseries. I am not only happy with this, but I support it. I think some of the rules are a bit ott and serve to do little more than drive up the cost of childcare which is not a good thing. But, the idea of a central body which oversees standards nationally is good.

But.... nannies are a different kettle of fish. My nanny is my employee. I will decide what qualififcations she needs. I will decide what her job descrition entails. I will decide a whole lot of things which are none of the governments business. And for this level of control over how my children are raised in my absense I am prepared to accept the burden of becoming an employer. I am not prepared to pay for the hoops Ofsted wishes to present to my nanny. Surely, when Ofsted says to nanny go do a, b, and a, then nanny will expect her emplyer to cover the costs of a, b, and c. But, why would I want to do that? Ofsted can go away and leave managing my employee to me. They have no place in our relationship.

When I was inspected as a cm earlier this year, it was all about the 'learning journeys', observation and assessment, how I ensure that all 6 areas of learning and development are met, to comply with EYFS, paperwork, policies and procedures - I even had a 'Pet Policy' and a risk assessment to cover my cats .I could go on forever.

Totally agree Boff that the important 'care' side of childcare has been buried under legislation. I still work with children in a playgroup but am still sad that I was forced to give up a profession I loved because I did not have enough hours in the day to do what is now expected and also spend time with my family. I sincerely hope that the legislation that childminders have to abide by - and the accompanying mountain of paperwork - is never extended to nannies. Many wonderful professional childcarers have already thrown the towel in as a result of changes in registration and legislation, to lose more from another sector would reduce parental choice in childcare further.

Sorry for the hijack

You see there's something which doesn't quite click for me, Athene, and I think it's that if registration of all nannies were to be compulsory it wouldn't be about what you tell your nanny she can and can't do at all. Someone might need to point out to OFSTED the distinction between a private home and a business (and that might require a test case) but as far as the cost of things goes, or the nanny having to meet certain requirements, IF registration were compulsory then nannies would be expected to meet those costs themselves in order to be able to work so it really wouldn't a case of OFSTED saying you have to go do this, that and t'other and nanny expecting employer to meet the cost. Most nannies are already recognising that a 1st aid cert and a CRB are an absolute must - and I think a basic qualification is also becoming increasingly common, especially for nannies entering the industry. It's not about you as an employer jumping through hoops. The nanny is the one jumping through the hoops and if it doesn't matter enough to them to jump through the hoops then they've chosen the wrong profession. What you would do about au pair's I don't know, but IMO the registration of professional nannies, even as it stands, wouldn't interfere with your relationship with your employee at all. You can still say you want your nanny to be fluent in Swahili, have a degree in zoological science, a cordon bleu and have won an olympic rowing medal if you like but the government happen to say that if you want to leave your children with someone for more than, say, 5 hours a day then they have to be insured, have a CRB done, have a first aid certificate and have done a basic childcare course.

Of course nannies with years of experience will probably object but it's not going to hurt you to sit through a 12 hour course and take a test, or read a booklet, fill in some questions and send it back. You have to do more to learn to drive and most nannies did that! It's sad but it's true that once a regulation has been put in place it's very unlikely that it will be taken away, even if it's the most pointless thing in the world, because of the public perception.

I think boff has it right though - OFSTED is the wrong body to regulate childcare because of its educational focus, but that's what we're stuck with until someone reads this thread and thinks boff has had a fabulous idea. If a party promised to reorganise the regulation of childcare in a way I liked then they'd have my vote!

But Ofsted (or whomever) will require a nanny to do things I don't require her/hime to do. For example, the CRB is useless for a non-British nanny. What is the point of getting a British police check for someone who has never before lived in Britain. Complete waste of time.

The nanny I have now is fab. She has never been through any childcare course. But, she does a good job with the kids. She keeps the place tidy. Generally speaking she completes the whole of her duties better than any of her predecessors. Various previous nannies have been at this or that in the job description. But, current nanny does the best job of the whole job.

I don't need the extra cost of all this regulation added to my already barely affordable childcare bill. It is preposterous (and arrogant) of the government to think they know better than I do what qualifies one to look after my children.

Your nanny is probably one in a million, Athene, but I think that people like her are quite rare.

Do your require your nanny to have some form of plice check from their country? What's the problem with your nanny doing a childcare course? She might already know what she needs to do the job but does she know what she should do if she has concerns about child protection, does she have insurance if (heaven forbid) a child has an accident in her care and she was at fault? What's the problem with a nanny meeting extra requirements, the only one of which you don't seem to agree with is a CRB check? And presumably you only have their word that they've never lived in the UK and committed a crime there before....

I might be a lone voice but I really don't think the employer should be picking up the cost of the majority of OFSTED's requirements. In other professions the burden falls on that person to keep themselve fit to practise.

For the record I don't particularly like the current system and I don't think OFSTED is the best way to regulate it but I work with it, and I really think it's only going to get worse. I just don't understand people's objections other than a vague 'I don't like the government interfering'. They're not interfering, per se, they're trying to have some kind of standard for an industry which has been unprofessional for far too long.

I accept that their intentions are good. But, the result is that they are interferring.

I don't think my nanny is all that rare. I think finding a good nanny has a lot more to do with personality than it does pieces of paper.

The reason for not doing the course is that it is a waste of time and money. I think formal nanny training is one way to become a nanny. But, not the only way. So it should not be imposed on everyone.

frakkin - I'm another that doesn't believe the parents should pay for the courses that a nanny should do to meet ofsted's requirements. I've been a nanny for over 25 years (CM for 10 of that) and my current job is the 1st that required registration. I've always kept my paediatric 1st aid up to date and for the last few years have had insurance. I needed to do the common core skills to bring myself up to Ofsted's required level.

The only thing I have asked my employer to pay for is the registration fee of £103. I object to the yearly fee being the same amount because they do not renew your crb and do not even issue you with a new certificate. From what I can tell the £103 fee just pays for you to stay on the database of registered childcare

I agree with you too about the course Athene. I did the 12 hour course, on a part funded place so paid half price (about £80 I think), and found it so easy I'm sure I could've done it in 2 hours. In fact I think I could've sat the test and passed without doing the 12 hour course. As someone that is interested in childcare and child development I've kept myself up to date on relevent aspects.

What couse apart from Common Core does a nanny have to do to meet the requirements?
Common Core can be done distance learning and takes less than a day to fill in the answers and design a poster,
No reason why employers have to pay costs of training, reg, etc.

What couse apart from Common Core does a nanny have to do to meet the requirements?
Common Core can be done distance learning and takes less than a day to fill in the answers and design a poster,
No reason why employers have to pay costs of training, reg, etc.