Help me set things right with my nanny!

[chandellina]

I had my first tense exchange with our much-appreciated nanny today, over the rate she's charging to look after our son for an extra day this week.

She had already told me she is looking after another child that day, a regular babysitting she does. I asked her today what we should pay, and she said her usual net rate per hour.

I queried this, since she'll have another child too. She works for us in a nanny share, so we pay only half of that usual net on a normal day. I wasn't aggressive, but implied I didn't think that was totally fair.

On reflection, I now accept that I should have just agreed to her asked-for rate, because she's basically doing us a favour, and, as I said, we very much appreciate and treasure her.

Unfortunately, she took the tense moment to mention that she's discovered the going rate for nanny shares is actually £2 more net per hour than she's getting now.

Now I'm in a bit of a pickle and don't know what to do. Apologise? Forget about it and move on?

(She hasn't asked for a pay rise, her contract doesn't renew until September, but now that info is out there.)

wow, it sort of kicked off here. It's really interesting to read all the different points of view.

For what it's worth, I apologised, she apologised, and I think we are square again.

I do think it's tricky. I didn't expect to pay my normal half of her net rate. I guess I had a vague idea it might be 10% or 20% less because of the shared situation. And if it had been sole charge for the day I would have paid the full rate without a second thought.

We didn't put anything about overtime into the contract. She has stayed an hour late for us before and we paid her the full hourly rate--I supppose I should have used that as the precedent.

It was the "share" that complicated it in my mind, and led to the problem, though after weighing it up I think it ultimately isn't that relevant, since I have no arrangement with the other family.

I really do treasure our nanny, we are very happy with her, so I am happy that it doesn't seem to be a major problem between us. Maybe she was unprofessional to blurt out about the going rate for shares, but she probably felt put on the spot by me questioning her and got a bit defensive.

Glad you both said sorry and hopefully all sorted

def worth putting in contract overtime rate

Out of curoisty what do you pay her and what's your area and her exp/age and the mn jury will say if she is £2ph underpaid

How can she look after your child and someone elses on the same day and you have nothing to do with them?

Fab, I think that the family on this particular day is a different family to the normal 'share' arrangement.

Blondes - she gets £10 net per hour in a part of SE London with a thriving market for nannies. The share is based at one house, and she has no duties beyond caring for the children (two, same age). We (the two families) provide meals the vast majority of time, so she rarely has to cook.

I do know some nannies charge £12 for shares, and I've written here before I don't think it's necessarily fair for there to be a higher rate than for one family, depending on the circumstances and duties of course.

She is very experienced, 30+ years, had fabulous references and has been totally reliable and wonderful since she started.

£10 is a good wage but tbh she is right to say that she is on £2 less an hour. Average share is about £12

saying that , as I said in my first reply on this thread she can't complain about money as she agreed and accepted the salary you offered

to increase £20per day is a lot Esp with tax/ni etc added on

Agree she is getting less than the going rate but she agreed it at the start, presumably it's either what she requested or you specified and there wasn't any issue then.

Share rates are a bone of contention. You get fewer duties but you have 2 children who are not necessarily used go sharing adult attention, 2 different ways of dealing with children to be consistent with, 2 employers to please, 2 sets of holiday to negotiate, twice the risk of having to stay late in the evening and potentially children who are just at different developmentally tricky stages which IMO requires more patience than siblings or twins. But then again is that worth a salary hike? To me it is.

In fact everything that's a hassle about being a nanny you get double and if I could get the same working for another family I probably would just to make my life easier.

But overtime. Contract. Now.

OP if she's really resentful of the pay, as much as you like her, it may be worth finding another nanny. No one should have to be on tenterhooks and walking on eggshells around their nanny. That's silly. There are loads out there and you'll find another that your kids and you will treasure just as much, I'm positive of that. I think it's so sad to see families going into debt to pay nannies...etc. Pay what you can afford. There will be a lovely wonderful one out there that will accept your rate without that attitude. Just IMO obviously.
And if it's really important to her to get £2 extra, she can find another family willing to pay that.

If she is full time (50 hours per week) £10 net per hour equates to about £35800. I have a hard time regarding that as underpaid in a job that doesn't even require a university education.

Another £2 per hour will take that gross wage to roughly £43,400.

Surely these rates are not proportional to today's economic climate.

Agreed Strix. I like you

Strix and StarExpat, you two are unbelievable! You know absolutly nothing about this nanny, her education or hours worked. A 50 hour week with children can be very demanding as I'm sure parents would agree. I don't see the relevance of a " university degree " either, parents don't have uni dgrees to have children do they? Childcare is a very demanding job aswell, looking after somebody else's child is an extremely responsible job so a good rate of pay is well deserved. I'm sure none of you would want people dissecting you or your wages and de-valuing you as you both have to this nanny. It would be interesting to know what rate of pay stay at home mums/dads would expect if they could be paid for looking after their own children.

I'm with Strix.

If this nanny is doing 50 hours a week (we don't know what hours they are doing, so can only guess)... then £12 net per hour I feel takes the Cost Of Employing that person (so to include Employers NI) to £47,269

For the parent to pay that from their take home pay, they would need to be earning £70,000 just to pay the nannies salary, yet alone all the other misc costs.

"Childcare is a very demanding job" - Yes but the pay does reflect that. If the person was working in an office job, they may be getting not much above minimum wage. That office job may be just as demanding, just in a different way.

I feel that there has to be a balance between what parents can afford and what the nanny feels is a suitable salary for the work they do.

nanny wage is more than full time teachers one

The net rate is for a nanny share, so each family would actually be paying £6.00. Puts a different perspective on things. Good childcare is priceless at the end of the day and like any other job shouldn't be critised for the rate of pay asked, especially by people that don't do that particular job. If you choose to have children you need to be fully aware of the implications and costs involved. Many childcarers are working parents too and also need a suitable wage to support their own way of life, something many people seem to forget. It boils down to what is agreed between parent and carer and I feel many comments have been unfair to the nanny involved.

Just out of interest what is full time teaching hours? I am currently doing my early years foundation degree and am not yet sure how to follow it up, I had thought about teaching.

School hours 8.30 - 3.30-4.30 - plus time for lesson preparation, marking, meetings & parent's evenings

Sounds good to me especially being term time only, although I know marking and planning is also done sometimes in the hols. I currently work 50 hours a week looking after 4 under 2's all year round. That doesn't include the unpaid time for clearing up, cleaning toys and equipment, eyfs paperwork and planning for each child and training which has to be done on evenings or saturdays. But as demanding as it is I love my job, although working less hours and being able to be with my dd in the holidays would be great. Paid hols would also be nice as my fee is £3.60 an hour but I don't get paid for my hols.

strix, i have worked 50hr weeks/5 days and earn £10nett so therefore i have earnt £35k and dont have a degree etc

im good at my job and yes charge/earn/can conmand a good salary

nannies can work long hours and yes obv parents have to earn xxx amount to pay us,but is that our fault?

its not as if we MAKE the employer pay us our wage, if the salary is too much for some familys then they employ a younger/less exp nanny

it is the familys choice to agree to pay us the salary we ask for

my friend earns £35k working in an office 9-5 - should she be paid less than me as works 3hrs less a day, so 15hrs less a week?

she doesnt have a degree and sits on computer talking about car accidents etc

Yep, I was fully aware of the costs involved in having children. I use a cm at £5/hour and pay all holidays, with the exception a 1/2 fee over summer hols as a retainer. I wouldn't be able to afford a nanny. If I chose a nanny share (considered it) at £5/hour for my half, that would have been what I could afford... and I would not have been able to pay the nanny more. Definitely not more than my salary! If a nanny wants a job earning a very high salary, they should work for a very wealthy family. You're right, blondes nannies can charge what they would like. But not all families can pay it. They just have to find someone who can.

If a nanny agrees a contract of a certain wage, s/he should not then make remarks about how she is paid under the "going rate". It's obviously what the parents can afford.

Nannies work hard, I don't deny that. We all do. I'm not comparing how hard one is to another. I didn't do that Lilly, you did.

I just know that in my job, I work damn hard and I would never speak to my employer like that. My salary was agreed at contract. I don't make remarks to my boss about how other people doing the same thing are getting more. .

I totally agree that what's in the contract is in the contract and that's what's agreed. I have a salary I ask for and get. It's in line with my qualifications, experience and the hours expected. If a family don't want to pay that they choose not to interview me - agencies have my salary baseline. Reverse holds true - if I were to employ a nanny I would be looking to employ one within my means, which would necessarily mean a less qualified/experienced nanny. Whilst I would love Blondes as a nanny I can't afford her. I'm more in the ex-au pair/NQ nanny realm if I can afford one at all...

That's a completely different issue to whether nannies in general should get £12 net in a share situation.

As an aside I earn more nannying than I do teaching And I'm not working til 10pm those days either.

aww love you too - and if you could afford me, i would work for you

I don't feel bad at all about what we are paying her. There was no negotiation on the rate - it was what she asked for and what we agreed. The other family will struggle to pay even a tiny raise, but it would be a shame to lose her, so we would probably do what we could on our side, though even with the share her three days gross costs much of my four day's net. (grandma comes one day)

I agree good childcare is "priceless" but I am also very experienced in, and frankly quite good at, my career and on an hourly basis I'm making less than the nanny if we bumped up to £12. (and I have a masters degree)

Re: all the extra responsibilities that might come with a share, I think you do have to look at the exact situation. We have agreed on all holidays (nanny chooses two weeks) this year and there are no parents turning up late. We have had no disputes with the families

I look after the other child if the other family is late - nanny goes home, which I encourage. I am never late myself.

It's more about the potential hassle though - Blondes doesn't know, before she starts working for me, that I will pay on time, be completely aligned with the other parent in my share, be home on time, know that the share will last the distance (share situations being typically more unstable!), not make trouble over holiday etc...

You do sound like a nice employer though and I'd rather have that with £10/hour than a dreadful set on £12/hour.

I agree, Frakkin, she sounds lovely. That's why I work where I do... it's a much, much nicer situation for a little less money than the "going rate". Even though I have a Masters Degree. I wouldn't complain because it's a lovely place to teach/work and the salary is still fair and livable.

I know someone who took out a loan to pay for a nanny... and borrowed more after the first year because the nanny demanded it. It left them in debt for years because the nanny was making more than the mother's salary. So silly (their fault, of course. They should have just gotten a different nanny or different childcare). Yes, childcare costs money, but it shouldn't cost more than your own salary.

Chand. You shouldn't have to pay more than the other family. It's a share and you both should be equal as both have same no of children

don't overstretch yourself to give a payrise. As i said you both agreed this salary. And to go to 12 from 10 is a huge payrise of 20%. Average seems to be 3% poss 5%

you sound a lovely employer ESP looking after the other child if parents are late.

Tbh I wouldn't want to do a share as 4 parents to please and double hassle with holidays etc