Teens, chores (lack of) and money

[Needaglassofwinedotcom]

We have 4 kids who get pocket money for chores. The eldest (teen) does (or should do!) the most chores but also gets the most pocket money, plus phone paid plus monthly school allowance whereas the others get less pocket money. In effect the teen gets £30 more a mth plus the opportunity to earn another £20 by doing extra jobs.

However he's stopped doing his daily chores. We've tried cutting down his allowance - though he moans he does more than everyone else!

Is this fair to cut his allowance? It doesn't seem to make a difference. Dh thinks we should try blocking his phone (don't know how!)

Any ideas?

Introduce competition and pay by results. A minimum wage paid out to all but slightly more for the eldest. Each job gets a set amount on completion but any of the DC can select any job, so if the eldest wants to live a thrifty lifestyle, let him. Its a good life lesson, I would also set a minimum level to get the phone paid.

I don't get paid for chores and neither does DH. That is why I dislike linking chores to pocket money or allowances. DC need to learn that chores are part of life and need to be done by every member of the house.
I have never paid for routine household chores, but sometimes for one off jobs such as fence painting.
Is your eldest doing exams op? I don't expect much in the way of chores when they are in the midst of GCSEs /AS/A levels. They have a long summer to make up for it.

Like GB - I've never linked jobs around the house to pocket money, as I think everyone should contribute as everyone lives here.

However, if you have, or if you want to, then I think the fairest way is to give everyone a minimum level of what you expect them to do anyway, and then offer money for the bigger jobs - that way, they can each choose if they want to work and have money, or not work and don't. You have to stick to it though once decided - if you start slipping them the odd tenner here and there then you completely undermine the system.

It sounds like they are used to having ample money, so little cut backs doesn't really deprive them. If you want to pay them for work then it needs to be at a realistic minimum wage type level without other allowances being given, as if they have a pretty comfortable allowance anyway then there's no incentive for them to do the less appealing jobs. Unless of course you really need them to do the job, in which case give them nothing automatically, but pay slightly more for each job that needs doing.

My kids help with the running of the house based on age and ability. They don't get paid to help.

Thanks for your replies. What happens if they don't get paid if they don't do their chores?

Yes absolutely I cut if chores aren't done - I have 2 teens. Works very well for us.
Without the chore-money linking I think we would struggle and argue much more about this.

If they try 'not helping', then I point out to them that means I will still be doing that job later on then, or at the weekend, when they are expecting me to take them to one activity or another. They really enjoy the things they belong to and wouldn't want to miss them - more motivated by them, than money. That said, I think, like all 'reward systems' (or punishment, come to that) you have to know the dc and link it to what will motivate them.
I also think it helps in that we've always expected our dc to help as they are able - it's not a new thing imposed in their teens. They know that the table needs to be cleared after each meal and the dishwasher needs emptying and if we don't keep on top of the washing then it's them that is going to look silly / be disadvantaged turning up for activity without any kit, and so forth. They all cook, and know what a pain it is to be needing a particular pan or something only to find it's not been washed yet, or that the ingredients aren't there as no-one put them on the shopping list, etc. I think that helps too.