Stealing babysitters?

[Anonymous]

Free market principles applied to friendship...only in Washington, DC, would you hear such a thing!

[Anonymous]

I think you'd hear that in NY, too. In fact I bet there's even less divulging of babysitter names in NY.

[Anonymous]

Sitters aren't property. If you want, you could always set a regular time for a sitter. Fair is fair.

[Anonymous]

What is fair about telling a friend you need a sitter for an emergency and then hiring her permanently for the exact time your friend depends on her -- without even running it by your friend? If she didn't ask her friend if it was OK, it is because she knew it wasn't. I really don't get how anyone could defend this action.

[Anonymous]

I understand why some are so protective of their sitters - because of situations like this. Why don't you mention to your friend that you need to replenish your sitter contacts now that (insert babysitter's name) is booked up. Maybe she can give you some names that you can use. If her reaction is to decline or state that she has none, and does not seem to feel any guilt about setting up a long-term arrangement w/someone you gave her access to, then you know what kind of friend you are dealing with. If she doesn't attempt to help you out after you helped her, then good riddens.

[Anonymous]

This is nuts to me. If someone is an occasional sitter, then you obviously don't use her on a regular basis. If you don't use her on a regular, scheduled basis, then you can't expect her to automatically be available or to forgo other babysitting gigs -- any of them, even a regularly scheduled, every-other-Saturday one. Unless OP had her scheduled for every other Saturday and she ditched the OP to go work those same nights for OP's friend -- which she obviously didn't -- then I don't see the problem. Unless OP's post is unclear, it sounds like she used the babysitter whenever a special occasion arose, in which case neither the babysitter nor OP's friend should be expected to keep Saturdays open just in case OP happened to need her.

If a friend of mine did this, maybe I would be a little bit jealous that I hadn't thought of it first, but I certainly wouldn't be mad. It's not the same as a friend hiring away your nanny.

[Anonymous]

I also think it's a breach of etiquette to "take over" someone's sitter like that by setting up something regular, in effect stealing them out from under the person who provided you with the contact. Yes, it's a risk to recommend a favorite sitter to someone but I think most people like to help a friend who's in a bind.

I would definitely say something to the friend and let them know that you're glad you could help them out that one time but now you are having a problem finding a sitter since she's using her regularly and so often. I would ask if she would mind cutting back on the frequency with which she uses this person, explaining that she has a relationship with your kids/family, and/or that if she wants to keep using this person often that she at least give you first dibs on booking her for a particular day.

[Anonymous]

This is gross because everyone is acting like the mother OWNS the babysitter. No one it taking into account that there is a third party here -- the babysitter -- who makes choices for herself and (presumably) takes on a workload that she wants with the family that she wants. We don't even know if the babysitter even *likes* working for the first family. Honestly, this sounds like jealous pettiness all around.

To the OP: why don't you just tell your friend that you are in a bind now (are you even in a bind?!) because she has booked your babysitter for many nights that you otherwise needed her. Maybe you can act like a grown up and sit down with the other family and the babysitter, and see if there is a schedule that meets ALL of your needs.

[Anonymous]

To the PPs outraged by my suggestion that booking a babysitter isn't theft, it's the free market, I'm equally stunned by your self-righteousness. I suppose it's shocking inject capitalist principles into a discussion of a paid service, but you do understand that you don't own your sitter, right? Do you really expect a babysitter to turn down work because the job is with a friend of her original employer? Do you really expect a friend not to offer a regular job to an available sitter simply because you want the sitter at your disposal, without paying her for that privilege? Sounds incredibly selfish to me. Here's a way to solve the horrifying epidemic of "sitter stealing" -- if you want a babysitter on call for Saturday nights, set up a regular schedule and pay someone to reserve those nights for you. Otherwise, you're at the mercy of... yes, the free market.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is fair about telling a friend you need a sitter for an emergency and then hiring her permanently for the exact time your friend depends on her -- without even running it by your friend? If she didn't ask her friend if it was OK, it is because she knew it wasn't. I really don't get how anyone could defend this action.

You are spot on!!

[Anonymous]

If people are expected to comply with the "free market" principle with their "friends" then why would anyone ever help a friend out when they're in need. This friend had an "emergency", and the lesson OP learned is, well, don't help a friend out because you're putting yourself at risk. Not the society I want. I expect we can arrange something a bit more civil and understanding among friends, for pete's sake. I will certainly at least think twice before helping out a friend in need now.

[Anonymous]

And BTW, OP never implied she owned the sitter, and in fact came back to state that she would have gladly booked the sitter with as many hours as she wanted had her "friend" come clean to her about her intention of booking the sitter up. Moreover, even if OP is the worst family in the world to sit for, that's just a different thread. This thread is about supposed "friends" who poach sitters.

[Anonymous]

PP at 9:20 is 100% right. OP already came back on to explain that she doesn't bear any ill will towards the sitter, who was free to take whatever job she wanted. OP also said she hadn't set up something regular, in large part to try to be respectful of the sitter's presumed desire to have some of her weekends free. OP's (totally justified) problem is with this "friend" that she did a favor for who then responded by acting in a totally unfriendly way to the OP. THAT is not a good friendship.

To our "free market" defenders - please read the thread since it's very clear that no one here - and certainly not the OP - is saying that the sitter is at fault in this situation. It's entirely the "friend" who's at fault.

[Anonymous]

OP Here with an update. I left my friend what I considered to be a thoughtful and understanding voicemail asking if we could talk, indicating my feelings were hurt about her booking up the babysitter, because I thought it was a one-time favor. I also told her that obviously our friendship meant more to me than a babysitter. I guess I'm the only one who feels that way, because she hasn't returned my call after 2 days.

To the majority of posters who offered understanding, thank you. I really appreciate it.

To the several posters who think I'm over reacting you're probably in tune with her, may I ask would you return a call like that? Would you check in just to say "I am sorry you feel hurt, but I really still don't think I was doing anything wrong" or would you just blow off your friend? Is there any way I could communicate to you my frustration even though you disagree? Or is this some sort of polarized partisanship between the poaching and free market camps where we will never be able to communicate, so I'd better just keep with friends who are my own kind?

[Anonymous]

Wow, I'm surprised your friend didn't respond to such a kind voicemail. I'm not in tune with her (don't think you're overreacting in the first place), but I can't imagine not calling back.