Travelling with nanny is it ok to put her in economy when we all do first?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't need help they are tweens and teens , I guess it sounds like first for all. Lol

Then why are you bringing the nanny???

Then why do you HAVE a nanny?

SP. Our youngest children are now in their tweens and early teens. We still have a nanny. She helps if someone is at home from school (like last year, remember!?!), she volunteers in the kids' schools, she does a lot of the afternoon driving around like pick-ups from school, and she monitors all after school activities like homework and play time. Believe me, she's busy!

Sigh. DP, not SP.

Your middle and high schoolers have "play time"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, you treat her as less than an equal. How would you feel if she treated your child with the same level of disdain that you treat her?

If you expect her to come on a trip with you, then you treat her as an equal and her time and travel comforts as important as your own. If you aren't willing to do that, let her stay home and take care of your own children. Frankly, your suggestion is not only rude, but clueless as well as rude.

Does your boss treat you exactly as an equal? Or if you were ever a lower level staff did you have to fly economy while your c-suite or execs flew business or first? This is to be expected in the real world.

I have traveled a lot in a number of different jobs, and I have never had my boss make me fly coach while they flew business/first. We always flew the same, which is what I now do with my subordinates when we travel. Doing what you suggest is nothing but a great way to alienate the people you rely on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't need help they are tweens and teens , I guess it sounds like first for all. Lol

Then why are you bringing the nanny???

She wanted to go on vacation and we offered to add her to ours. We wouldn't be using her as a nanny on Vacation.

I think it's perfectly ok for her to fly economy. Personally, if I was traveling with my employer, I would rather have my space and sit separately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't need help they are tweens and teens , I guess it sounds like first for all. Lol

Why do you have a nanny then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, you treat her as less than an equal. How would you feel if she treated your child with the same level of disdain that you treat her?

If you expect her to come on a trip with you, then you treat her as an equal and her time and travel comforts as important as your own. If you aren't willing to do that, let her stay home and take care of your own children. Frankly, your suggestion is not only rude, but clueless as well as rude.

Does your boss treat you exactly as an equal? Or if you were ever a lower level staff did you have to fly economy while your c-suite or execs flew business or first? This is to be expected in the real world.

I have traveled a lot in a number of different jobs, and I have never had my boss make me fly coach while they flew business/first. We always flew the same, which is what I now do with my subordinates when we travel. Doing what you suggest is nothing but a great way to alienate the people you rely on.

I'm not "suggesting" anything. Many companies have actual policies outlining how people can travel. If you have status and want to upgrade yourself, then go ahead, but most employees can't buy first/business class tickets while their managers can. I certainly have sat in coach while people I was traveling with didn't. It wasn't a big deal. There are only so many upgrades available anyway, nobody took one for the team and sat in the back regardless.

[Anonymous]

OP here, I didn't think this would be such a controversy, it's only an extra 800 for the ticket. And yes we offered to bring our nanny on vacation no work fully paid. Yes we have a nanny and tweens but she's more of a household helper as the kids only need driving to and from school and activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, you treat her as less than an equal. How would you feel if she treated your child with the same level of disdain that you treat her?

If you expect her to come on a trip with you, then you treat her as an equal and her time and travel comforts as important as your own. If you aren't willing to do that, let her stay home and take care of your own children. Frankly, your suggestion is not only rude, but clueless as well as rude.

Does your boss treat you exactly as an equal? Or if you were ever a lower level staff did you have to fly economy while your c-suite or execs flew business or first? This is to be expected in the real world.

I have traveled a lot in a number of different jobs, and I have never had my boss make me fly coach while they flew business/first. We always flew the same, which is what I now do with my subordinates when we travel. Doing what you suggest is nothing but a great way to alienate the people you rely on.

I'm not "suggesting" anything. Many companies have actual policies outlining how people can travel. If you have status and want to upgrade yourself, then go ahead, but most employees can't buy first/business class tickets while their managers can. I certainly have sat in coach while people I was traveling with didn't. It wasn't a big deal. There are only so many upgrades available anyway, nobody took one for the team and sat in the back regardless.

Some people being able to use status to upgrade while others can't is different from what's being discussed here, which is a deliberate decision to make the nanny travel in lesser accommodations than OP plans to purchase for the family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would Fedex her ahead of time to the destination so she could help set everything up.

Omg that’s funny. I’m surprised they didn’t think of this.

The nanny is not working and is tagging along on THEIR vacation!

[Anonymous]

Ew. Yes, get her first class. WTF

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, you treat her as less than an equal. How would you feel if she treated your child with the same level of disdain that you treat her?

If you expect her to come on a trip with you, then you treat her as an equal and her time and travel comforts as important as your own. If you aren't willing to do that, let her stay home and take care of your own children. Frankly, your suggestion is not only rude, but clueless as well as rude.

Does your boss treat you exactly as an equal? Or if you were ever a lower level staff did you have to fly economy while your c-suite or execs flew business or first? This is to be expected in the real world.

I have traveled a lot in a number of different jobs, and I have never had my boss make me fly coach while they flew business/first. We always flew the same, which is what I now do with my subordinates when we travel. Doing what you suggest is nothing but a great way to alienate the people you rely on.

I'm not "suggesting" anything. Many companies have actual policies outlining how people can travel. If you have status and want to upgrade yourself, then go ahead, but most employees can't buy first/business class tickets while their managers can. I certainly have sat in coach while people I was traveling with didn't. It wasn't a big deal. There are only so many upgrades available anyway, nobody took one for the team and sat in the back regardless.

Some people being able to use status to upgrade while others can't is different from what's being discussed here, which is a deliberate decision to make the nanny travel in lesser accommodations than OP plans to purchase for the family.

It's a free ticket just to be nice. Sheesh it's not even a work related trip. Some of you are really doing too much here for the nanny's sake. No good deed goes unpunished.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here, I didn't think this would be such a controversy, it's only an extra 800 for the ticket. And yes we offered to bring our nanny on vacation no work fully paid. Yes we have a nanny and tweens but she's more of a household helper as the kids only need driving to and from school and activities.

Wow. Can I be your nanny?

[Anonymous]

Yes, it is fine. I'd be willing to bet she'd take the money difference in a heartbeat over the fancy seat if it were to come to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, you treat her as less than an equal. How would you feel if she treated your child with the same level of disdain that you treat her?

If you expect her to come on a trip with you, then you treat her as an equal and her time and travel comforts as important as your own. If you aren't willing to do that, let her stay home and take care of your own children. Frankly, your suggestion is not only rude, but clueless as well as rude.

Does your boss treat you exactly as an equal? Or if you were ever a lower level staff did you have to fly economy while your c-suite or execs flew business or first? This is to be expected in the real world.

I have traveled a lot in a number of different jobs, and I have never had my boss make me fly coach while they flew business/first. We always flew the same, which is what I now do with my subordinates when we travel. Doing what you suggest is nothing but a great way to alienate the people you rely on.

I'm not "suggesting" anything. Many companies have actual policies outlining how people can travel. If you have status and want to upgrade yourself, then go ahead, but most employees can't buy first/business class tickets while their managers can. I certainly have sat in coach while people I was traveling with didn't. It wasn't a big deal. There are only so many upgrades available anyway, nobody took one for the team and sat in the back regardless.

Some people being able to use status to upgrade while others can't is different from what's being discussed here, which is a deliberate decision to make the nanny travel in lesser accommodations than OP plans to purchase for the family.

No, the argument is about the optics. The optics are the same if some can upgrade and some can't. Some are in the front, and some in the back. Lets anyone get alienated. The people who get the upgrades have higher status than the ones who don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is really low class to put kids in the few first class seats available on a flight.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait, what?! You have tweens and teens and are bringing your nanny on vacation?!?!

Right??