If you ask for money from the other parent, that gives her some power over YOUR nanny. What if she wants to add another activity or another one of her kids to the mix? This parent is taking advantage of you and your nanny. Keep the control.

I am the PP who said don't confront. Add some activities/errands that "prevent" your nanny from being the scheduled driver. Moocher mom will find somebody else.

My biggest issue with this situation is that she’s contacting the nanny directly and not OP. Seems underhanded.

Anonymous wrote:
We have gone off the deep end if we need insurance to host a two person playdate at a home. And even thinking about it in legalistic terms I'm not sure how the Nanny's liability is any different if a guest gets injured instead of her legal charge.

The difference is that the parents of the legal charge have an existing relationship with the nanny and probably some sort of contract with her as well that spells out how things would be handled.

Personally, my biggest concern would be the driving part more than the at-home part. Car accidents happen. I personally would feel uncomfortable myself driving the kid of someone I didn't know well let alone having my nanny drive them...though that just might be me. People are litigious, and you just never know...

Anonymous wrote:Just to be a devil's advocate, there is a chance that nanny is fine with the arrangement because it might be easier to have two girls who get along together than having to entertain your DD herself.

So I'd maybe have another more direct conversation with nanny first, and float the idea of asking the other mom to pay her?

This

I don't know the right answer for this, but I think it definitely needs to be addressed. It's one thing if you are carpooling and taking responsibility for the safety of another child both while driving them and while having them in your home...it's another if it's your employee. No one wants to think about those what-ifs, but car accidents and play accidents happen. And these don't sound like close friends with an established relationship where you might be able to navigate something like that.

Personally, I wouldn't like to have my childcare provider caring for another child on a regular basis since it limits our flexibility. But I can see others feeling differently. Nonetheless, we have insurance and a contract with our nanny which also spells out some of these things...it's advisable to have something similar for this other child as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have a FT nanny if your kid is in school during the day? Ask Larla's mom if she wants to pay your nanny to help her out sometimes.

And yes, it's unfair, and you need to say something to the other mom.

(Bump) Good question. OP?

Completely irrelevant question. Maybe nanny is half housekeeper but its immaterial to the question and to the situation.

Not at all irrelevant if the nanny has extra time and could potentially be paid by the other family. Win win for OP.

The issue has never been nanny bandwidth it's nanny being taken advantage of by not being compensated.

Pp is just trying to make op feel guilty like this is nbd

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have a FT nanny if your kid is in school during the day? Ask Larla's mom if she wants to pay your nanny to help her out sometimes.

And yes, it's unfair, and you need to say something to the other mom.

(Bump) Good question. OP?

Completely irrelevant question. Maybe nanny is half housekeeper but its immaterial to the question and to the situation.

Not at all irrelevant if the nanny has extra time and could potentially be paid by the other family. Win win for OP.

Anonymous wrote:

My nanny picks my DD up from school at 3pm every day and on Wednesdays she takes gymnastics with Larla. One week when the mom was in a pinch she asked if my nanny could pick Larla up from school too and take her to gym. No problem. But somehow that has become the norm and my nanny now takes her every week. On top of that, she regularly texts my nanny (I gave Larla's mom my nanny's number to coordinate play dates) to ask if she can take Larla home another 1-2x per week when she is stuck or running late.

These are NOT playdates. There is a difference between a playdates and these extras that keep popping up.

+1 The other mom is a moocher and OP needs to come up with a pay arrangement. Otherwise the nanny is going to resentful sooner or later.

Anonymous wrote:OP I had this exact situation last year with my au pair and the mom of a classmate. She kept calling my au pair to arrange playdates that included picking her child up from school and spending the entire afternoon with her when the mom had to work a part time job. She never invited my child to play at their house.

Finally, I called the mom and said all playdates needed to be organized through me -- not directly through the au pair. I thought that would help; it did not. She still texted my au pair. I told her she needed to pay her if she expected her to watch her child. She blew up at me and said that in her country (which she left more than 10 years ago) moms helped each other out. I said that may be true, but I see the helping going only one way and not the other.

Needless to say she didn't speak to me again, but my poor au pair was relieved.

People are incredible!

One more question:

Do you have a second car seat / booster this girl is using?

My biggest concern is Nanny being taken advantage and liability. Driving children is a lot of liability should there be an accident. If you have the minimum car insurance, immediately get more.

Step 1: Talk to your Nanny
Step 2: Agree on reasonable boundaries - compensation.
Step 3: Approach other Mom via phone
Step 4: Ensure plan has been implemented

Let's face it, when you bring up $$ to the other mother, all hell is going to break loose. She will not want to pay, Kids friendship will probably be over or very curtailed.

I would start scheduling my child for a few additional activities or have nanny run an errand so the nanny would not be available for the other child.

Why would other parent be willing to have a stranger drive her child around? Insurance liability for the nanny.

OP I had this exact situation last year with my au pair and the mom of a classmate. She kept calling my au pair to arrange playdates that included picking her child up from school and spending the entire afternoon with her when the mom had to work a part time job. She never invited my child to play at their house.

Finally, I called the mom and said all playdates needed to be organized through me -- not directly through the au pair. I thought that would help; it did not. She still texted my au pair. I told her she needed to pay her if she expected her to watch her child. She blew up at me and said that in her country (which she left more than 10 years ago) moms helped each other out. I said that may be true, but I see the helping going only one way and not the other.

Needless to say she didn't speak to me again, but my poor au pair was relieved.

OP, the problem is that this mom now expects your nanny to pick up her kids. What if your kid is sick and isn't in school one day? Will she expect your nanny to put your kick in the car and go get her kids? And what if your kid has a doctor's appointment, or another play date, or anything else? Your nanny works for you, as you are the only one paying her (and I'm not saying that like you own the nanny - I have one and don't remotely think I own her - I say that as in you ought to protect her in this situation by saying something to the mom). The other mom definitely needs to pay for this, but first, you and the nanny need to decide that it's what you want to do. Where does the extra car/booster seat come from? What happens if the other kid is sick? I feel like this is a slippery slope kind of thing and your nanny is going to be even more taken advantage of as time goes on and then it will be even more awkward.

My nanny picks my DD up from school at 3pm every day and on Wednesdays she takes gymnastics with Larla. One week when the mom was in a pinch she asked if my nanny could pick Larla up from school too and take her to gym. No problem. But somehow that has become the norm and my nanny now takes her every week. On top of that, she regularly texts my nanny (I gave Larla's mom my nanny's number to coordinate play dates) to ask if she can take Larla home another 1-2x per week when she is stuck or running late.

These are NOT playdates. There is a difference between a playdates and these extras that keep popping up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to be a devil's advocate, there is a chance that nanny is fine with the arrangement because it might be easier to have two girls who get along together than having to entertain your DD herself.

So I'd maybe have another more direct conversation with nanny first, and float the idea of asking the other mom to pay her?

She needs to be compensated for the responsibility for taking care of another child, no matter how much easier it is for her. At the risk of sounding dramatic, she responsible for this girl's life while she is with nanny. (I'm know there's a less dramatic way to phrase this)

There is no risk of you sounding dramatic - you do sound dramatic and ridiculous.

The Nanny is in charge of the safety and well-being of another child while she is with her. Do you think that's dramatic and ridiculous ?

As a parent of two high energy boys who has also done a few stints of coaching yes it is ridiculous and dramatic.

They are having a play date not hiking the Himalayans while drunk.

If the home is safe for one kid it is just as safe for two.

Who do you think these people would sue if something happened to their daughter while playing? We had insurance for this reason when we had a nanny.

We have gone off the deep end if we need insurance to host a two person playdate at a home. And even thinking about it in legalistic terms I'm not sure how the Nanny's liability is any different if a guest gets injured instead of her legal charge.