Car Seats

[Anonymous]

Oh for heaven's sake. If you don't want to drive the kids in your car then you make that clear up front. If the parents expect you to drive the kids they need to provide a vehicle or negotiate that with a nanny.

Part of the agreement - work it out upfront as professionals. That way whatever works for the individual parties is fine.

If you don't want carseats in your car then say no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The mileage rate covers gasoline and wear and tear on cars. The hourly rate covers carting kids around. Together ( plus any added costs the nanny has for insurance, which the family pays) the two cover the car seat issue. Obviously, if a nanny prefers not to drive or not to drive her own car, that gets negotiated when the job is accepted.

I think we have a differing opinions and that's ok. I don't consider the wear and tear of highway driving to be equivalent to the wear and tear of what kids do to a car. The costs do add up for parents so I don't fault you for wanting to pay so little either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The mileage rate covers gasoline and wear and tear on cars. The hourly rate covers carting kids around. Together ( plus any added costs the nanny has for insurance, which the family pays) the two cover the car seat issue. Obviously, if a nanny prefers not to drive or not to drive her own car, that gets negotiated when the job is accepted.

I think we have a differing opinions and that's ok. I don't consider the wear and tear of highway driving to be equivalent to the wear and tear of what kids do to a car. The costs do add up for parents so I don't fault you for wanting to pay so little either.

In this case, the easy solution is just to decline jobs that ask for the nanny to transport kids; plenty of both types of jobs, in my experience. However, if you do take kids in your car, they should absolutely not be causing significant additional wear and tear, or you should be addressing this with your parents. No food or drink goes into cars in our house, and muddy or sandy shoes come off before getting in. Maybe school-aged kids cause more damage than young kids, but those two rules have been enough for our toddlers/preschoolers to not cause much impact on the car one way or the other. Dents from things you hit at the zoo should be covered by your insurance, not by the family employing you.

The IRS rates is intended to cover gasoline, wear and tear (depreciation), repairs, oil, insurance and other costs, and if actual costs exceed the mileage rate, the employer is required to pay the difference. Seems like that ought to cover just about any scenario, kids or otherwise.

[Anonymous]

If you use your car isnt it your decision to not let the kids drink juice and eat cheerios in it?
My car has never been dented at the zoo either, those spaces are quite big.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you use your car isnt it your decision to not let the kids drink juice and eat cheerios in it?
My car has never been dented at the zoo either, those spaces are quite big.

Certainly. I am trying to imagine MBs response when I explain DC may not have food in my car so I let him scream for an hour while we sat in traffic from DC2s school. Seems like one of those things that is easy to advise but not workable in real life. Idk, maybe some people never have a situation where their kid has to eat in the car but I don't know those people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you use your car isnt it your decision to not let the kids drink juice and eat cheerios in it?
My car has never been dented at the zoo either, those spaces are quite big.

Certainly. I am trying to imagine MBs response when I explain DC may not have food in my car so I let him scream for an hour while we sat in traffic from DC2s school. Seems like one of those things that is easy to advise but not workable in real life. Idk, maybe some people never have a situation where their kid has to eat in the car but I don't know those people.

It's clear you resent your nanny family for having you drive the kids around. Sort of your own fault since you agreed to it. You should probably find another job at this point since clearly this is making you bitter. I am curious though, what exactly are your charges doing in your car that is causing such damage. I drive around a 20 month old a couple of times a day and the worst part I have to do is a quick vacuum of the backseat at the end of the day.

Take responsibility for your own anger at this situation. If they pay you poorly, why did you accept and why are you staying? If they are causing so much damage to your car, why are you not discussing this with your bosses and why did you agree to it when you so obviously hate it?

[Anonymous]

"The IRS rates is intended to cover gasoline, wear and tear (depreciation), repairs, oil, insurance and other costs, and if actual costs exceed the mileage rate, the employer is required to pay the difference. Seems like that ought to cover just about any scenario, kids or otherwise. "

Not true. Employers are not required to pay any costs above the IRS rate. They aren't even required to pay the IRS rate, although they absolutely should pay the IRS rate. It's a fair rate and more than enough to cover the use of the nanny's car on the job.

[Anonymous]

16:32 why cant you get to the school a few minutes earlier and let your kid have a snack at the school before you get back in the car.
It can be convenient to let your kids eat in the car but its not a necessity.

[Anonymous]

The IRS does not dictate how much an employee should be compensated for driving on the job. The IRS rate is simply the maximum amount per mile that can be paid as reimbursement (as opposed to taxable income) without documenting actual costs. Legally, you can pay the IRS rate per mile, a lower rate per mile, or track and reimburse actual costs. In almost all situations, the IRS rate will be higher than your actual costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"The IRS rates is intended to cover gasoline, wear and tear (depreciation), repairs, oil, insurance and other costs, and if actual costs exceed the mileage rate, the employer is required to pay the difference. Seems like that ought to cover just about any scenario, kids or otherwise. "

Not true. Employers are not required to pay any costs above the IRS rate. They aren't even required to pay the IRS rate, although they absolutely should pay the IRS rate. It's a fair rate and more than enough to cover the use of the nanny's car on the job.

Right--to be clear, I didn't mean private employers are required to pay any of this; that would get negotiated with their employees. But for federal or state agencies that use the IRS rate or for anyone deducting business travel or moving mileage for tax purposes, the formal policy is the greater of actual costs or the mileage rate, so if you are using the IRS rate to be representative of costs, you would presumably follow that policy. (All of the private employers I've worked for who've chosen the IRS rate have followed this policy as well.) Actual costs typically have to be substantiated with receipts and the bar is higher for documenting those, and in my experience the mileage rate is usually a better deal anyway.

[Anonymous]

When I had charges young enough for car seats, MB didn't want the car seats moved so I drove her car every day. She worked from home are rarely needed the car during the day. If she did we would work it out. I watch a 12 year old now, but if I go back to younger children I would look for a family that provided a car with the seats.