Where my pay goes
![[Post New]](/nanny-forum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
You get the MB (mom b*t*h) award of the week. How perfect. |
Anonymous
|
Bringing this back on topic...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681136/Can-afford-American-Dream-Study-shows-ideal-lifestyle-costs-130-357-year.html "A new analysis shows that only 1 in 8 families could afford the cost of living what's commonly known as the American Dream in 2014. Inspired by the new book 'Chasing the American Dream,' about the cost of the financial crisis, housing bubble, and Great Recession, reporters at USA Today calculated the cost of all those elements that make up the American Dream. For the project they included the costs of home ownership, moderate-cost groceries, a car, health insurance, taxes, educational expenses for your children, and retirement planning. They reached an average total of $130,357 per year in household income. In a country where the median household income is roughly $51,000, that's a dream well out of reach for most people." Users of DCUM please note: the median household income in the USA is 51K. MBs of DC, please consider how your own family would live if your income and resources were dramatically reduced to that number. Consider that if you have a nanny, she has (or would like to have) these kinds of expenses - home ownership, children to educate, a car to drive, and healthy food to eat. These are not luxuries like the newest iPhone or a European vacation, they are what we believe America should be able to offer. I'm not saying that if you can't pay a nanny $65,000 a year you can't afford one because that would be absurd, but please just think about the majority of Americans who can't even afford a great daycare, let alone sole, in-home care (thus forcing them out of the workforce and reducing their households to a single income). This is the reality many, many people are living and shouting that someone should get an education, develop more worthy skills, and so on is misplaced "assistance." Many capable, educated, intelligent, and hard-working people can't achieve the basics of the American dream; it isn't just nannies. This is a flaw in our entire system and not your sole responsibility, but we all have to take responsibility for the systems we use...particularly when they come at the expense of others. Happy Independence Day. |
Anonymous
That's all you have, PP? No response to the facts or links presented? Nothing of actual substance to offer the discussion? You get the Stupid, Entitled, Whiny Nanny of the Week award! How perfect. 
|
Anonymous
I am not PP but I don't see how underpaying one group the makes it ok to underpay another. So, as long as there is poverty anywhere then you can justify poverty everywhere? I don't feel that paramedics or firefighters should be valued so little. Indeed, they seem to want some of the things we all want. I was touched by this article in particular: "We can work well over a hundred hours per week, can hone our skills as much as we’d like, and can save lives and alleviate as much suffering as one person can handle, but it isn’t enough to put a full tank of gas in our car every time we need to fill up and also to afford cable television. Heaven forbid that we don’t take our lunches to work or want to take our wives out to a nice dinner." http://www.lifeunderthelights.com/2009/07/05/why-does-being-a-paramedic-seem-so-worthless-sometimes/#sthash.HvgNtx79.dpuf It does not undermine the need to pay you nanny a living wage though. If anything, the links you share evidence a shared thread of suffering. They all speak to the fact that skill, work ethic, education, negotiating, and additional training do not move those in a position to control your financial prosperity toward just or equitable action. |
Anonymous
And also, it speaks poorly of you to tout just how many people you can get away with subjecting to the welfare line. |
Anonymous
Very well said. Thank you. |
Anonymous
What is this living age? Nobody is willing to answer this so far. Please elaborate. |
Anonymous
I'm the PP who posted the first paramedic links and thank you for addressing them. I agree with you. There are shared threads of suffering and a great income disparity in this country. I also agree with you that economic disparity does not undermine the need to pay a nanny a living wage. We differ on a few points, of course. The first is the definition of a living wage. $15+/hr for childcare is a living wage. It may not be a desirable wage for the lifestyle you want, but it is most definitely a living wage, especially considering the low bar of entry into the profession. You don't have to take out student loans to be a nanny. You don't even need to have finished high school to call yourself a nanny. You don't have to prove to anyone that you have any training or measurable skills to be a nanny. All you have to do is say you are a nanny and boom, you can make $15/hr or more. Is this a bad thing? That's debatable. I don't think so, but I do think you should feel lucky to be able to make so much when compared to paramedics, who have to invest in training to achieve measurable skills, lifesaving skills, and still make as much as you do for doing a far more critical job. The other area in which we disagree is whose responsibility it is to address income disparities in this country. OP seems to think individual MBs should be moved to pay more than they can afford because a nanny has bills. This is the worst, most irresponsible argument ever and would never fly in any other industry. Remember, MBs work in other industries, where no one cares about your bills; they only care about how you do your job and your ability to show added value to your employer with the work you do. Do I think this is a good thing for anyone? I will out myself and say no. That said, I don't live in Sweden, with a far more evolved sense of economic disparity and a wonderful social safety net. I live here, faced with the same challenges nannies, firefighters, paramedics, teachers, and everyone else. When nannies here complain about rates, they like to mock MBs and suggest that they can't afford a real nanny if they can't pay $35/hr. This is a straw man because MBs absolutely can afford a real nanny because there are enough nannies available, at every price point, to virtually guarantee that they can afford someone, and that someone is likely to do a very good job for $15/hr. Nanny care is not an elite privilege, in spite of what some here may say. Nannies are a child care option, among many available to families who are trying to do the best they can for their children. There is a myth, here, that most MBs are selfish lawyer types earning a half million dollars a year and paying their nanny $10/hr and expecting Alice. Are those MBs out there? Sure. But they are the exception, not the rule. So what are the solutions, besides moving to Sweden? The solution may be in professionalizing the nanny world in a way to raise rates by playing the value added game and forgoing the sympathy card. Create a license structure, be strict about paying legally, install protections for nannies from the awful MBs, lobby for employment protections and advocate for professional standards that engage both nannies and MBs to raise the bar...weeding out both lazy nannies and mean MBs. Sorry this is so long and thanks if you read this far. I know there will be some who will post a one line insult to me starting with the term "bitch" and I'm ready for that. It makes me sad this forum has ceased to be a place to build bridges and understand each other....but I'm not in charge of the inter webs. I do hope that there are a few nannies and MBs who might read this and think and rethink where we are and where we hope to be. Peace out. |
Anonymous
Thanks for your thoughtful response. You and I are sharing some common ground. I reread OP's posts after seeing your most recent post. I think there is some fiction going through your argument. For example, the OP clearly states that her message is not intended to shame families who can not afford to pay may. She explicitly states that she prays families who lack the means to pay more will also find solutions to their economic obstacles. So who was the post targeted to? To families who can afford to pay competitive wages but have chosen not to based on the believe that all nannies should be paid only $15 per hour. Later in the thread OP shared that she has in fact gotten a degree in a child care related field and she is continuing to grad school. To me that shows she has in fact invested in her skills and training to be a nanny. You mention that MBs are being held responsible for the nanny's cost of living. I agree that it is short sighted to claim your employer is solely responsible for one's earning potential seeing how the employer can not make you arrive to work on time or interview well or apply classroom knowledge in a competent way. I think you have misunderstood or possibly disagree with what I personally believe , however. Employers in every industry are accountable for paying a living wage. They bear that responsibility by paying competitively (Costco, Apple) or hiring low-skilled, immigrant laborers because they are willing to work for little money (McDonalds, Walmart). Similarly, nannies have varying skill sets. A young nanny with few hard skills would not be paid as well as someone who is older and has invested in a college education, as you pointed out, taking on loans to do so. Why should all nannies be paid as though they are uneducated, low-skilled, immigrant employees? Nothing against those employees, they are just trying to make it. But they are not as competitively positioned. I don't know what lifestyle you think should be attainable for a nanny. There are conflicting ideas on this. I also don't know that every nanny, at every age, and under every circumstance can be held to a single lifestyle standard. If the nanny is a fresh faced early 20s girl then sure a roommate is reasonable. A retired teacher with extensive education and experience though, I think it would be reasonable at the age of 60 to have your own bathroom. I've interviewed with families who can not afford to pay me even $15. These families do not lower their expectations though. They still want all the perks of my 8 years of experience, they still want me to be flexible for their schedule, and to have their homemade baby food and for me to solve their kids disciplinary problems and soothe their colicky baby. Those are hard earned competencies. A new nanny is still practicing how many rounds of beer pong she can fit in and still show up on time, if at all. Finally, I disagree with the idea MBs don't have any responsibility at all. Corporate employers absolutely peg their compensation to regional cost of living. I got a cost of living adjustment when I transferred to DC with my nonprofit organization - the most cash strapped type of business. My job description did not change. I got a raise because I moved to a more expensive city. It is deceptive to say that only performance drives pay - benefits, seniority, added responsibility, and higher level of accountability are some of the other factors that influence salary. MBs do also need to live within their means, I agree with you there. That may mean doing a nanny share or requesting a flex schedule at work or, sadly, hiring the younger nanny who you will have to check on several times because if she gets overwhelmed she may shake your baby. |
Anonymous
| bump |
Anonymous
Another brilliant post. Again. Who says professional nannies aren't educated? And don't deserve to be compensated accordingly? |
Anonymous
|
While it's a noble idea in theory, I doubt it's viable. Because once you introduce standards and licensing then you would need to introduce a system that deals compliance: i.e. monitoring and fines or punishments for working or hiring without a license. Depending on where the line is drawn (e.g. requirement for HS or GED) then part of the currently working people will be ineligible and out of work or working under the table for further reduced wages. That flies in the face of the argument of needing it for moral reasons.
If the standards are so lax that anyone can pass then there is no point in standards. Further, if there is licensing in place then there will develop a sub-market of "housekeeper looking after kids" - i.e. domestic labor that's nannying but is called something else to avoid compliance, unless you want to introduce regulation to any kind of domestic work, which would be difficult to do and would likely put additional burden on market participants: someone will need to pay for licensing and enforcement - if it's to be covered by NF, then it would reduce their ability to pay. Last, but not least, since one of the pps brought up Sweeden: the tax rates in Scandinavia are much higher than here, and not just for high earners. That's the price they agreed to pay for social cohesion as a society, but at the rate it's going it will never happen here. |
Anonymous
Which post are you responding to? |
Anonymous
Thirty dollars an hour three years ago. Sweet. |
Anonymous
In what year of med school do they teach the differences between the words "then" and "than"? |