contract term legnth

[Anonymous]

We are looking to hire a nanny starting in January. We'd like to conduct the review in September, give a raise then, and do the second contract for a year. the reason is that in our area, it seems to be easier to find a position over the summer and also, I expect we will send our then 2-yr-old to full time preschool.

Does that sound ok? If you (a nanny) were handed a 9-mo contract to consider, would you be put off? The other thing is that, I think, nannying a 4-12 month old is different from a 12-24 month old and so doing the renegotiation around the birthday just makes more sense to me.

I am open to thoughts on this b/c I think we will soon extend an offer and want it to be attractive and work for both parties.

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

OP, I'm not a nanny - I'm an MB, so take my response with that caveat.

My hunch is that if I were a nanny seeking a position this kind of arrangement would make me concerned about the long term prospects. I think it reads a little bit like a family that doesn't think they want a nanny long-term, and/or a family that wants the ability to renegotiate frequently. Which is certainly your prerogative, but if I had multiple job offers I would go with a family that seems like they want one person for the long-term. I would value job security pretty highly and your framing of your approach makes it sound like I would very likely be looking for another job in less than a year, or would be facing a reduced rate offer.

Just my two cents.

As an MB I would encourage you to think seriously about how long you would want a nanny to be with your family and what it might or might not be worth to you to have turnover. THere are lots of nannies available, but probably only a handful that are just the right fit for you and your family. If you find someone great you want to keep them, and you want them to be happy in the position. I would suggest at least considering a longer term view.

Also, just because you have a contract doesn't mean either party can't terminate employment. Whatever "term" you put on it is still a fairly unenforceable construct.

I think nannies don't think in terms of one year contracts and yearly renegotiation - they think in terms of families and kids over the long run, and that isn't such a linear/clear-cut approach.

[Anonymous]

MB: That's helpful. We'll do a year contract. We absolutely want her for 2 years and maybe longer if full-time preschool doesn't seem right for this child. Too hard to know at 2 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm not a nanny - I'm an MB, so take my response with that caveat.

My hunch is that if I were a nanny seeking a position this kind of arrangement would make me concerned about the long term prospects. I think it reads a little bit like a family that doesn't think they want a nanny long-term, and/or a family that wants the ability to renegotiate frequently. Which is certainly your prerogative, but if I had multiple job offers I would go with a family that seems like they want one person for the long-term. I would value job security pretty highly and your framing of your approach makes it sound like I would very likely be looking for another job in less than a year, or would be facing a reduced rate offer.

Just my two cents.

As an MB I would encourage you to think seriously about how long you would want a nanny to be with your family and what it might or might not be worth to you to have turnover. THere are lots of nannies available, but probably only a handful that are just the right fit for you and your family. If you find someone great you want to keep them, and you want them to be happy in the position. I would suggest at least considering a longer term view.

Also, just because you have a contract doesn't mean either party can't terminate employment. Whatever "term" you put on it is still a fairly unenforceable construct.

I think nannies don't think in terms of one year contracts and yearly renegotiation - they think in terms of families and kids over the long run, and that isn't such a linear/clear-cut approach.

Interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm not a nanny - I'm an MB, so take my response with that caveat.

My hunch is that if I were a nanny seeking a position this kind of arrangement would make me concerned about the long term prospects. I think it reads a little bit like a family that doesn't think they want a nanny long-term, and/or a family that wants the ability to renegotiate frequently. Which is certainly your prerogative, but if I had multiple job offers I would go with a family that seems like they want one person for the long-term. I would value job security pretty highly and your framing of your approach makes it sound like I would very likely be looking for another job in less than a year, or would be facing a reduced rate offer.

Just my two cents.

As an MB I would encourage you to think seriously about how long you would want a nanny to be with your family and what it might or might not be worth to you to have turnover. THere are lots of nannies available, but probably only a handful that are just the right fit for you and your family. If you find someone great you want to keep them, and you want them to be happy in the position. I would suggest at least considering a longer term view.

Also, just because you have a contract doesn't mean either party can't terminate employment. Whatever "term" you put on it is still a fairly unenforceable construct.

I think nannies don't think in terms of one year contracts and yearly renegotiation - they think in terms of families and kids over the long run, and that isn't such a linear/clear-cut approach.

Maybe some nannies think that way. I know plenty of nannies (myself included) who prefer to have the option to renegotiate each year. If OP's contract is worded so that the renegotiation period for the next contract is clearly laid out, I wouldn't have an issue with a shorter contract until the child is 1.