How much do you pay your nanny for overnight care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Many of you simply cannot afford a nanny.

No family can afford you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Many of you simply cannot afford a nanny.

No family can afford you

Why so angry?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Many of you simply cannot afford a nanny.
You are not entitled to the most elite form of childcare, any more than you are entitled to the biggest house in your neighborhood, or the most elite private school you can find.

I'm entitled to direct my resources to any area I want, as long as someone I deem worthy is willing to accept it: see definition of norm, above.

I don't think a nanny is automatically "the most elite form of childcare," and I sincerely doubt that you, poster, have experienced or provided it. Troll.

The first PP is our resident troll, and you should ignore her.

However, having a nanny IS the most elite type of childcare, and it does no one any good to pretend it isn't. Having 1:1 care for your child(ren) is a luxury that the vast majority of people cannot afford. PP's point is poorly made and not entirely relevant in this thread, but it is legitimate. None of us are entitled to have a nanny, and if we can't afford to pay high enough for our FT nanny to live on then we need to consider whether we can really afford it or not ("I pity the man who wants a coat so cheap that the man or woman who produces the cloth will starve in the process").

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
However, having a nanny IS the most elite type of childcare, and it does no one any good to pretend it isn't.

That's like saying a car IS the most elite type of transportation. There are all sorts of cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, having a nanny IS the most elite type of childcare, and it does no one any good to pretend it isn't.

That's like saying a car IS the most elite type of transportation. There are all sorts of cars.

No, it is not. "Childcare" is the "car". Having a nanny is like having a hummer. It's the most expensive form of childcare. We all know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nannies are crazy to accept overnight rates. They can't go out and party, get drunk, have boyfriend over so they are om duty the entire time. You people are so cheap, it is disgusting

Seriously? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nannies are crazy to accept overnight rates. They can't go out and party, get drunk, have boyfriend over so they are om duty the entire time. You people are so cheap, it is disgusting

Seriously? Wow.

Let's not get silly here. When you are waiting to have to jump up any minute, you should be getting paid to do so.
Which of you mb's want to sleep at your job, waiting to be called in the middle of the night, and get paid a little token?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, having a nanny IS the most elite type of childcare, and it does no one any good to pretend it isn't.

That's like saying a car IS the most elite type of transportation. There are all sorts of cars.

No, it is not. "Childcare" is the "car". Having a nanny is like having a hummer. It's the most expensive form of childcare. We all know that.

Your love of hummers aside, this is becoming a semantic argument about a subjective notion. But it is illogical and self-aggrandizing to decide that one must be a member of the wealthy 'elite' to afford a nanny, or that once you employ a nanny, you must lose your sense of economy. We're not talking about someone to swab the yacht deck here; childcare is a necessity, and some people's priorities dictate that a nanny is worth it despite it being a challenging expense for them.

And, like every other service, there are nannies that are worth $15/hour and nannies that are worth $25/hour. There are nannies who you'll pay an exorbitant overnight rate (>$150) to keep them, and nannies, for whom you won't. But this isn't an elite access thing, other than the fact we do find time in our day to bray on about it in online forums. I'm kind of ashamed so I'm gonna stop now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, having a nanny IS the most elite type of childcare, and it does no one any good to pretend it isn't.

That's like saying a car IS the most elite type of transportation. There are all sorts of cars.

No, it is not. "Childcare" is the "car". Having a nanny is like having a hummer. It's the most expensive form of childcare. We all know that.

Your love of hummers aside, this is becoming a semantic argument about a subjective notion. But it is illogical and self-aggrandizing to decide that one must be a member of the wealthy 'elite' to afford a nanny, or that once you employ a nanny, you must lose your sense of economy. We're not talking about someone to swab the yacht deck here; childcare is a necessity, and some people's priorities dictate that a nanny is worth it despite it being a challenging expense for them.

And, like every other service, there are nannies that are worth $15/hour and nannies that are worth $25/hour. There are nannies who you'll pay an exorbitant overnight rate (>$150) to keep them, and nannies, for whom you won't. But this isn't an elite access thing, other than the fact we do find time in our day to bray on about it in online forums. I'm kind of ashamed so I'm gonna stop now.

The non-elite form of FT babysitting is called daycare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, having a nanny IS the most elite type of childcare, and it does no one any good to pretend it isn't.

That's like saying a car IS the most elite type of transportation. There are all sorts of cars.

+1. A car is to transportation what a nanny is to child care. Beyond that, there are expensive cars and expensive nannies and affordable cars and affordable nannies. As in the car world, price point doesn't tell you which nanny is "better," just which nanny costs more. Some of us are very happy with the Honda Accord of nannies, particularly when the alternative is a finicky, high-maintenance Mercedes nanny who needs constant servicing and doesn't really perform any better than the Accord.

Now can we all stop this silliness and get on with more important discussions?

[Anonymous]

And then there are some of us who hold out for the Tesla nannies. Expensive, quiet, and cutting edge.

[Anonymous]

To the crazy PP: you are free to demand double time for overnight care, or whatever it is you think your time is worth. I'm not going to price myself out of work or ask for an amount I think is unreasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the crazy PP: you are free to demand double time for overnight care, or whatever it is you think your time is worth. I'm not going to price myself out of work or ask for an amount I think is unreasonable.

It's rather silly to pretend that anyone is demanding double pay for overnight work.

[Anonymous]

This is a flawed metaphor in so many ways, but if we want to stick to it then I think the most accurate comparison to draw would be to say that:

Most people need transportation / childcare.

A car is the most elite form of transportation / a nanny is the most elite form of childcare.

Many people use buses, subways, and carpools. This is perfectly acceptable. / Many people use daycares and nanny-shares. This is perfectly acceptable.

If you drive your own car / If you hire your own nanny, that's lovely for you, but it does no good to pretend you're not making a privileged choice when you do so. Because you are. Many people cannot make that choice.

(Of course, PP's argument that the car = childcare and the type of car is equivalent to the level of luxury you've chosen for your childcare is also sound.)

And yes, of course there are nannies that cost more than others, but there are no good nannies who cost less than daycare. Period.

You're all acting like idiots and I don't believe any of you are actually that dumb. Let's try this once more.

Of course you can be very happy with your Honda nanny - I'm very happy with my Honda car - but you are STILL utilizing the most elite form of childcare available to us. That's okay. You don't have to be rich or throw your nanny a bonus every quarter to enjoy that privilege, but you should recognize your already privileged status as nanny employers and not try to pretend that it is less elite than the daycare your neighbors had to settle for. You have also taken it upon yourselves to be someone's employer, and you need to make sure your conscience is sound when it comes to how you compensate her.

Perhaps it is the lack of forum monikers derailing this again, but I have never said you need to be a member of the wealthy elite or lose your sense of economy to/once you have employed a nanny. I actively call out the "$25/hr" troll and regularly campaign here for reasonable rates for nannies (I'm the poster who consistently says I don't believe in an increase in pay when additional children are born). But if you're not comfortable enough with your good fortune to admit that you are purchasing the most expensive form of childcare for your children, you are going to have much bigger problems in society as they get older.

[Anonymous]

Should have said... no good nannies who cost less than daycare *for one child* -- obviously a nanny becomes more cost-effective the more kids you have.