how many au pairs go into rematch?
![[Post New]](/nanny-forum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
which agency are you with? I am the host mom with 6 rematches and 6 successes (but I also always had a challenging job, 45 hours always, and first little kids and then lots of little kids - I now have 4! Half of my rematches could have been passable au pairs if they had easier gigs). Most of my rematches came from one agency (Interexchange), in fact with Interexchange my record was 1 success and 4 rematches, two of whom should never have been au pairs; needless to say I am not going back to them, because I feel the quality of their pool was lacking at the times I was matching, and I feel they didn't send home the au pairs who really needed to go home and not be passed on to another family. But that was years ago (I last was with them in early 2011) so things may have changed. |
Anonymous
I'm confused why agencies will not share the numbers. How else can you really compare the agencies/clusters, and make an informed choice? |
Anonymous
|
HM of seven au pairs, two rematches here. I think some LCCs will tell families what they want to hear - such as the LCC that says it's the same habitual rematching families skewing their statistics. It may be true for her cluster, but then why isn't she working harder to get the families out of the program? Surely she knows other clusters where that isn't the case, or she isn't networking well with other LCCs (also possible). Why would you ever sign up for an au pair if you think you'll rematch? They - through whatever formula their company uses - get paid more if they have more families.
Anyway, as the 12 time host mom with 6 rematches says, the agencies do let through women that shouldn't be au pairs. We had one too, and rematched quickly once it became apparent. Our second rematch happened once our au pair realized we weren't kidding when we told her while interviewing that our house was smaller than other host families' houses, but we'll include her in everything we do. She requested rematch to "trade up", a fairly common occurrence. How does the LCC that says it's mostly repeat rematching families respond to questions about "trade up" rematches initiated by au pairs? Whether it's to get a nicer house/situation or to get a better schedule (let's face it, we'd all like to be paid a full stipend to chauffeur a couple of 5th and 7th graders to after school activities in the close-in New York suburbs), there are au pairs that take any family that is interested then rematch once they get here. |
Anonymous
|
Agree with the PP who said that peer support/peer pressure play a significant role in rematch. I've been a host mom for 4.5 years now, on our 4th AP, 5th is about to arrive. I see rematch waves - both within a family and in the surrounding area.
They can egg each other on: we had a group of APs at our house, they were discussing one AP's situation. AP was in a new host family, and clearly there was communication disconnect. HF needed to give AP a clear advance schedule - instead it was a kind of play it by ear daily situation. While some APs were approaching this with good advice ("you need to talk to HP"), others were like ("that's wrong! you should demand a schedule, it's your right! and if you don't get it, rematch!"), ratcheting up the conflict. This was a brand-new AP, just arrived, and I'd heard an out-all-night-drinking story about this AP (not on duty), so undoubtedly there was more to the story. Another thing I've seen is a HF who previously had several successful matches go through a wave of rematches - 3 in a row. Partly bad luck, but also I think new AP replacing the rematching AP is oriented to throw in the towel easier/faster, especially if there is overlap. For this reason (and others), I avoid overlapping new and old APs. Clean break is best. For the record, I've had 4 APs in 4.5 years. No "rematches" but one mutually-agreed early departure. |
Anonymous
They may pick the au pairs and HFs, but they do not MATCH them. So, unless you know *why* every rematch occurred, you can't extrapolate on the "success" or quality of an agency simply from the number of rematches. So, no, what you think is clear isn't, if you know the first thing about statistical analysis. |
Anonymous
Those with lower rematches would be preferable to those with higher rematch rates. So simple. 
|
Anonymous
I don't know, I kind of see your point, but on the other hand, if an agency did have a really low rematch rate compared to others, it's likely they were doing SOMETHING right - whether it be having higher quality APs that were less likely to bomb, preparing APs & HFs better and helping them match using effective methods, filtering out terrible HPs, better LCCs that work closely with the girls to ensure they make friends and get the most out of their year or successfully stay on top of AP/HF relationships to mediate effectively when things go wrong.... There are 3 primary reasons re-matches occur : Unqualified APs, Unwelcoming/Kind HFs, Incorrect expectations (on either side). If an agency can successfully minimize those big 3, then their rematch rate would presumably be lower, and they would therefore be 'better'. Same like EHarmony can make claims as to why they are more successful than other dating sites (no clue if this is actually true) using their 17 points of compatibility or whatever. |
Anonymous
I don't think this is the case. I'm thinking about our AP's friend who wasn't happy with her family. It just wasn't a great fit. If our LCC had told her to stick with teh family, that she was unlikely to otherwise find a family and therefore would have been sent home, and that she was over-reacting because nothing is perfect ever, it's very likely she would have stayed with the family, because we live in a great town, she had access to good transportation (not a car but good trains), and she had a lot of friends. But, because our LCC told her she was an excellent candidate, that with six months left she would likely find another family, and that the LCC would herself support the AP and try to find her a new family, she ended up in rematch. Let's say that the LCC brings the same thoughtful, caring approach to working with, I don't know, say 5 of her other APs this year. So out of her 40 APs, 6 go to rematch when maybe they could have stayed if she had pressured them to, and 4 go to rematch because that is the only option (family insists, etc). So now LCC has a 1/4 rematch rate. She could have had a 1/10 rematch rate, but the 6 APs who would have stuck it out would not have had as great a year. Is this really a preferable thing? I think you're trying to reduce a complicated situation to a basic formula, and that is really simplistic and reductive and won't get you the info you really want. |
Anonymous
|
Agencies can make up all the excuses they want to, but nothing can explain why they're hiding their rematch rates. Potential clients, the parents MUST demand these numbers in order to be INFORMED consumers of child care services. Children are at risk here. |
Anonymous
CCAP. I think families like yours (habitual rematchers) are what carries the bulk of the load when it comes to rematches. We didn't even start on APS until our youngest was in pre-k 5 days a week. I thought having a consistent and mature professional caregiver during their early years critical. Even THE BEST AP is with you at most 2yrs. APs are understandably not interested in families like yours so you are not getting the cream of the crop, hence the lower quality candidates and a high (50%!) Turn over rate. |
Anonymous
First lets not name call. I am not a habitual rematcher. Most happened early in my hosting history when i was not exlerienced and used an agency with a pool poorly suited to my needs. Second the cream of the crop, i.e. those who truly love kids, and love large warm families, are very interested in a family like mine. Since I had my fourth child i had no rematches. And i have no problem finding enough candidates who want to talk to me out of the ones i am interested in, and i am picky. Two of my au pairs were preschool teachers with two or more years of full time work experience. On the other hand one could argue that an easy gig like yours can attract greedy opportunists who have no interest in kids and want to minimize interaction with them. And lets not judge each other's mothering choices. Consistent caregiver when young may be best for you, but it doesn't mean others are bad moms. The best consistency is a stay at home mom but it looks like you also chose to work when your kids were young. |
Anonymous
That seems astronomical to me. |
Anonymous
New poster, but a 50% rematch rate seems pretty habitual to me. Not name calling, just an adjective. |
Anonymous
| I've seen successful and unsuccessful matches with all agencies. The more important factors are realistic expectations, communication and commitment from both the APs and the HFs. While Area directors may be able to mediate or facilitate a re-match, they are not ultimately responsible for a successful or a failed match. I've had four APs, no re-matches, but every year has a different set of challenges which we address. |
Anonymous
Exactly. |