Instead of a raise... Is this unreasonable?

[Anonymous]

Nanny has been with us 5 years, and is now making $22/hour for nearly 50 hours a week - we started her at $18/hour and have given $1/ hour raise every year. This is the year the youngest goes to FT school - 7:30 to 3:30 (includes a bus ride). We realize we can't cut her hours to part time because we need her for vacation and sick days, and so we are willing to keep her on as long as she takes on additional tasks (errands, shopping, cooking, laundry). However, it feels outrageous to pay over $50k/year for someone to sit around for 7 hours a day most days (we can't possibly give her enough to fill that time). So this year instead of a raise we are proposing to keep her pay the same and reduce her hours (probably give her one morning a week she can come 2.5 hours later), so she is getting a raise in her hourly rate but not a raise in overall pay (but also not a reduction).

Is this unreasonable? She is unhappy about it, but it seems fair to me. I doubt she could find another job that pays her over $1000 a week so fast, and we could probably find someone who was happy for $20/hour for 40 hours a week with OT when kids are off, and save ourselves $200/week. So I feel like we are trying to do right by her by not firing her or cutting her hours/salary, but she doesn't see it that way.

[Anonymous]

Seems fairly reasonable to me, but why the 2,5 hours? Why not give her the whole morning off until 2pm or whenever she needs to start lunch/pick up the kids? Presumably with so much time each morning she can accomplish all the tasks?

Or does she object to the new tasks and not the money?

[Anonymous]

Would you be happy if your boss did this to you? Big deal to come 2.5 hours later one day a week! You are just being cheap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would you be happy if your boss did this to you? Big deal to come 2.5 hours later one day a week! You are just being cheap.

NP here, but if my organization's needs changed, I could either take or leave the new proposal. I am a former nanny, and would have felt this situation was more than fair and very generous. The alternative would be for them to fire me and hire a part-time nanny, which is all they actually need.

[Anonymous]

I think her job has run it's course and it feels like charity to me. However, if you want the stability for 1 more year, I think keeping pay constant is more than fair (many employers don't give annual pay raises)

However, you are eventually going to switch to a new childcare solution soon, so why not start looking for alternatives now.

Your situation is perfect for an AuPair- much cheaper, flexible, and you have hours left over for a date night and a weekend here or there.

Or there are usually college girls eager for a 3-7pm after school gig. They can also work on school breaks.

[Anonymous]

It's not unreasonable, but you can't make her see it that way. She's now going to be unhappy and dissatisfaction will probably start coloring how she feels about her job and how she performs. If I were in your position and she wasn't happy about the proposed change, I'd start looking into alternate care options.

There are many nannies on DCUM who only want to do childcare and are not interested in keeping a job longer by transitioning into taking on other tasks as the kids get older. It sounds like your nanny is one of them, so let her go find a new family in need of infant care and OT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not unreasonable, but you can't make her see it that way. She's now going to be unhappy and dissatisfaction will probably start coloring how she feels about her job and how she performs. If I were in your position and she wasn't happy about the proposed change, I'd start looking into alternate care options.

There are many nannies on DCUM who only want to do childcare and are not interested in keeping a job longer by transitioning into taking on other tasks as the kids get older. It sounds like your nanny is one of them, so let her go find a new family in need of infant care and OT.

I think the 2.5 hours is not enough. Give her a real half day so she could conceivably take a class at the gym or go out for coffee and still wake up late. Or, if you add up all of those 2.5 hours, you get 16 8-hour days. Maybe double her PTO (or give her an extra week); something she can really use.

Or, if she's really not happy, let her go. I think it's fair to tell her you've reached the top of your pay scale, and this is the way it will be going forward, and let her decide what to you.

[Anonymous]

OP please ignore any snarky nannies commenting. When children start going to school the nanny position goes into a family assistant role and yes household duties are added. Perhaps your nanny just wants to stay as nanny and your position is not looking good to her. Decide what your family needs as a whole and talk with your nanny about it. do get her input and choose what you will compromise and what you will not.

You really are being reasonable, your position is changing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems fairly reasonable to me, but why the 2,5 hours? Why not give her the whole morning off until 2pm or whenever she needs to start lunch/pick up the kids? Presumably with so much time each morning she can accomplish all the tasks?

Or does she object to the new tasks and not the money?

So keep paying nanny $50,000 a year but only ask her to work ~20 a week vs. the original 50? Win for the nanny, insanity for anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Why do you want to keep this nanny so bad? Why are you paying her so much? Are you kids special needs? Is she Mary Poppins?

[Anonymous]

I was with a family for 7 years. Once the kids started school full time I didnt get a raise but i was ok with that because was basically off 6 hours a day. Yes there were days that a kid was sick, but not many. I still got paid my full time salary for working 5 hours a day.