MB told me she didn't want an overweight nanny

[Anonymous]

I was hired 18 months ago. The conversation came up of other nannies she interviewed, and she mentioned I was one of the few who wasn't overweight. She jokingly self proclaimed her and DB as "fatist" and said they wanted someone who would model good eating habits for NKs. First of all, I don't eat that healthily. She just assumes because I'm thinner. Secondly, isn't that discrimination? What happens if I gain weight, am I gone? Did I only get hired based on my physical appearance? Not my own merits? The whole conversation rubbed me the wrong way, like I'm not going to be bothered by her and DB making jokes about overweight people. Neither of them are obsessed with looks, but both seem to have body issues (I'm pretty sure DB has an eating disorder and MB started obsessively trying to the baby weight a week after her C-Section). I'm concerned of what this attitude will do to the kids. DB brought up LO's weight to the doctor when she was six-months-old and once when I came back to work from a stomach virus she awed over how skinny I looked. I love this family, except for the body comments.

[Anonymous]

Wow, they sound just lovely. Not.

[Anonymous]

First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?

I understand that, and I hired twice based on the nannies' self reports of good health and an active lifestyle despite them being significantly overwieght. They were young, and references attested to their activity level. But in both cases, the health issues started soon after hiring and never let up. Since I can't go by anything besides references and the nanny herself, and I would feel too shitty to fire someone just because she has some health challenges, I am not taking that chance again next time.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, I don't think there's much you can do about this but try to model good eating habits and body image with the kids and put an immediate stop to any language or attitudes you hear from them that are not healthy or appropriate in your opinion, even if it's allowed around their parents.

You can't change the parents, and sadly, this is probably going to impact the kids in the future, but you can refuse to be a part of these discussions with the MB and DB (kindly change the subject or nicely point out a contradiction, but just refuse to be drawn into a conversation you don't want to be a part of), and be a strong voice of healthy body image and eating for the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?

I understand that, and I hired twice based on the nannies' self reports of good health and an active lifestyle despite them being significantly overwieght. They were young, and references attested to their activity level. But in both cases, the health issues started soon after hiring and never let up. Since I can't go by anything besides references and the nanny herself, and I would feel too shitty to fire someone just because she has some health challenges, I am not taking that chance again next time.

What we are telling you is that you are asking the wrong questions. Instead of asking the nanny how active she is, ask the former employers whether the nanny used all of her sick days. Ask them what kinds of activities she did with the children. Ask how active they are as a family.

I am sort of in-between (size 20 and 235 lbs which is not quite fat enough that employers assume I will feed the kids nothing but cheetos but fat enough that nonone worries about me f-ing their husband). I feed the kids made-from scratch healthy whole-food plant-based hippy food diet. I take them outside in all weather and I currently tandem babywear twin 18mos on the hike back from most of our outings (I don't use strollers because I want them to walk as much as they can). I have used two sick days since I started 18 months ago, one for food poisoning and one for a virus I caught at work. If you asked my references about my stamina, activity level, need for sick days, and ability to model healthy eating they would gladly go on and on about how well I do in those areas. Oh, and I am in my 30's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?

I understand that, and I hired twice based on the nannies' self reports of good health and an active lifestyle despite them being significantly overwieght. They were young, and references attested to their activity level. But in both cases, the health issues started soon after hiring and never let up. Since I can't go by anything besides references and the nanny herself, and I would feel too shitty to fire someone just because she has some health challenges, I am not taking that chance again next time.

What we are telling you is that you are asking the wrong questions. Instead of asking the nanny how active she is, ask the former employers whether the nanny used all of her sick days. Ask them what kinds of activities she did with the children. Ask how active they are as a family.

I am sort of in-between (size 20 and 235 lbs which is not quite fat enough that employers assume I will feed the kids nothing but cheetos but fat enough that nonone worries about me f-ing their husband). I feed the kids made-from scratch healthy whole-food plant-based hippy food diet. I take them outside in all weather and I currently tandem babywear twin 18mos on the hike back from most of our outings (I don't use strollers because I want them to walk as much as they can). I have used two sick days since I started 18 months ago, one for food poisoning and one for a virus I caught at work. If you asked my references about my stamina, activity level, need for sick days, and ability to model healthy eating they would gladly go on and on about how well I do in those areas. Oh, and I am in my 30's.

If you are a size 20, you are significantly smaller than my current nanny. The first one was probably about that size. Their references were all glowing. Perhaps my mistake was hiring young nannies. If they were older, those health problems would have already developed.

[Anonymous]

This is just anecdotal but there are two nannies who bring their charges to a sensory class wher I bring my daughter. One nanny is young and thin and she just sits while her charge plays. The other nanny is older and overweight and she is up, dancing and engaging her charge as well as the other little kids!!


I'd hire the older, overweight nanny in a hot New York minute!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is just anecdotal but there are two nannies who bring their charges to a sensory class wher I bring my daughter. One nanny is young and thin and she just sits while her charge plays. The other nanny is older and overweight and she is up, dancing and engaging her charge as well as the other little kids!!


I'd hire the older, overweight nanny in a hot New York minute!!

You've had the chance to observe her over time. I also note that she's older, too.

The problem is that we have to make these decisions based on people we've just met. I've had this happen twice now, and it's hardly unusual that significantly overweight women might develop weight-related health issues. I would not hire another young woman with limited experience (due to being in her early twenties) who is significantly overweight. If she is older, I would ask a lot more questions of her references, which might make them call her and say I'm asking personal questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?

I understand that, and I hired twice based on the nannies' self reports of good health and an active lifestyle despite them being significantly overwieght. They were young, and references attested to their activity level. But in both cases, the health issues started soon after hiring and never let up. Since I can't go by anything besides references and the nanny herself, and I would feel too shitty to fire someone just because she has some health challenges, I am not taking that chance again next time.

What we are telling you is that you are asking the wrong questions. Instead of asking the nanny how active she is, ask the former employers whether the nanny used all of her sick days. Ask them what kinds of activities she did with the children. Ask how active they are as a family.

I am sort of in-between (size 20 and 235 lbs which is not quite fat enough that employers assume I will feed the kids nothing but cheetos but fat enough that nonone worries about me f-ing their husband). I feed the kids made-from scratch healthy whole-food plant-based hippy food diet. I take them outside in all weather and I currently tandem babywear twin 18mos on the hike back from most of our outings (I don't use strollers because I want them to walk as much as they can). I have used two sick days since I started 18 months ago, one for food poisoning and one for a virus I caught at work. If you asked my references about my stamina, activity level, need for sick days, and ability to model healthy eating they would gladly go on and on about how well I do in those areas. Oh, and I am in my 30's.

If you are a size 20, you are significantly smaller than my current nanny. The first one was probably about that size. Their references were all glowing. Perhaps my mistake was hiring young nannies. If they were older, those health problems would have already developed.

References are almost always going to be glowing. If the family didn't enjoy working with the nanny, she wouldn't be using them as a reference. My point is that you need to ask about activity level and number of sick days specifically and in detail if that is important to you. You need to be asking about this regardless of the size of our nanny. If it is important to you that your kids have an active caregiver who can keep up with them, you should be asking the family about whether the nanny is that kind of person with no charges whether she is a size 2 marathoner wear a size 32 crochet enthusiast. It is not the size or the age of the nanny that determines whether this is an issue, it is the needs of the family. If you need someone reliable and active, then you should be asking her previous employers detailed questions about how reliable and active she is, not just whether they liked her and whether she seemed nice.

[Anonymous]

Avoid the fats

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?

I understand that, and I hired twice based on the nannies' self reports of good health and an active lifestyle despite them being significantly overwieght. They were young, and references attested to their activity level. But in both cases, the health issues started soon after hiring and never let up. Since I can't go by anything besides references and the nanny herself, and I would feel too shitty to fire someone just because she has some health challenges, I am not taking that chance again next time.

What we are telling you is that you are asking the wrong questions. Instead of asking the nanny how active she is, ask the former employers whether the nanny used all of her sick days. Ask them what kinds of activities she did with the children. Ask how active they are as a family.

I am sort of in-between (size 20 and 235 lbs which is not quite fat enough that employers assume I will feed the kids nothing but cheetos but fat enough that nonone worries about me f-ing their husband). I feed the kids made-from scratch healthy whole-food plant-based hippy food diet. I take them outside in all weather and I currently tandem babywear twin 18mos on the hike back from most of our outings (I don't use strollers because I want them to walk as much as they can). I have used two sick days since I started 18 months ago, one for food poisoning and one for a virus I caught at work. If you asked my references about my stamina, activity level, need for sick days, and ability to model healthy eating they would gladly go on and on about how well I do in those areas. Oh, and I am in my 30's.

Gee, i'm the PP who said weight isn't a good predictor, but you could be me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

I have a BMI of 19.5 and despite being thin, I have been off sick for 7 weeks in the last 12 months due to various medical conditions. OTOH, my overweight colleagues didn't have to take a single day off work for ill health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, nannies are not covered by anti-discrimination law. Know your rights, and know which ones you don't have. Employers with fewer than 15 employees are not required to follow federal anti-discrimination laws. Some states have lower limits, but the lowest I know of is 5 employees.

Second, weight is not a covered category, even if anti-discrimination law did apply.

Third, we have had two young, very overweight nannies (early 20s). Both were active, and appeared healthy. Bot h had ongoing, chronic and acute health problems related to their weight that resulted in a lot of time off for doctors' appointments and A LOT of days of "not feeling well" related to their conditions and joint and back issues. These are young women, and they are having many of the issues my menopausal friends relate (though my friends are healthier, frankly).


You can't blame your Genes for being overweight, it's not genetic. Eating salad ,drinking smoothies won't make you thin. You have to do weight training and eating right at right time is important. For me overweight is excuse not disease.

Our current nanny has been with us for three years. We are now encountering activities she can't participate in with them because of her weight (a ropes course is the most recent example).

So, in the future, I would hire someone with a little extra weight, but I will not hire a substantially overweight nanny again. It's like the mental health thread; I am not allowed by dictates of being a kind, trusting, and pleasant employer to ask nanny candidates to undergo a physical or do regular drug testing. That would be considered invasive. So, I am going to err on the side of hiring someone who looks like she's as active as she tells me she is in her interview.

Sometimes looks aren't predictors. I am very overweight due to genetics. I eat a salad for lunch/dinner, smoothie with fruits and vegetables for breakfast. Not only am I capable of running around and doing things with kids, I am strong enough to carry kids long distances in an emergency (my personal opinion is that any nanny should be able to carry their unconscious charge out of the house, at the minimum, and that if she takes them hiking, she should able to carry them down). All of the ropes courses I have done had a high weight cut off, something around 300 or 350, but the true test was whether the person could buck the belt correctly (I can). Why would you not ask references for examples of what the nanny did with their children and whether there were any issues that precluded her joining in? Weight isn't the only thing that could keep a nanny on the ground at a ropes course, there are a number of other issues that would do the same thing (fear of heights, high blood pressure resulting in dizziness, laziness, disinterest in physical activity, etc.)?