Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was hired with no nanny experience, but with lots of experience with children of all ages (at a daycare).

I mean, I need to start somewhere.

Everybody has a first hire, I was hired without experience 11 years ago too. But I'm much more interested in what parents' impressions of novice vs experienced nannies are.

I'm the one near the top who said I hired someone without experience as a nanny. She had a lot of experience being around kids, has a genuine interest, is open to discussion, happy to research issues that come up, etc. There was a nanny on here a week or so ago saying she wanted a baby to cry it out and kept claiming HER way was THE way to raise a baby into a good person, and seemed very resistant when others posted perhaps the mother didn't want the baby crying it out. My nanny is not so rigid in her ways that she is closed to various ways of doing things. So I can say to her, "Would you research half a dozen toys that aren't plastic or character-based for DD's age-range?" and she will do it and when I come home there will be a list waiting for me. She won't just say, "Oh, every toddler I've worked with has had this Disney thing; get that" and then get upset when I don't get it. When I said something during the newborn stage about not being sure if the baby was still hungry, she suggested sticking my knuckle in the baby's mouth to see if she sucked. DH did not want that done, so she figured out a different way and was pleasant about it. This is why I'm happy having someone without specific nanny experience. No ego based on experience, happy to brainstorm and really work WITH us.

I like an experienced nanny who can dive right in without a lot of direction. It makes it easier on me

It is more about attitude than anything else. But I would say mid-level experience and age are often best. One nanny I had was a grandmother, lots of experience, very set in her ways, thought she knew more than me, and had a lot of attitude. Next I had someone very young with a little experience. She had a hard time learning and really understanding what it meant to be a nanny, as opposed to a babysitter. She was fun with the kids, but it took a long time for her to learn the basics, and she had no interest in cleaning up after the kids, doing laundry, and the less "fun" parts of watching children. I found someone in the middle, and she was best (7 years experience, still young and energetic). But a lot I think was personality in general. If the young one had a better work ethic, or the grandmother had less attitude. I know people who have great older, experienced nannies, and I know others with great au pairs who are young and pretty inexperienced.

Anonymous wrote:I was hired with no nanny experience, but with lots of experience with children of all ages (at a daycare).

I mean, I need to start somewhere.

Everybody has a first hire, I was hired without experience 11 years ago too. But I'm much more interested in what parents' impressions of novice vs experienced nannies are.

I was hired with no nanny experience, but with lots of experience with children of all ages (at a daycare).

I mean, I need to start somewhere.

Would depend on the age of my kids. For a baby, I really wanted someone with some experience with infants. I think I'd be comfortable hiring someone with no or limited experience for an older child, if he or she really clicked with my child.

I had twins, so that made what I was looking for pretty specific. I definitely wanted someone w/ experience w/ twins, at the infant stage, for WOHMs etc... I knew I needed someone who would understand the work involved and also would have figured out smart ways to manage two at once.

So significant experience was critical for me, in a way that perhaps I wouldn't have felt as strongly about if I only had one child.

More is not better after several years and too many nannies who have simply been nannies for a long time don't realize this. If you have 5-7 years experience, a past job that lasted for 3+ years, experience with infants and preschoolers, good driving record, and great references and no reference gaps you are just (and perhaps more if they have job gaps or lots of only 1-2 positions) attractive as a nanny who has 7-15 years experience. Nannies who have 20 years experience are only attractive to employers who want this type of nanny. Some employers may not want someone who is more set in their ways or who may have an attitude because they have been doing this too long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hired someone who'd never worked as a nanny before at all over other candidates who had between 2 and 9 years of experience.

Why? I hope you made the right choice. Why did she nanny to begin with? Was it her 'fall on, back up' job ? lOl. She must have been one hell of a nanny wannabe if you choose her..with experience!

Because we clicked, DH and I both liked how she was with the baby, and the baby was comfortable with her. She bartends and cut back her shifts significantly when she started working for us full time.

PP here. WITHOUT experience*

Anonymous wrote:I hired someone who'd never worked as a nanny before at all over other candidates who had between 2 and 9 years of experience.

Why? I hope you made the right choice. Why did she nanny to begin with? Was it her 'fall on, back up' job ? lOl. She must have been one hell of a nanny wannabe if you choose her..with experience!

I think this is a fascinating question....

I would say this is a personal choice.

Personality and chemistry most definitely take precedence in this profession.

If I had one nanny candidate who had 5+yrs of childcare experience, but my children or I didn't really mesh w/her, I would keep looking.

However, it would be kinda tricky to consider someone just starting out no matter how nice and competent she seemed since I wouldn't know if she was truly dedicated or not.

It's a tough call.

I hired someone who'd never worked as a nanny before at all over other candidates who had between 2 and 9 years of experience.

Is more always better?