Anonymous wrote:900 for 3 is more than enough and you don't need super nanny for 3 toddlers. The 2.5 year old will probably in preschool in another 6 months to a year. You do need to avoid hiring the lazy types that frequent this board expecting to spend the morning shopping at the mall, chatting on their phone or to other nannies in the park all morning followed by doing nothing for 2-4 hours during afternoon nap time.

You decided to open that can of worms eh?

Anonymous wrote:900 for 3 is more than enough and you don't need super nanny for 3 toddlers. The 2.5 year old will probably in preschool in another 6 months to a year. You do need to avoid hiring the lazy types that frequent this board expecting to spend the morning shopping at the mall, chatting on their phone or to other nannies in the park all morning followed by doing nothing for 2-4 hours during afternoon nap time.

You're right. I forgot to mention that my 2.5 yo is starting preschool in September.

900 for 3 is more than enough and you don't need super nanny for 3 toddlers. The 2.5 year old will probably in preschool in another 6 months to a year. You do need to avoid hiring the lazy types that frequent this board expecting to spend the morning shopping at the mall, chatting on their phone or to other nannies in the park all morning followed by doing nothing for 2-4 hours during afternoon nap time.

My budget for wages, taxes, and health care payments for the nanny is $4,100/month. Are you saying that I should be vigilant about previous experience and references or that I should scrap my plan and come up with a new one? Either way, help.

Anonymous wrote:OP you are getting terrible advice. A $925 starting salary is very high even for 3 under 3. No one pays $17 for one toddler. When you advertise you should seek a nanny who has worked with multiples or shares. With a $925 a week starting salary every nanny will be drooling to get the job and not consider whether they can actually handle the job.

Give OP your email so she can consider you (among countless others), for the job. We wish you the very best of luck at your interview.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are getting terrible advice. A $925 starting salary is very high even for 3 under 3. No one pays $17 for one toddler. When you advertise you should seek a nanny who has worked with multiples or shares. With a $925 a week starting salary every nanny will be drooling to get the job and not consider whether they can actually handle the job.

It may be a high starting salary, but only because it is really long hours. $17/hour for 3 under 3 is low and you know it. $17/hour is a good rate for 2, but for 3 under 3 including a set of young toddler twins it is low. Yes $925 will attract nannies no doubt. Will it attract a nanny with the experience and expertise you need? Likely not. Just take a look at the threads about 3 baby shares. It's a lot of work and the nannies with the experience wouldn't do it again for less than $X/hour.

This is right on point.

Anonymous wrote:OP you are getting terrible advice. A $925 starting salary is very high even for 3 under 3. No one pays $17 for one toddler. When you advertise you should seek a nanny who has worked with multiples or shares. With a $925 a week starting salary every nanny will be drooling to get the job and not consider whether they can actually handle the job.

It may be a high starting salary, but only because it is really long hours. $17/hour for 3 under 3 is low and you know it. $17/hour is a good rate for 2, but for 3 under 3 including a set of young toddler twins it is low. Yes $925 will attract nannies no doubt. Will it attract a nanny with the experience and expertise you need? Likely not. Just take a look at the threads about 3 baby shares. It's a lot of work and the nannies with the experience wouldn't do it again for less than $X/hour.

OP you are getting terrible advice. A $925 starting salary is very high even for 3 under 3. No one pays $17 for one toddler. When you advertise you should seek a nanny who has worked with multiples or shares. With a $925 a week starting salary every nanny will be drooling to get the job and not consider whether they can actually handle the job.

$25 (at least) along with a stiff drink at the end of the day because man oh man that's a big job. lol

way too low. I have twins and an older child, but the spacing is three years apart. And that's hard as it is. I cannot imagine how difficult it is with a 2 year old and twin 1 year olds. I would never take this position unless it paid in the 20s.

17./hr would be just your toddler. Do you have any family or friends you can ask to help you? These children need to be loved by their caregiver.

I agree that you need a super nanny OP. $17 is on the low side, but may get you some candidates just not the best. If you're willing to hire a younger energetic and willing to learn nanny, $17 might be perfect. She'd need more guidance and training.

OP, don't you think you need super nanny? If you're thinking 17, I think you'll have a very tough road ahead. I would not imagine anything less than 23 for just the twins.

That amount seems on the low side to me. You can always run an ad with that figure and see what response you get.

I have a 2.5 yo and twin 1.5 yo kids. Is $17/hr for three kids on the high end, low end or the going rate? That would work out to $850/week for 50 hours.

Edit: I forgot to calculate OT, $935/wk.