OP, Kensington MB here. Your rate is perfectly fine - in fact, you should have your pick of several relatively experienced nannies who have at least some level of English.

I would be concerned about the language barrier. It is tricky to manage the employer/employee dynamics - especially when trying to discuss parental preferences/beliefs/philosophies about feeding, scheduling, discipline, activity, behavior, etc... I think you may find the language barrier to be a much more important issue than you realize. Our nanny is fairly fluent in English and we don't have any trouble in person, but on the phone - especially if she's stressed in any way - it gets significantly harder. So if she has to call me when a child is sick, it's a good deal more difficult to manage that conversation (just a for instance).

Anyway, good luck but don't feel that you cannot find an english speaking nanny at that price point.

What do your friends (or their friends) pay her?

OP - i think it's a great rate for location and for 50 hrs a week considering she speaks no english. that's a huge handicap.
I would make sure you are really fluent though - our nanny speaks very good English but we still end up with communication issues occassionally. there are just so many little things so think carefully about how good your Spanish is if it is all you have to rely on.

Anonymous wrote:
I agree with 18:14 on the English. Speech therapy is now common place. Two languages are supposed to be wonderful, but for many children with the non-English speaking sitter, it's not turning out so well.


This is garbage. There is no connection between being bilingual and needing speech therapy. This crazy poster keeps trying to suggest a connection, but there is none.

Why?

Why does the crazy poster insist on posting about a connection between bilingualism and speech therapy that doesn't exist? I have no idea.

Why is there not a connection between the two? Well, that isn't how language acquisition works and speech therapy doesn't mean what crazy poster thinks it does.

It's pretty simple, really.

For someone who doesn't speak English, what you are paying her is a a great rate. I don't agree with you paying her under the table for overtime. You need to be paying her overtime legally as well.

I would be concerned about what would happen if there were an emergency and you could not be reached.

*actually

Anonymous wrote:I agree with 18:14 on the English. Speech therapy is now common place. Two languages are supposed to be wonderful, but for many children with the non-English speaking sitter, it's not turning out so well.

One of my former MBs has a Yale PhD in Spanish and French. It was actuall her who told me that most parents would be utterly horrified if they knew the level of Spanish their children were getting.

I do not have a degree in Spanish or French, and I don't need one to know that when you speak to a little child in two languages in every sentence, you're setting the stage for problems down the road. Do you?

Btw, I am bilingual. Are you? Why are you so touchy about this, PP?

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with 18:14 on the English. Speech therapy is now common place. Two languages are supposed to be wonderful, but for many children with the non-English speaking sitter, it's not turning out so well.

This is garbage. There is no connection between being bilingual and needing speech therapy. This crazy poster keeps trying to suggest a connection, but there is none.

Why?

I agree with 18:14 on the English. Speech therapy is now common place. Two languages are supposed to be wonderful, but for many children with the non-English speaking sitter, it's not turning out so well.

This is garbage. There is no connection between being bilingual and needing speech therapy. This crazy poster keeps trying to suggest a connection, but there is none.

I agree with 18:14 on the English. Speech therapy is now common place. Two languages are supposed to be wonderful, but for many children with the non-English speaking sitter, it's not turning out so well.

OP here. Thanks for the replies. She is legal and we were planning on paying the first 40 hours on the books and then pay her for any hours over 40 under the table at the 15$/hour rate. As for the language issue, we can definitely communicate in an emergency, both my husband and I have lived in spanish speaking countries--just some of the money/tax talk gets difficult.

Is $15 the base rate for the first 40 hours, followed by $22.50 per hour for the remaining 10 hours you need? Or is $15 the average rate? On the books or under the table?

Quite frankly, I think you're making a huge mistake by hiring someone who doesn't speak English while you speak enough Spanish "to get by." I wouldn't want to put my children in a situation like that. What if there was an emergency?

If you're paying under the table to some illegal, well...you get what you get. smh.

If she accepts, she'll either be happy with it, or continue to keep her eyes open for something better.

We are in Kensington and pay our nanny $17 an hour for an infant and a toddler. So $15 is not unreasonable at all.

Hi,
We are working on hiring a nanny who was referred through a friend for our (not yet born) newborn. She has worked as a nanny for >10 years and has good references, but doesn't speak any english. We speak enough spanish to get by, so this is not a huge obstacle but does make things a little more difficult. We are planning on paying her $15/hour. She seems to not think this is very much, but for about 50 hrs/week we really cannot do much more. Is this a reasonable rate? I want to be fair to her, but also not get ourselves into a situation that is not sustainable.