OP here. I respect all of the opinions submitted in response to my original comment. I acknowledge that this is none of my business, and I won't comment again on this topic.

Having said that, I stand by my original comment, which was directed at what I've observed to be wages paid to nannies that are NOT live-ins. (I completely understand that live-ins are in a different category because room and board is paid.)

I looked at the web site posted above that sets forth the rules for these nannies. According to those rules, the employers must pay AT LEAST the applicable minimum wage (which I understand to be approximately $7.25 per hour.) It does NOT prohibit the employer from paying more than that.

The WB/IMF is paying its employees a wage that allows them to live decently in this high-cost-of-living area. If the nanny is not living with the employer (as is often the case in my neighborhood), then the nanny must somehow pay rent and food etc, in this high-cost-of-living area. I would figure that someone who is dedicated to the mission of the WB/IMF would want to pay their nanny a living wage so that she can get by in this high-cost-of-living area.

I saw a PP mention that the low pay for these nannies reflects their type of visa, which limits their options to working for foreign families. To me, that seems like all the more reason to pay the non-live-in nanny a living wage. After all, their only option is to work for one of these foreign families. The nannies still need to pay expenses in the DC area, which is hard to do when paid $7.25 per hour ($300/week for 40 hours).

Thank you for your time.

You have no clue about IMF\World Bank contracts and nannies benefits so mind your own business. Really.

Clearly, OP, you and your "mother hen" nanny should mind your own business.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Most of these nannies are here on specialized visas authorized only for World Bank employees and these workers are not eligible to work legally in the regular market. Their pay is a reflection of their special work visa status."

This is it. Plus that many of the NFs are from other countries that normally pay domestic staff VERY little. It is not the same market as the market for those allowed to work here freely / for any family.

And more to the point, the option for families who are concerned about the pay is not to raise the rate, which they aren't legally allowed to do--it's to choose to use another caregiver not subject to these restrictions, or switch to the WB/IMF daycare centers (and I do have friends who've gone both routes). Neither choice helps the nanny on the special visa, who typically would need to return to her home country or find work with another WB family at the same low rate. It's a much bigger issue than the individual employee-family agreements.

I wouldn't say the G-5 program is now completely without abuse today. However, guidelines are pretty stringent now.

Here is the guidance from the State Department:

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87174.pdf

Here is the info. on the World Bank external website about the minimum requirements and that abuse can be reported to the WB ethics office:

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTABOUTUS/ORGANIZATION/ORGUNITS/EXTETHICS/0,,contentMDK:20680361~menuPK:781299~pagePK:64168445~piPK:64168309~theSitePK:593304~isCURL:Y,00.html

Anonymous wrote:"Most of these nannies are here on specialized visas authorized only for World Bank employees and these workers are not eligible to work legally in the regular market. Their pay is a reflection of their special work visa status."

This is it. Plus that many of the NFs are from other countries that normally pay domestic staff VERY little. It is not the same market as the market for those allowed to work here freely / for any family.

And more to the point, the option for families who are concerned about the pay is not to raise the rate, which they aren't legally allowed to do--it's to choose to use another caregiver not subject to these restrictions, or switch to the WB/IMF daycare centers (and I do have friends who've gone both routes). Neither choice helps the nanny on the special visa, who typically would need to return to her home country or find work with another WB family at the same low rate. It's a much bigger issue than the individual employee-family agreements.

"Most of these nannies are here on specialized visas authorized only for World Bank employees and these workers are not eligible to work legally in the regular market. Their pay is a reflection of their special work visa status."

This is it. Plus that many of the NFs are from other countries that normally pay domestic staff VERY little. It is not the same market as the market for those allowed to work here freely / for any family.

Also consider that most of these nannies get room and board in addition to their salaries.

Anonymous wrote:These nannies are strictly regulated by the State Department and WB/IMF, there is a minimum wage standard issued by the state dept. What you understand is a living wage is just that - your understanding, NFs go by what the US gov't requires of them or else they cannot be an employer of a nanny.

Paid vacation is not legally required for domestic or foreign nannies.

Sometimes what is legal is not moral. OP is talking about what is moral.

Anonymous wrote:Assuming their nannies are adults and not children, why don't you mind your own business? Adult women are perfectly able to advocate for themselves. Obviously whatever their salaries are they are able to support themselves, I'm sure they aren't homeless nannies. And finally, to be fair, the absurd wages spouted on this website of $15-25 is not a fair price for a nanny, I'm sure many a nanny would love those wages, but truth be told nannies is a low skill, uneducated job that should be paid in the $10 an hour range. Of course if a wealthy family wants to pay more for someone with skills from another industry (teaching, nursing, etc) to take care of their precious child then they can, but it is by no means the norm.

PP is helping, or at least trying too. You are not. You have what you have because other people fought for your rights, because they didn't mind heir own business. That is true no matter what your background.

Most of these nannies are here on specialized visas authorized only for World Bank employees and these workers are not eligible to work legally in the regular market. Their pay is a reflection of their special work visa status.

Anonymous wrote:Assuming their nannies are adults and not children, why don't you mind your own business? Adult women are perfectly able to advocate for themselves. Obviously whatever their salaries are they are able to support themselves, I'm sure they aren't homeless nannies. And finally, to be fair, the absurd wages spouted on this website of $15-25 is not a fair price for a nanny, I'm sure many a nanny would love those wages, but truth be told nannies is a low skill, uneducated job that should be paid in the $10 an hour range. Of course if a wealthy family wants to pay more for someone with skills from another industry (teaching, nursing, etc) to take care of their precious child then they can, but it is by no means the norm.

Piss off please.

I don't understand why you are getting so involved and it is odd to me that your nanny is involving you. As a PP said, these are grown adults, why can't they figure this out for themselves?

These nannies are strictly regulated by the State Department and WB/IMF, there is a minimum wage standard issued by the state dept. What you understand is a living wage is just that - your understanding, NFs go by what the US gov't requires of them or else they cannot be an employer of a nanny.

Paid vacation is not legally required for domestic or foreign nannies.

Assuming their nannies are adults and not children, why don't you mind your own business? Adult women are perfectly able to advocate for themselves. Obviously whatever their salaries are they are able to support themselves, I'm sure they aren't homeless nannies. And finally, to be fair, the absurd wages spouted on this website of $15-25 is not a fair price for a nanny, I'm sure many a nanny would love those wages, but truth be told nannies is a low skill, uneducated job that should be paid in the $10 an hour range. Of course if a wealthy family wants to pay more for someone with skills from another industry (teaching, nursing, etc) to take care of their precious child then they can, but it is by no means the norm.

I live in Bethesda where I enjoy having many World Bank/IMF families as neighbors. They are all lovely people.

Over the past 10 years, our nanny has gotten well-acquainted with many of the nannies for the World Bank/IMF families. She's enjoyed doing playdates at the park with them, etc. She is something of a mother hen to them.

Our nanny occasionally asks me for advice on compensation issues relating to her friends who are nannies for World Bank/IMF families. I've noticed that many of these World Bank/IMF families pay very low hourly rates (sometimes a fair bit less than $10 per hour) to care for 1-2 small children, cook, and clean. The jobs at the World Bank/IMF seem very demanding, and so the nannies are working long hours. Also, when these families visit their home countries, they seem NOT to pay their nannies for the 3 weeks that they are gone, even though the World Bank/IMF is paying them while they are on vacation.

The advice I have given our nanny (to share with her nanny friends on a confidential basis) has been for these nannies to stand up for themselves by asking, for example, to be paid while their employer is on vacation. But this is easier said than done. Many of these ladies seem to just accept whatever the employer gives them, perhaps because that is their culture or because they don't want to rock the boat at all.

I had figured that these World Bank/IMF employees were well-educated and progressive and would support the mission of the World Bank/IMF -- helping the poor. I hope that they'll consider paying a living wage, which I understand to be about $13 per hour in Montgomery County. Also, I hope that they will not wait for their nanny to advocate for herself.