Anonymous wrote:Can any parents share their experience with this sort of split workday or workweek?

OP again. Sorry, realized this sub-forum may not be the place to get parent responses, but would be interested in any nannies' perspectives too if you've done this kind of setup (as either the FT or PT nanny).

OP here. Thanks for all the input so far, especially the 55hr nanny's ideas! I think we'd be able to do all of those (except maybe the 5-6 weeks vacation... though we might be able to get close with visiting relatives). I think the thing that throws me off is that the most common reasons we've heard candidates say for leaving a current family are "need more hours" and legal issues like "they don't pay OT/give a W-2" (and we make it clear we pay on the books in the first interview). But in any case, we will consider raising the pay too. Just wanted to get a sense of what else would help.

The second nanny/babysitter idea had occurred to me before. Can any parents share their experience with this sort of split workday or workweek? Admittedly this is all uncharted territory for me, but my first thought was that a 10-15hr/wk position would be even less desirable or have higher turnover, and this could possibly create additional problems like inconsistencies between the two nannies' methods or routines, adding another transition to the day (kid goes from parent -> nanny 1 -> nanny 2 -> parent), and so on, which is why I'm trying to make a single nanny situation work.

I have a couple friends with 50 hr/week nannies and they pay $18/hr (in medium COL city). The both found their nannies through agencies.
The agencies recommended no more than 50hrs

You need to Up your base rate, OP. No one igood is going to work those hours without considerable pay off. Or think about covering medical insurance.

I would not consider San Diego a Medium COL city.

I'm in Portland and that rate is fine for this city especially if it's not 3-4 kids. The issue is the number of hours. Break it into a compresed work week...like 3x12 for one person and 2x12 for another (or whatever works for your candidates). If you are in Portland, I'll be looking soon and would consider this set up.

Anonymous wrote:$16 is not starting pay in a mid-range city (though may be starting pay for an educated English fluent nanny). But 55 hours a week is a lot. I agree to break it into two jobs - one full-time and one part-time. Or, as with everything, of course higher pay would make it more attractive too.

I live in Columbus, GA, which is a low COL city. Starting pay here is about $12-13/hr. This poster mentioned cities with much higher COL.

$16 is not starting pay in a mid-range city (though may be starting pay for an educated English fluent nanny). But 55 hours a week is a lot. I agree to break it into two jobs - one full-time and one part-time. Or, as with everything, of course higher pay would make it more attractive too.

Anonymous wrote:Or hire a babysitter for the last two hours of each day or one on a Friday evening so your nanny gets a half day.

+1 yes!

I work 55 hours a week. My hours are from 7 until 6pm, which gives me plenty of time for my own life.

Things that made this position attractive:
Pleasant, non micromanaging employers. They set the expectations, I meet them, but they don't tell me how and when to do things
I get around 5-6 weeks of PTO. It corresponds with the family, but they have no issues with me asking to leave early or a day off in addition
Direct deposit so I don't have to care about the bank
They're fine with me running simple errands during the day i.e. Getting stamps or going to the drug store as needed

If your job is long term that might appeal to more applicants. I'll be honest and say working 50+ hours a week is extremely draining, but it can be workable with the right outlook.

Nobody wants to work until 7 PM. When will they see their family?

Or hire a babysitter for the last two hours of each day or one on a Friday evening so your nanny gets a half day.

But to answer your question, higher pay will make this job more attractive to better nannies. There are always some people who need money more than time.

This is a very long workweek, and you want (or you say you want) and experienced nanny who will not quit. So, you've got two factors:

1) $16/hr is starting nanny pay, even in a mid-range city. For an experienced, mature nanny, there is no reason to take this lower pay for 55 hours a week when they could make the same money in a higher-paying job of fewer hours. The only person who is going to make that bargain is someone who is already looking at $15-$16/hr, and is excited about overtime at that rate.

2) 55 hours a week is a lot. It is pretty much the maximum anyone would recommend you try to schedule for one person. A lot of experienced nannies are just beyond the point where they want to work 11 hour days (remember, they will also have to commute to you). That means having to negotiate with you to ever see a doctor or go to the bank, or essentially having to do everything like that on the weekends rather than having their own time to relax.

If money is a consideration, I strongly suggest that you hire two people: one full time person and one part time person. You will likely find someone willing to do a 44-hour gig with one day off, and then hire someone for the other day. That drastically reduces your OT issue.

I'm going through my first nanny search, looking for someone Monday-Friday, 8-7 to take care of one infant. We live in a medium-COL city (median HHI here is ~$60k... think Houston/San Diego/Portland sort of place). We're thinking of offering $1000/wk gross for 55hrs ($16/40hrs base, $24/15hrs OT) but have been a little surprised to find how unattractive that is to nannies, as many candidates either:
a) Are not willing to work that many hours
b) Want $20+ base for this job
[There is also c) 20 year olds desperate for "as many hours as possible" and have less childcare experience -- but this seems, at best, like a high turnover situation]

My original thought was that since it is more hours, a slightly lower base of $16 would still be competitive as it works out to $52k/yr with OT pay and guaranteed hours, but am now wondering if it is the opposite and nannies require an even higher rate when hours are longer than the "standard" 40-50 hrs/wk? Our goal is high-quality, consistent care for our kid until she goes to school, so where should we focus our efforts/money? Is it offering as high a rate as we can? Giving more PTO of the nanny's choice? Something else? Basically, what would make a job with long hours more attractive to great nannies?

We do plan to come home early whenever work allows to relieve the nanny, and we take maybe 3-4wks of vacation a year (which we would also give the nanny off with pay, as opposed to making her walk the dog or whatever), but since these are not guaranteed/nanny's choice, I'm not sure if nannies would consider these much of a plus. Looking for any suggestions about how to make this job more appealing to candidates and sustainable for whomever we hire. TIA!