Anonymous wrote:You'd have to first agree what a nanny is. Good luck with that, seeing that some of you think it's a warm body, while others think it's a professional with extensive knowledge of, and experience with early childhood development.

Ok, let's talk definitions? What exactly is "extensive knowledge or early childhood development"? has read X number of books about it? Has a degree? Has been a nanny for X years? But that's experience, not necessarily knowing the theory or latest research.

You'd have to first agree what a nanny is. Good luck with that, seeing that some of you think it's a warm body, while others think it's a professional with extensive knowledge of, and experience with early childhood development.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see being annoyed by the family's wealth if you are being paid below market but not otherwise. We can "afford" to pay a nanny $100,000 a year but we don't.

Problem is we have zero data about "market rates." How can we when most of it is still underground?

Market research: post ads here and on another site or two. Gather the applicants' asking rate data, calculate average. Or if you want to go fancy calculate averages by characteristics (education, years or experience, special skills). That's as close as you will get to knowing the market rates.

How about just being able to speak English? That minimal qualification alone, would eliminate at least half of Washington area so-called nannies from any research.

What exactly are you asking? How to gauge the market for the legal, English speaking nannies? Then put these two requirements in the ad. If you want to know how much each segment charges do 2 ads, one in Google translated Spanish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see being annoyed by the family's wealth if you are being paid below market but not otherwise. We can "afford" to pay a nanny $100,000 a year but we don't.

Problem is we have zero data about "market rates." How can we when most of it is still underground?

Market research: post ads here and on another site or two. Gather the applicants' asking rate data, calculate average. Or if you want to go fancy calculate averages by characteristics (education, years or experience, special skills). That's as close as you will get to knowing the market rates.

How about just being able to speak English? That minimal qualification alone, would eliminate at least half of Washington area so-called nannies from any research.

Anonymous wrote:If your kid misses the old nanny like crazy, too bad.
It's never to soon to learn:
Here today, gone tomorrow.

Someone offers the nanny double the rate, she'd be gone in a second. Works both ways.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see being annoyed by the family's wealth if you are being paid below market but not otherwise. We can "afford" to pay a nanny $100,000 a year but we don't.

Problem is we have zero data about "market rates." How can we when most of it is still underground?

Market research: post ads here and on another site or two. Gather the applicants' asking rate data, calculate average. Or if you want to go fancy calculate averages by characteristics (education, years or experience, special skills). That's as close as you will get to knowing the market rates.

Anonymous wrote:I can see being annoyed by the family's wealth if you are being paid below market but not otherwise. We can "afford" to pay a nanny $100,000 a year but we don't.

Problem is we have zero data about "market rates." How can we when most of it is still underground?

If your kid misses the old nanny like crazy, too bad.
It's never to soon to learn:
Here today, gone tomorrow.

Its often cheaper to hire a new nanny when you add a second child then bump up your existing nanny. If you have a great nanny who is excited about having another charge then this is worth it but if your nanny is the type that will quit because the raise wasn't big enough then its better for you to get rid of her anyway. Some nannies become quickly accustomed to the ease of only having 1 an older potty trained toddler and will resent any type of additional work no matter what you pay them. A new nanny who has been on the job market and is grateful to have a position and openly accepts watching a baby and a kid in school will perform much better.

I think it is very rare to go over $20/hour in DC. I think that will be my max as by the time my nanny gets up there (assuming $.50-1.00/year raise), 2 out of the 3 kids will be in school full time, and one will be part-time. This is for full time hours. Part time, I think, can justify a higher hourly wage.

nannydebsays wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ooops, you caught me posting lazy, nannydeb. I actually meant 50cents/hr, not a nickel per hour.

Thanks for the kind way you pointed out my mistake.

Wait, no, you really weren't that kind, were you?

No, you're right, I wasn't very kind. I guess the tone of your entire post made me think you actually meant 5 cents was adequate?

Regardless, I could have asked. Thanks for pointing my mistake out so nicely.

I'm curious - what is your "cut off", so to speak, on when new baby raises are not needed or no longer significant? I've never actually experienced a nanny care situation in which a new baby didn't add to an already significant workload, but I have never cared for kids who were in FT school when a newborn came along. I do sincerely want your thoughts please!

I am giving a $1 dollar raise when my next baby arrives. It's an additional $40 a week. Does this sound "right" to me in terms of the additional work my nanny will be doing? No. But it is the going rate and my nanny is seems pretty happy about this deal. It's more than she's ever made for any other position nannying. I think it is the going rate because nannies are paid hourly and you aren't spending additional free time that is your personal time working because of the new baby. $17-18 is what is costs for someone who possesses the skills and capabilities of a good nanny to spend an hour at my house.

I think the cut off is when it approaches about $18.50 for DC area, IMHO. I would not pay more than $19 for a nanny because there are just too many good people out there that makes switching to a cheaper nanny worth it. Tons of nannies make $15-16 for two kids out there that are just as good.

Anonymous wrote:Ooops, you caught me posting lazy, nannydeb. I actually meant 50cents/hr, not a nickel per hour.

Thanks for the kind way you pointed out my mistake.

Wait, no, you really weren't that kind, were you?

No, you're right, I wasn't very kind. I guess the tone of your entire post made me think you actually meant 5 cents was adequate?

Regardless, I could have asked. Thanks for pointing my mistake out so nicely.

I'm curious - what is your "cut off", so to speak, on when new baby raises are not needed or no longer significant? I've never actually experienced a nanny care situation in which a new baby didn't add to an already significant workload, but I have never cared for kids who were in FT school when a newborn came along. I do sincerely want your thoughts please!

Stop it. We are not going to let this new forum devolve into what the old one was.

Ooops, you caught me posting lazy, nannydeb. I actually meant 50cents/hr, not a nickel per hour.

Thanks for the kind way you pointed out my mistake.

Wait, no, you really weren't that kind, were you?

Anonymous wrote:Not changes worth a raise, PP.

Normally, I would suggest a $1/hr raise for a new baby, but, since the nanny has a decreased workload, I would offer no more than $.05/hr. PPs are right. The market is swarming with experienced, legal nannies looking for work.

Yeah, because a 5 cent an hour raise is DEFINITELY appropriate. I mean, a new baby is only worth $2.50 a week for extra work.

And yes, there are warm bodies, novice nannies, and even nannies with some experience willing to work for peanuts. They'll even stay a little while. Until they find a job that doesn't pay peanuts.

Plus, unless your "nanny" is truly disconnected and pretty useless (or your family simply goes through a new nanny every 4 months or so, meaning your kids don't bother getting attached at all), losing a nanny is a pretty big transition. Is it worth the savings to have to re-train, re-orient, and re-adjust for just yourself, not to mention your kids?