...The answer is that you start doing less for child #1 so that you have time for child #2.

Anonymous wrote:
So interesting how when your're doing a share, you want to pay only 1/2 of the nanny's rates.

However, if it's your new baby doubling (at least) nanny's responsibilities, then it's worth only $1-2. extra pay.

Are nannies really THAT stupid???

No one doubles their workload for an extra $2/hr.

....No one except for dumb nannies who can't do basic mathematics.

The answer to your question is on the surface and I suspect you know what it is. Still, I will humor you and explain why the math works the way it does.

When you nanny for a single child, that child gets 100% of your attention. This is why I'll be paying the nanny a 100% rate for that one child. For the sake of the argument, $15/hr.

When the second child enters the picture, assuming the same nanny stays on, each child in the family gets 50% of the nanny's attention. Not 100%. You do not magically clone yourself just because the family has two children now. Your workload does not double because it's impossible. The first child gets less because now you have to give some of your time and effort to the second child. That's OK because that's expected. If you take offense at the notion that the first child is now getting less, please explain how is it that you can continue to do everything you USED to do that child in the past and STILL have time for a newborn. You can't. The answer is that you start doing less for child #1 so that you have for child #2. This is not a judgment of your skills or quality. This is the reality that when you take care of 2 children vs. one, each child gets less of you. The parents understand that.

This is why your rate does not double. In effect, you are now running a share with 2 kids of the same family, and you're getting a share rate of $8-$9 per child, or $16-$18/hr.

In an actual share, you'll probably make a dollar or two more (so $19-$20/hr) to account for more hassle and logistics as two families are involved instead of one.

If you have other questions, feel free to ask.

nannydebsays wrote:The issue with your proposal that a nanny's wage be doubled, or at least increased by more than $1 - $2/hour when an additional child is added to the family is this:

Nannies press this issue. Nannies try to insist on 50% raises when a second baby arrives.

Parents say, well, OK, you have a point about the workload.

Then the nanny who once made $15/hour for one child is told that because the potential employers plan to have a second child "someday'" and can't afford to give a 50% raise when that happens, they will either start nanny at $10/hour and then give that 50% raise whenever baby #2 shows up, or they will pay nanny $15/hour now and fire her when they have baby number 2 so that they can hire a new nanny for $16/hour.

Fortunately, we can't paint all (or even most) parents, with one broad brush.

The issue with your proposal that a nanny's wage be doubled, or at least increased by more than $1 - $2/hour when an additional child is added to the family is this:

Nannies press this issue. Nannies try to insist on 50% raises when a second baby arrives.

Parents say, well, OK, you have a point about the workload.

Then the nanny who once made $15/hour for one child is told that because the potential employers plan to have a second child "someday'" and can't afford to give a 50% raise when that happens, they will either start nanny at $10/hour and then give that 50% raise whenever baby #2 shows up, or they will pay nanny $15/hour now and fire her when they have baby number 2 so that they can hire a new nanny for $16/hour.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone said the pay should be doubled, the topic is regarding an 1-2 dollar increase.

It's so very refreshing when a poster stands out, just because she can read what's being said, rather than jumping to unreasonable presumptions. Thank you. -OP

I don't think anyone said the pay should be doubled, the topic is regarding an 1-2 dollar increase.

If I were going to pay double for two kids, I would hire two nannies. Then each child could still get one-on-one attention, could nap on his/her own schedule, attend his/her classes without worrying about the other's child's needs or schedule, etc. Why would I just pay one person double?

Anonymous wrote:I was a nanny for two year old twins, and got paid 2 dollars more than most nannies in my area are paid. When baby number 3 came, my salary was increased by 2 dollars. I did not expect, or think that the parents should have to add half of my rate for each extra child.
When a nanny share has more than 3 kids in it, they don't get triple what they would get for one child. You have no logic to prove your point, you're just being rude.

You are correct. I imagine you were appropriately paid for what you did. No reason to believe otherwise. -OP

New poster here, I don't believe it should be tripled or anything of the like. But I do think$1-2 is very little.

I was a nanny for two year old twins, and got paid 2 dollars more than most nannies in my area are paid. When baby number 3 came, my salary was increased by 2 dollars. I did not expect, or think that the parents should have to add half of my rate for each extra child.
When a nanny share has more than 3 kids in it, they don't get triple what they would get for one child. You have no logic to prove your point, you're just being rude.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know any hospice workers personally but I do know of nurses that earn roughly 115k per year. So yeah, they're not gonna be buying a new benz every 6 months but they're not exactly struggling now are they? And any nanny who thinks they can make that kind of money just from being a nanny is absolutely out of their mind.

Don't you read the newspaper? The press loves to write about nannies earning over $100K, just because of the shock value for people like you.

There is a huge difference between a nanny share and a second child. For a nanny, working for one set of parents at one location is much more simple. When parents are off, home early or on vacation, the nanny for only one family has the time off and still paid. One set of responsibilities. My nanny of two children has only one child for much of the day as the older one is in pre-school and last year had over 10 weeks paid time off due to vacation schedules, grandparent visits, etc. If she needs to come in late, leave early, arrange for time off- she only needs to talk to me-- not work with the schedules of 4 different people. There is more job security with a single family for a good nanny who wants to stay in the same job for more than a few years.

I don't know any hospice workers personally but I do know of nurses that earn roughly 115k per year. So yeah, they're not gonna be buying a new benz every 6 months but they're not exactly struggling now are they? And any nanny who thinks they can make that kind of money just from being a nanny is absolutely out of their mind.

Have yet to post on this thread but, I'm an RN. Make 6 figures for 3 16 hours shifts plus some on call times. I also work in the ER so you can imagine what my patient number looks like on a given shift.

I understand what you are saying OP, but the reality is that if nannies demanded to be paid twice the amount when a second child is born, it would ultimately end up hurting them. There will always be nannies on the market who will take a cheaper paying job, will agree to be paid under the table, etc. I think, if all of a sudden families knew they had to pay double for the birth of a second child, you'd find a really unstable nanny market. But I do agree that a simple $1 or $2 raise is not enough.

Anonymous wrote:You're right, there are professional caretakers that make professional salaries. Nurses, people who work in hospice, etc. But you know what? Their schedules are all over the place, they're usually on call when they're not working, and they have to deal with bosses, patients, and the patient's family members. They don't get to come home at the end of a long day and complain on an anonymous forum about their job. If you want to be wealthy, don't be a nanny. If you love kids and find that your nanny job is paying the bills and helping you get by, fantastic. But don't confuse the two.

If you don't mind, please show me a "wealthy" nurse or hospice worker. Thank you.