Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the idea of both families and the nanny meeting together. You would not want the nanny to feel the families went behind her back.

They are her employers, not her partners. They should discuss their needs and options privately before involving the nanny. I doubt their nanny would want to sit through their awkward "negotiations" (for lack of a better word) anyway.

The nanny is NOT your race horse that you negotiate.

How DARE you and your elitist self.

I'm sorry? What are you talking about?

Two sets of parents employ a nanny. When the situation for one of the sets of parents changes, they should discuss with the other family what they all ideally want to do - make it a 3-child share? invite the nanny to work FT for the family with 2 children? invite the nanny to stay on with the other family and have a new family join the share? Once both sets of parents have decided what would best suit them - what their needs are - they can sit down together with the nanny and let her know about the new addition. They can then ask her if she would be interested in XYZ offers that they have discussed.

If the two sets of parents are unable to reach an agreement, then they should let the nanny know that they will be dissolving the share. They can each then make whatever offer they want to the nanny and she can make her decision.

Please, try TRY to understand what you're reading before you jump off the deep end.

I've done several shares. Each families negotiates with me directly. I would not tolerate your nonsense, pp. You'd be out of the share if you tried to go behind by back like that.

You're just... clearly not understanding what I am saying.

1) Of course the details of a job will be negotiated directly with the nanny.

2) The details of the parents' partnership, how they want to proceed with joint or individual childcare, should be decided independently of her.

3) Then any offers or discussions about possible changes would take place with the nanny.

For example, in my opinion, it would go something like this:

Parents A and Parents B sit down.
Parents A say, "we are having DC#2 in September and wanted to talk with you about our nanny share"
Parents A and Parents B discuss their thoughts on having a 3-child share ("yes, we would be comfortable with paying more per hour and having you pay less per hour" or "I'd be concerned that Jimmy and Johnny won't have enough of the nanny's attention if there is a baby there" and so on)
Parents B say "actually, we were thinking about an academic preschool, perhaps you'd like to hire the nanny FT for just your family?"
Parents A say "oh, that sounds great but I wonder if we can afford that..."
Parents B say they think it sounds like the best thing to do would be to keep the share functioning until December and then dissolve it.
Parents A agree.
Then they can both sit down with the nanny and give her the news of the baby, notice of the end date for the share, and Parents A can privately make her an offer to stay on as their FT nanny. The nanny can then negotiate with Family A directly for her terms.

Why on earth would the nanny need to be present before that final step? THOSE CONVERSATIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HER.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the idea of both families and the nanny meeting together. You would not want the nanny to feel the families went behind her back.

They are her employers, not her partners. They should discuss their needs and options privately before involving the nanny. I doubt their nanny would want to sit through their awkward "negotiations" (for lack of a better word) anyway.

The nanny is NOT your race horse that you negotiate.

How DARE you and your elitist self.

I'm sorry? What are you talking about?

Two sets of parents employ a nanny. When the situation for one of the sets of parents changes, they should discuss with the other family what they all ideally want to do - make it a 3-child share? invite the nanny to work FT for the family with 2 children? invite the nanny to stay on with the other family and have a new family join the share? Once both sets of parents have decided what would best suit them - what their needs are - they can sit down together with the nanny and let her know about the new addition. They can then ask her if she would be interested in XYZ offers that they have discussed.

If the two sets of parents are unable to reach an agreement, then they should let the nanny know that they will be dissolving the share. They can each then make whatever offer they want to the nanny and she can make her decision.

Please, try TRY to understand what you're reading before you jump off the deep end.

I've done several shares. Each families negotiates with me directly. I would not tolerate your nonsense, pp. You'd be out of the share if you tried to go behind by back like that.

*family

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the idea of both families and the nanny meeting together. You would not want the nanny to feel the families went behind her back.

They are her employers, not her partners. They should discuss their needs and options privately before involving the nanny. I doubt their nanny would want to sit through their awkward "negotiations" (for lack of a better word) anyway.

The nanny is NOT your race horse that you negotiate.

How DARE you and your elitist self.

I'm sorry? What are you talking about?

Two sets of parents employ a nanny. When the situation for one of the sets of parents changes, they should discuss with the other family what they all ideally want to do - make it a 3-child share? invite the nanny to work FT for the family with 2 children? invite the nanny to stay on with the other family and have a new family join the share? Once both sets of parents have decided what would best suit them - what their needs are - they can sit down together with the nanny and let her know about the new addition. They can then ask her if she would be interested in XYZ offers that they have discussed.

If the two sets of parents are unable to reach an agreement, then they should let the nanny know that they will be dissolving the share. They can each then make whatever offer they want to the nanny and she can make her decision.

Please, try TRY to understand what you're reading before you jump off the deep end.

I've done several shares. Each families negotiates with me directly. I would not tolerate your nonsense, pp. You'd be out of the share if you tried to go behind by back like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the idea of both families and the nanny meeting together. You would not want the nanny to feel the families went behind her back.

They are her employers, not her partners. They should discuss their needs and options privately before involving the nanny. I doubt their nanny would want to sit through their awkward "negotiations" (for lack of a better word) anyway.

The nanny is NOT your race horse that you negotiate.

How DARE you and your elitist self.

I'm sorry? What are you talking about?

Two sets of parents employ a nanny. When the situation for one of the sets of parents changes, they should discuss with the other family what they all ideally want to do - make it a 3-child share? invite the nanny to work FT for the family with 2 children? invite the nanny to stay on with the other family and have a new family join the share? Once both sets of parents have decided what would best suit them - what their needs are - they can sit down together with the nanny and let her know about the new addition. They can then ask her if she would be interested in XYZ offers that they have discussed.

If the two sets of parents are unable to reach an agreement, then they should let the nanny know that they will be dissolving the share. They can each then make whatever offer they want to the nanny and she can make her decision.

Please, try TRY to understand what you're reading before you jump off the deep end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harsh, not "hards". Opps!

OP said "stealing" nanny. You think this is something a person with scruples would do?

The nanny doesn't belong to anyone. She makes her own decisions and is free to work for anyone she chooses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the idea of both families and the nanny meeting together. You would not want the nanny to feel the families went behind her back.

They are her employers, not her partners. They should discuss their needs and options privately before involving the nanny. I doubt their nanny would want to sit through their awkward "negotiations" (for lack of a better word) anyway.

The nanny is NOT your race horse that you negotiate.

How DARE you and your elitist self.

Anonymous wrote:Harsh, not "hards". Opps!

OP said "stealing" nanny. You think this is something a person with scruples would do?

Anonymous wrote:I have tried searching and have not found much on this topic...

Our two-year-old is currently in a nanny share (hosted at our house). What have others done with the arrival of a second child? (Moving the older child to daycare is not likely given the popularity of the centers by our house.)

Do people try to take/steal the current nanny to care for both children? (I doubt that would go over well with the other family!) Do people have two nanny shares? (Seems logistically complicated.) Or just hire a brand new nanny? (Also hard because we do like our current nanny a lot.)

Honestly, it makes me want to move our to the 'burbs where it is easy to get daycare or something. Sigh.

OP, you're making this way too complicated than it has to be. When you go shopping, do you let stores convince you of what you want?

Here's what you do. Determine what you want. Do you want to hire this nanny to care for your two children? Do you want to keep the nanny share going with three children? Do you want a brand nanny? What is it?

Once you determine what it is that you want, approach whoever you need to make it happen. If you want the nanny for yourself, make her an offer. She'll either take it or she won't. If you want the nanny for all three kids, talk to the other family AND the nanny to figure out the detail.

This isn't an emotional transaction. It's a business exchange. This talk about "stealing" nannies is ridiculous. Nannies are living, breathing beings and they get to decide whom to work for. If an entirely new family makes your nanny a better offer, she'll be gone in a flash without all this navel-gazing, and she'll be entirely right to do so. Figure out what you want, and go buy it. You don't owe your share family anything except reasonable notice. Because if they could find a better childcare arrangement, they'd turn out out in a flash. Stop imagining loyalties where there are none.

I know people who offered their nanny-share nanny a position nannying for their family only when they had a second. In at least one case, the nanny took it--I can imagine that having only one set of bosses and one workplace would be desirable. And who knows, perhaps the nanny liked that family better, for any number of reasons.

I agree with Nanny Deb. When the other family in our first nanny share was expecting a second child, we discussed what to do and how to deal with it (what we could afford to pay, how to adjust each share) and we came up with (a) an offer to our nanny that she could accept or not, and (b) agreed that if our nanny did not want to watch three children, we would offer her continued employment with one of the families. It worked out fine.

I would not consider just stealing the nanny away or go to her first with an offer for just your kids and leave the other family screwed. Not only is that shady, you put the nanny in a bad spot whether she says yes (and leaves the other family with a terrible impression of both of you) or no (maybe she has a favorite employer and - surprise - you aren't it).