Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many nannies I am hearing about on here sound like they still need parents, to be honest. Being treated as a responsible adult is the natural outcome of acting responsibly.

I beg you, let's not engage this troll.

+1

The natural outcome of being an adult is being treated like one. PP, when you are an adult and you are employed as an adult, you are treated as an adult. Period. I know several executives who act like toddlers when things don't go their way, but no one feels they are entitled to treat them like children. Same goes for fast food workers, teachers, nannies, doctors, sales managers, etc.

I don't see what makes her a troll, PP. she has a valid point.

Anonymous wrote:Many nannies I am hearing about on here sound like they still need parents, to be honest. Being treated as a responsible adult is the natural outcome of acting responsibly.

I beg you, let's not engage this troll.

Many nannies I am hearing about on here sound like they still need parents, to be honest. Being treated as a responsible adult is the natural outcome of acting responsibly.

As long as she is honoring her work commitments to your family OP, then in her free time she can do whatever she wants to do. I could understand if she were to baby-sit add'l children in your home, under your roof. For that she should ask permission.

But just to babysit in her free time, she doesn't have to ask you permission nor tell you where she is going.

I am seeing on here something that is becoming quite annoying.

Many families on here who employ a live-in nanny act like they are her parents as well.

They are complaining when she stays out all night, when she goes in the kitchen, who stays in her room, what she does on her days off, where she is, etc.

It's so unfair.

OP, with a full time nanny, you don't need to pay for every hour in which you might need her to work overtime. You just need to make her availability within certain defined hours part of the job requirements and find someone who doesn't mind being flexible.

In other words, specify at the time of hiring that you might need her to work overtime between the hours of x and y of z day(s) each week and that she must remain available during those hours unless discussed with you in advance. You then guarantee a certain number of overtime hours as consideration for her holding those dates and times, but the guaranteed hours need not encompass all the reserved hours.

This is quite common where employers' jobs have unpredictable dismissal times. My long time nanny is required to be available for a twelve hour block each work day unless discussed in advance, but we only guarantee and typically only use 10.5 hours per day.

Having a live in does not give you "dibs" on her off time. If you would like dibs on that time, you need to guarantee a certain amount of hours, plain and simple.

OP, what hourly rate are you doing with your nanny?

Anonymous wrote:Working a 14-hour day plus travel time to/from work and to/from other employer in between keeps you fresh for the next morning of work? Come on . . .

I assume you're replying to me? I'm 16:14.

I am basing my post based off of my own experience. I live 5 minutes from where I work and the families I babysit for are all walking distance from my FT job. I have virtually no commute and no travel time between work.

And yes, it does keep me fresh. Working with kids of different ages or different personalities has that effect on me - and probably other nannies who love their jobs as well.

Anonymous wrote:Working a 14-hour day plus travel time to/from work and to/from other employer in between keeps you fresh for the next morning of work? Come on . . .

The nanny is a live-in so no travel time to/from work.

Working a 14-hour day plus travel time to/from work and to/from other employer in between keeps you fresh for the next morning of work? Come on . . .

Why the snark toward the poster who said maybe she needs a break from your kids?

Presumably she's with them 50+ hours a week plus living in the same house as them (and her bosses)? I work 10 hour days with my primary family, and extending the day by 4 hours is much tougher for me than going to a new babysitting job at the end of my regular day. That offers a change of scenery, change of kids, just a different vibe, and it keeps me fresh for my FT responsibilities.

Please don't be too precious about assuming she won't ever prefer to work for another family and take a break from yours - it isn't a bad thing and will probably improve her job satisfaction and work performance. If you need a lot of OT or can't guarantee those OT hours, why not hire a different sitter (who'll be cheaper anyway)?

Thanks, PP - really appreciate it.

Anonymous wrote:Thanks, PP. Helpful advice as well. Yeah, to me having some concept of priority access was part of the point of having a live-in and justified the tradeoff. We do try to be respectful about not burning her out and want to make sure she has time for personal plans, but if she's just going to go babysit for someone else anyway . . .

We all learn as we go along, OP. I would have assumed the same thing and I have employed live-out nannies for over a decade.

P.S. In the above example, X should be LESS THAN Y.

IOW, if she makes $12/hour for her normal hours, you should offer $13+ for any reserved hours.

Or you could find a few sitters and keep your nanny from burning out.