I have received one week most every year.

One year I received 3 weeks (but that was a year I had done ALOT of extra because of a terminal illness within the family and I know it was a thank you)

Agree with prior posters that the norms are different among different tiers of nannies. High-end career nannies generally expect a bonus of at least one week's salary. Student nannies, part time nannies, recent college grads who are only nannying for a year or two while finding themselves often get much less--a small gift or a couple hundred dollars in cash or a gift card. It's basically like other nanny perks. The high end career nannies almost always get PTO, while nannies employed by many working and middle class families do not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:having experience and qualifications and good references is something that you look at when hiring. Amd yes people accept different standards for all these. A bonus is truly supposed to be for rewarding the job done, how all those skills are actually put into action.

Hoping for a "standard" bonus is understood but if a nanny actually has not performed her job well (as we see on some threads over and over - as much as we see threads about demanding and unfair bosses) which can also happen with those nannies that come with experience and references etc. does not actually mean that someone is automatically entitled to a bonus.

A bonus should be related to the actual performance of the nanny and not an assumption just because you come with 5 or more years experience.

PP and of course I completely agree. A bonus is something you earn, not a right or an obligation, but there are definitely standard SIZES for bonuses depending on the nanny and the job (e.g. how long she's been working, how much extra work was added this year w/o additional pay, etc.).

So what is the "standard" given all these variables? And by standard I mean commonly accepted practice.

As I said above, I can only speak for nannies in my "tier" - that is, 5+ years experience, college degrees, bilingual, etc. (the kind of nannies the best agencies will send your way) and for us, one week's pay is quite common. That assertion is backed up by agency AND nanny payroll sites who all advise giving a one week bonus. No clue what it looks like for new nannies, foreign-born nannies (no hate here, I just know they tend to get shafted when it comes to compensation), nannies without degrees, etc. It might be the same? Or not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:having experience and qualifications and good references is something that you look at when hiring. Amd yes people accept different standards for all these. A bonus is truly supposed to be for rewarding the job done, how all those skills are actually put into action.

Hoping for a "standard" bonus is understood but if a nanny actually has not performed her job well (as we see on some threads over and over - as much as we see threads about demanding and unfair bosses) which can also happen with those nannies that come with experience and references etc. does not actually mean that someone is automatically entitled to a bonus.

A bonus should be related to the actual performance of the nanny and not an assumption just because you come with 5 or more years experience.

PP and of course I completely agree. A bonus is something you earn, not a right or an obligation, but there are definitely standard SIZES for bonuses depending on the nanny and the job (e.g. how long she's been working, how much extra work was added this year w/o additional pay, etc.).

So what is the "standard" given all these variables? And by standard I mean commonly accepted practice.

Anonymous wrote:The replies from nannies aren't very valid. Of course you want employers to think that everyone gets a huge bonus! The rampant lying on this board just gets worse every year.

+1. The "standard" seems to have increased vs the bonus threads last year.

Anonymous wrote:having experience and qualifications and good references is something that you look at when hiring. Amd yes people accept different standards for all these. A bonus is truly supposed to be for rewarding the job done, how all those skills are actually put into action.

Hoping for a "standard" bonus is understood but if a nanny actually has not performed her job well (as we see on some threads over and over - as much as we see threads about demanding and unfair bosses) which can also happen with those nannies that come with experience and references etc. does not actually mean that someone is automatically entitled to a bonus.

A bonus should be related to the actual performance of the nanny and not an assumption just because you come with 5 or more years experience.

PP and of course I completely agree. A bonus is something you earn, not a right or an obligation, but there are definitely standard SIZES for bonuses depending on the nanny and the job (e.g. how long she's been working, how much extra work was added this year w/o additional pay, etc.).

having experience and qualifications and good references is something that you look at when hiring. Amd yes people accept different standards for all these. A bonus is truly supposed to be for rewarding the job done, how all those skills are actually put into action.

Hoping for a "standard" bonus is understood but if a nanny actually has not performed her job well (as we see on some threads over and over - as much as we see threads about demanding and unfair bosses) which can also happen with those nannies that come with experience and references etc. does not actually mean that someone is automatically entitled to a bonus.

A bonus should be related to the actual performance of the nanny and not an assumption just because you come with 5 or more years experience.

NP chiming in to reply to PP (didn't read the rest of the thread) and you are right in a sense - just as there is no "standard" expectation for what a nanny does during nap time. We see answers all over the place on that topic. Or for hourly rate - is it REALLY $15/hr or is it more like $18? No one can agree.

And that's because nannies get hired in different tiers. Less experience, lack of degree, lack of references, poor communication skills (in whatever language the parents prefer), lack of car/driver's license etc etc etc will affect the overall compensation package.

BUT, for a nanny with experience and qualifications - either excellent and extensive references or some additional training/skill - there IS a standard bonus. Ask any high-end nanny agency or look on any nanny payroll sites and they say one week is expected. So if this is the KIND of nanny you have, there is a common expectation.

Anonymous wrote:For instance, most of us would agree it's "standard" to treat people who help you, with dignity (as your children should to), but not everyone does. It's how you were raised and how you raise your children.

The definition of standard is "used or accepted as normal or average." So the only way there is a "standard" nanny bonus that is given in or around December every year is if most people know that it exists, know when to give, know how much to give, etc. The fact that there are so many questions about it makes me think there is no commonly accepted standard. Do I give one? Do I give one when performance has been mediocre? Is it one week? Two weeks? One month? Is it prorated for when a nanny hasn't been here for a year? What if I've given her extra time off instead? There is no commonly accepted "standard."

The replies from nannies aren't very valid. Of course you want employers to think that everyone gets a huge bonus! The rampant lying on this board just gets worse every year.

Hopefully.

For instance, most of us would agree it's "standard" to treat people who help you, with dignity (as your children should to), but not everyone does. It's how you were raised and how you raise your children.