OP here, and I need some help understanding the responses. What did I say that lead folks to believe I want the kids to be quiet when my DC is sleeping? Or that I wanted to be 'the boss'.
I feel like we are getting off topic and just getting extra words/thoughts in about nannies and their kids in general.

Anonymous wrote:OP here, the just the clarify but the best part of the advice that I liked what the information about the pool with so many kids and the no play dates at the house.

I think those are related to safety and do not think make me entitled.

I absolutely agree that no pool time is a safety issue, but playdates? Upper elementary kids should be able to manage playdates with minimal adult interference, and even preschoolers shouldn't need constant management. Perhaps limiting playdates to those friends the kids know well and are able to get along with fairly easily would be a good idea?

If the older kids are no longer used to "quiet time" then it's going to backfire on you if you insist on imposing that - a much better idea would be to do all you can to make your child's nap schedule "match" the schedule of their youngest child (because it might be assumed that the parents will want that child to get a decent nap), and just accept that your kid is going to have to play second fiddle. You will, essentially, be adding a 5th child to the family. That means ALL the young kids will go to activities planned for the older kids after school.

To make this work, you will have to focus on fitting your child into your employer's children's dynamics and schedule. You will be an employee. Telling your employer what to do and how you will be running your day so that you can have the optimal schedule for you and your child wouldn't go over well in any work environment.

If you feel that you need to run your own show, make your own schedule, and be "the boss", you'd be better off looking into opening a small home daycare - there, hyou set the schedule, you make the decisions, and you "fire" clients who aren't willing to work within your parameters.

Basically I am not a career person, I work now to make sure we have a robust college savings for DC and healthy contributions to retirement plans.
And with the law degree I could do contract work in a few years as well. Low job stress, take projects you want, and having time to be around for my family.

Well, for starters I do not place value judgments on jobs. An honest hard working person is good in my book. So a lawyer is no better than a teacher than a lawyer- so I do not see myself as 'ending' up as a nanny. However I can see how it could appear tragic to others.
I do not have law school debt- so not concerned about paying it off. I wanted to do policy word in edu so taught first. That is where I will end up eventually- but why not monopolize the next few years by hanging out with kids and spending more time with my own?

OP are you one of those people who got a law degree but never practiced? Its a strange road to pay for a law degree, move to teaching and then end up a nanny. We have an IT guy with a law degree making less than 70K at our company. I don't think he could jump back to law now after years of fixing phones and computers.

I am also an attorney. I will be ok!

2 younger kids and 2 older older kids are completely manageable at a pool assuming the older kids are strong swimmers and you are very consistent about following rules/maintaining sight of them. Its the extra 18 month old that pushes this over the edge of safety and that your kid OP. The pool is something to discuss. Around here if kid are not at camp, they are at the pool. The pool is a big deal to a lot of kids.

Are you sure that you will be jump back to teaching so easily? There are budget cuts everywhere. Some of the lay offs have been avoided in areas with fast growth but this won't last.

So why not be honest and upfront about what I think will work, and then both parties can say no.

LOL you are not thinking like a nanny. As a nanny you have no supervision and can do whatever you want. No need to get parents to agree to what you want, just do it anyway!

Anonymous wrote:What about snow days OP? Are you going to expect the other family to stay home whenever the schools are closed or will you be OK driving out with your young child?

If the family is high profile and need someone very reliable this doesn't sound like it will work. They need a live in with no kids not someone who is going to tons of paid time off, and curtail their kids' activities so she can be paid to stay with her kid.

In order for this thread to be helpful do not hold me, the OP to what other PPs have suggested. I never mentioned 'tons of time off' and making everyone jump to my kids nap time.
Snow days, depends on what you are talking about. Rough roads- sure. Snowmageddon like we had a few years ago, no. And they have tried a live in, it has not worked. There is a reason they are reaching out to me. Not that I am totally awesome, but one of the older kids is a bit tough at times. And MB does not want a live in again.

Guys, here is the deal. This job does not have to work out. I can stay teaching, getting paid fairly well- with great hours and building a pension. So why not be honest and upfront about what I think will work, and then both parties can say no.
As for the pool, it has nothing to do with my baby. I would feel uncomfrotable watching 4 kids in the pool, regardless. I am a certified life guard as well and still feel its too big of an age range to supervise. And if thats a deal breaker, thats ok. A negotiation of terms and conditions does not mean someone is entitled, it means people are talking about their vision for the job.
The play dates- also have nothing to do with my child. My husband is also a teacher so would pick up DC at the end of his day. I just think that a house of 8 kids is more than I want on my plate.
Yes, bringing the kiddo is a huge perk, if it works. Will also add that the reason they are reaching out to me is because I am reliable and great with their kids. If the my child was a deal breaker this offer would have never been put on the table.

What about snow days OP? Are you going to expect the other family to stay home whenever the schools are closed or will you be OK driving out with your young child?

If the family is high profile and need someone very reliable this doesn't sound like it will work. They need a live in with no kids not someone who is going to tons of paid time off, and curtail their kids' activities so she can be paid to stay with her kid.

Its going to suck for the older kids not to be allowed to have play dates or go to the pool because the nanny is bringing her child.

We used to have a nanny that brought her baby to our house. Her daughter and DS were around the same age, so that made things easier. Without being asked or mentioned (it wasn't something
that had occurred to us), she adjusted her baby's nap time to closely match ours. When our son started to drop his afternoon nap and had a later morning nap, she engaged in quiet play with him. Reading books, art time, etc.
We gave her more than average PTO so that she'd be able to take a day off if her child was under the weather. Obviously when our child was under the weather, she had the day off with pay and it wasn't counted towards her PTO.
Unfortunately, there aren't many nanny jobs where you can bring your child, especially one so much younger. You may find that it won't work out, but I think you'll find that you have to adjust your schedule to fit theirs.

Pp here. Here's what I'd say.

Consider all the reasons parents may choose to have a nanny over other, cheaper forms of child care. Individualized attention. Activities tailored to their kids needs and ages. Play dates at home with friends. Flexibility. Availability of care for a mild or even moderately ill child. Whatever else you can think of.

Now consider how many of those benefits you are going to ask the parents to give up because you are bringing your child. A couple.... Fine. Especially if you can legitimately call them safety concerns, like the pool. But at a certain point, it's not going to work for them.

That's what is consider.

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but the entitlement on this thread is going to lose this nanny a job!

No, you cannot insist the other kids have quiet times and no activities during your child's nap. Nor can you expect extra PTO if your child is ill.

The ability to bring your child to work is a fabulous benefit. But you are still at work. Your child may have to adjust their nap schedule, or nap in a stroller. Like all of us parents, you may have to use your own sick time to care for your ill child.

Agree. I'm trying to think how it would go over if OP said to her future bosses" Well my baby naps from 10-11 and then again from 1-3. So during those hours the children must be doing quiet activities and we won't be leaving the house. I'll encourage them to go to play dates at other houses as much as possible though. But I won't be hosting any here so please make sure the other parents know it won't be reciprocal. Oh, and just because I'm going to be unloading your children as much as possible in order for my baby to nap, I expect to be paid the same. Oh, and I want my sick days to cover days when my baby is sick and I can't come in. I won't be using PTO/sick days when my baby is sick."

Yeah, that's not going to go over well and why finding a job where you can bring your child is difficult. That said, I do agree that pool and play dates are a safety issue. I just don't agree with trying to arrange one way play dates as often as possible in order to accommodate your baby.