Agree $30/hr, and say $24/hr if one kid drops out

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gross pay = $10 - $12 per hour per family if it is a 3 family share. That is an approximate discount of 30% off of my 1 child/1family rate.

A two family share? Still no less than $30/hour, and the parents would need to figure out the split of costs.

Of course, OT would apply.

So for a 50 hour week, all 3 families would pay at least $575/week GROSS. I would gross $1775/week.

That's 92k a year salary. Why would 3 families each pay $10 per child to be in a 3 kid share? They can get it in a 2 kid share. If 2 families are involved, again why would anyone with 2 kids deal with a 3 kid share? They can find a nanny that caters just to them at $20/hr.

You are quoting me, and I agree with you. Three kid shares make little sense to me. But OP wanted a cost quote, which I provided.

alicialcherry wrote:Hi everyone-

What is the going rate per hour (take home) for a nanny on Arlington? We are beginning a nanny share this summer for 3 young toddlers.

Thanks for your help!

Alicia

email: alicialynne628@gmail.com

Odd that she left her email.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difference between a share and a daycare is going to be in what a nanny specifically can offer.

None of what you list is what the nanny offers, it's all about what the parents provide or direct/request.

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid to eat exclusively whole, organic foods? Most daycares are serving goldfish at least sometimes.

Tons of daycare offer home-made, organic food. With the mainstreaming of organic food, it became a pretty common marketing point. And not all parents are anti-goldfish.

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid to spend their days at Smithsonians? Most daycares have limited field trips, but nanny can take them on big excursions daily.

15-month olds do not belong at Smithsonian, it's just parental whims. Besides, balancing three kids between one caregiver on a field trip is a PITA - you'd need three carseats, a triple stroller, a big-enough car, and a day when all three of them are up to it. With so much negotiation and logistics involved, it's tempting not to bother. Big excursions with three kids aged 15 monts are certainly not going to happen daily. You'd be lucky enough to have all three napping at the same time daily.

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid close to home? Daycares are where they are, but a share can be composed of families in your neighborhood.

Like there are no neighborhood daycares?

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid climbing trees and hiking in nature? Daycares have a LOT of limits imposed on what they can let kids do, but a nanny with the right background can provide lots of outdoor "risky" play.

How will you supervise all three kids engaged in risky play at the same time?

I would guess that you've never supervised multiple children at one time. I've nannied for a family of 7 kids, aged toddler to teen, and another family of twin toddlers and twin preschoolers. It's relatively easy to teach kids to stay together to do risky things, or to teach them to take turns.

Anonymous wrote:The difference between a share and a daycare is going to be in what a nanny specifically can offer.

None of what you list is what the nanny offers, it's all about what the parents provide or direct/request.

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid to eat exclusively whole, organic foods? Most daycares are serving goldfish at least sometimes.

Tons of daycare offer home-made, organic food. With the mainstreaming of organic food, it became a pretty common marketing point. And not all parents are anti-goldfish.

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid to spend their days at Smithsonians? Most daycares have limited field trips, but nanny can take them on big excursions daily.

15-month olds do not belong at Smithsonian, it's just parental whims. Besides, balancing three kids between one caregiver on a field trip is a PITA - you'd need three carseats, a triple stroller, a big-enough car, and a day when all three of them are up to it. With so much negotiation and logistics involved, it's tempting not to bother. Big excursions with three kids aged 15 monts are certainly not going to happen daily. You'd be lucky enough to have all three napping at the same time daily.

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid close to home? Daycares are where they are, but a share can be composed of families in your neighborhood.

Like there are no neighborhood daycares?

Anonymous wrote:Want your kid climbing trees and hiking in nature? Daycares have a LOT of limits imposed on what they can let kids do, but a nanny with the right background can provide lots of outdoor "risky" play.

How will you supervise all three kids engaged in risky play at the same time?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except nanny care for three toddlers honestly make no sense. At this ratio you are almost in daycare territory, and a well run home daycare center will be cheaper and more stable than a nanny who has to juggle three families.

Parents can't control anything about an in-home daycare; they can negotiate amongst themselves in a share.

When three parties have to negotiate and come to an understanding, the final result is unlikely to be 100% of what any single party wants. It will be compromise, i.e., the giving up of stuff.

Of course you can control some things with an in-home daycare. You can't control it all, but you can't control it all in a 3-kid share either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gross pay = $10 - $12 per hour per family if it is a 3 family share. That is an approximate discount of 30% off of my 1 child/1family rate.

A two family share? Still no less than $30/hour, and the parents would need to figure out the split of costs.

Of course, OT would apply.

So for a 50 hour week, all 3 families would pay at least $575/week GROSS. I would gross $1775/week.

That's 92k a year salary. Why would 3 families each pay $10 per child to be in a 3 kid share? They can get it in a 2 kid share. If 2 families are involved, again why would anyone with 2 kids deal with a 3 kid share? They can find a nanny that caters just to them at $20/hr.

I've had parents pay me "more" because they said they wanted me. But you believe all care is equal, so you wouldn't understand the parents who choose to pay me more. They get how much early environment matters in the long run.

I'm sure you're awesome but you are not the only awesome nanny on the market. In my opinion, a share with 3 kids is too crowded to get real benefits of nanny care. So paying a premium for that form of care is not rational.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gross pay = $10 - $12 per hour per family if it is a 3 family share. That is an approximate discount of 30% off of my 1 child/1family rate.

A two family share? Still no less than $30/hour, and the parents would need to figure out the split of costs.

Of course, OT would apply.

So for a 50 hour week, all 3 families would pay at least $575/week GROSS. I would gross $1775/week.

That's 92k a year salary. Why would 3 families each pay $10 per child to be in a 3 kid share? They can get it in a 2 kid share. If 2 families are involved, again why would anyone with 2 kids deal with a 3 kid share? They can find a nanny that caters just to them at $20/hr.

Exactly. It makes no sense.

This board had potential to be good but all it has become is nannies complaining incessantly and trying to inflate wages. It's really disappointing.

First, she stated that that would be the rate for a three-family share. While they could theoretically find a share nanny for $20, most nannies who are competent enough to handle a share well and really shine in that role have lots of options. I make $20 working for one family. To lure me into a share, I would want at LEAST $22. So for $20 you are already starting to limit to pool of candidates, which means that the quality of care is starting to look more like daycare. Nanny care is a luxury. So, yes, I am sure some people want a share because they think they can get someone at the bottom of the nanny market and split her pay and each pay $5-7 dollars and hours and won't this nanny be thrilled, that is only one mindset. Most people pursuing nanny care are doing so because they want a high-quality caregiver and a share gives them the chance to hire someone at the top of her field who they would otherwise never be able to afford. While it is not ALWAYS true that a $25 nanny has skills that most $20 nannies don't and likewise for $15 nannies, the majority of the time, the awesome, educated professional nannies know their worth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gross pay = $10 - $12 per hour per family if it is a 3 family share. That is an approximate discount of 30% off of my 1 child/1family rate.

A two family share? Still no less than $30/hour, and the parents would need to figure out the split of costs.

Of course, OT would apply.

So for a 50 hour week, all 3 families would pay at least $575/week GROSS. I would gross $1775/week.

That's 92k a year salary. Why would 3 families each pay $10 per child to be in a 3 kid share? They can get it in a 2 kid share. If 2 families are involved, again why would anyone with 2 kids deal with a 3 kid share? They can find a nanny that caters just to them at $20/hr.

Exactly. It makes no sense.

This board had potential to be good but all it has become is nannies complaining incessantly and trying to inflate wages. It's really disappointing.

The difference between a share and a daycare is going to be in what a nanny specifically can offer.

Want your kid to eat exclusively whole, organic foods? Most daycares are serving goldfish at least sometimes.

Want your kid to spend their days at Smithsonians? Most daycares have limited field trips, but nanny can take them on big excursions daily.

Want your kid close to home? Daycares are where they are, but a share can be composed of families in your neighborhood.

Want your kid climbing trees and hiking in nature? Daycares have a LOT of limits imposed on what they can let kids do, but a nanny with the right background can provide lots of outdoor "risky" play.

Anonymous wrote:Except nanny care for three toddlers honestly make no sense. At this ratio you are almost in daycare territory, and a well run home daycare center will be cheaper and more stable than a nanny who has to juggle three families.

Parents can't control anything about an in-home daycare; they can negotiate amongst themselves in a share.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gross pay = $10 - $12 per hour per family if it is a 3 family share. That is an approximate discount of 30% off of my 1 child/1family rate.

A two family share? Still no less than $30/hour, and the parents would need to figure out the split of costs.

Of course, OT would apply.

So for a 50 hour week, all 3 families would pay at least $575/week GROSS. I would gross $1775/week.

That's 92k a year salary. Why would 3 families each pay $10 per child to be in a 3 kid share? They can get it in a 2 kid share. If 2 families are involved, again why would anyone with 2 kids deal with a 3 kid share? They can find a nanny that caters just to them at $20/hr.

I've had parents pay me "more" because they said they wanted me. But you believe all care is equal, so you wouldn't understand the parents who choose to pay me more. They get how much early environment matters in the long run.