Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
You're quoting me. I think it's just harder to call in for merely being under the weather when you're live-in. If you're violently ill, obviously you have to take off, but if you're just suffering from a bad cold, and you're already physically at work, I think you're more likely to power through.
As you should just power through. A good employee works whenever possible during their scheduled time.
No, a good employee maximizes their availability. If I have had 4 bad colds in the last month and don't get a day to rest and recuperate somewhere in there, I am compromising my immunity and increasing the odds that I will get something more serious down the road and have to miss several days in a row.
A good employee also maintains high standards. If my best judgement says that I shouldn't be at work, the fact that it's "just a cold" shouldn't weigh in. As a live-in you feel like you have to be demonstrably sick (fever, throwing up, etc.) but if I am lightheaded and out of it, I am not safe to work.
I work primarily with toddlers and usually twins so perhaps if your nanny is just supervising school-aged kids doing homework and legos it might be different.
I'm a live in nanny I don't miss work unless I'm violently throwing up. My employers are thankful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
You're quoting me. I think it's just harder to call in for merely being under the weather when you're live-in. If you're violently ill, obviously you have to take off, but if you're just suffering from a bad cold, and you're already physically at work, I think you're more likely to power through.
As you should just power through. A good employee works whenever possible during their scheduled time.
No, a good employee maximizes their availability. If I have had 4 bad colds in the last month and don't get a day to rest and recuperate somewhere in there, I am compromising my immunity and increasing the odds that I will get something more serious down the road and have to miss several days in a row.
A good employee also maintains high standards. If my best judgement says that I shouldn't be at work, the fact that it's "just a cold" shouldn't weigh in. As a live-in you feel like you have to be demonstrably sick (fever, throwing up, etc.) but if I am lightheaded and out of it, I am not safe to work.
I work primarily with toddlers and usually twins so perhaps if your nanny is just supervising school-aged kids doing homework and legos it might be different.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
You're quoting me. I think it's just harder to call in for merely being under the weather when you're live-in. If you're violently ill, obviously you have to take off, but if you're just suffering from a bad cold, and you're already physically at work, I think you're more likely to power through.
As you should just power through. A good employee works whenever possible during their scheduled time.
No, a good employee maximizes their availability. If I have had 4 bad colds in the last month and don't get a day to rest and recuperate somewhere in there, I am compromising my immunity and increasing the odds that I will get something more serious down the road and have to miss several days in a row.
A good employee also maintains high standards. If my best judgement says that I shouldn't be at work, the fact that it's "just a cold" shouldn't weigh in. As a live-in you feel like you have to be demonstrably sick (fever, throwing up, etc.) but if I am lightheaded and out of it, I am not safe to work.
I work primarily with toddlers and usually twins so perhaps if your nanny is just supervising school-aged kids doing homework and legos it might be different.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
You're quoting me. I think it's just harder to call in for merely being under the weather when you're live-in. If you're violently ill, obviously you have to take off, but if you're just suffering from a bad cold, and you're already physically at work, I think you're more likely to power through.
As you should just power through. A good employee works whenever possible during their scheduled time.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
You're quoting me. I think it's just harder to call in for merely being under the weather when you're live-in. If you're violently ill, obviously you have to take off, but if you're just suffering from a bad cold, and you're already physically at work, I think you're more likely to power through.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Ok so are the live-out nannies saying they take sick days when they are not really sick?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nannies learned from experience that living in is tantamount to being on duty 24/7 for less pay.
This.
I would never, ever live in. Not only for that reason, but also because it's impossible to take a sick day when you live in. And, living in also requires you to give up the opportunity to live with a significant other, or any other sort of your own family. Way too huge a sacrifice for me.
Not OP but I will confess: fewer sick days being taken is one of the reasons I prefer live-in.
Anonymous wrote:if the person was otherwise reliable and qualified, what possible reason could you have for requiring they live in your house? genuine question.