I agree with the points raised by 12:52. In addition, a nanny bringing her child often costs more than a traditional nanny share but offers less benefits. OP- using your own language a nanny bringing her child for a slight pay reduction is not a balanced trade by any means.

*There is more liability and complexity in dealing with home and car insurance if your employee brings her child than a traditional share.
*A traditional share costs less.
*In a traditional share it is clear that each family bears the cost of activities, food, etc for their own child as opposed to having to pay for the nanny's child too.
*In a traditional share, a nanny can be honest about issues, kid's schedules, and what is not working. If she is bringing her child, she will not bring anything up that could jeopardize her ability to bring her child. You will only hear that everything is wonderful when its not.

Nannies don't care about any of the above issues because they affect the employers not them.

Anonymous wrote:
OP here- I can somewhat understand where your coming from, but I am sure most if not all nannies who bring their children take a pay cut for it. So it is not an entitlement it is a trade between two people to negotiate price and as you put it "privilege". The point of this thread is not to bash anyone nanny or MB. I respectfully accepted the terms of my employment, and I would not even consider asking my bosses to bring my child. But there are also families who would agree to a share but would not agree for the nanny to being her own child for a pay decrease. So how would you explain that? That seems ill-mannered in my opinion. Idk about the poster who you quoted who clearly had animosity in her response. Buy I do not think it has anything to do with entitlement once it is fairly negotiated.

I wanted to comment on your question on why some families would not agree to nanny bringing her own child even for a pay decrease (but would consider a share). Shares are different in that sense because the nanny is presumed to treat both kids on an equal footing. In a share there is also no need to have a meeting of the mind on things like parenting philosophies, what is allowed, not allowed, schedules etc. - these negotiations take place between share partners and not employer/nanny. The nanny just follows whatever the parents have agreed upon. So it's easier with the share because the personal element is removed from this scenario; the relationship is purely employer/employee with no maternal feelings brought into it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

This was the resentment I was referring to.

I don't get to take my children to work, if I'm paying my nanny to watch my children why should I let her bring her child too? FWIW my nanny doesn't have children and if she did and asked if she could bring them I'd consider it but I don't think it should be a given at all. What makes you think you are so entitled? If I asked my employer if I could bring my children to work she would look at me like I had 3 heads. If you work outside of your home, whether it's because you want to or you have to, it's your choice. If you want a job where you can bring your children it's up to you to find one that would allow it. If you approach it as an entitlement rather than a privledge though you'll never find anyone who wants you to work for them.

OP here- I can somewhat understand where your coming from, but I am sure most if not all nannies who bring their children take a pay cut for it. So it is not an entitlement it is a trade between two people to negotiate price and as you put it "privilege". The point of this thread is not to bash anyone nanny or MB. I respectfully accepted the terms of my employment, and I would not even consider asking my bosses to bring my child. But there are also families who would agree to a share but would not agree for the nanny to being her own child for a pay decrease. So how would you explain that? That seems ill-mannered in my opinion. Idk about the poster who you quoted who clearly had animosity in her response. Buy I do not think it has anything to do with entitlement once it is fairly negotiated.

I'm the PP you quoted and I agree with you completely. My comments were directed at the PP I quoted and not towards you. I actually feel for you completely and your situation. I agree that it makes no sense for someone to be ok with a nanny share but not for the nanny to bring her own children. I think that seems ill-mannered too. I wasn't saying a nanny should never be allowed to bring her children to work either and as I said, I might even be ok with it myself depending on the nanny and number of children if we negoiated it fairly for everyone involved. The PP made it seem like any parent though who didn't let a nanny bring their children was a bad person and I don't agree with that either. OP, I don't think you sound entitled at all, I think you are trying to do what's best given a difficult situation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

This was the resentment I was referring to.

I don't get to take my children to work, if I'm paying my nanny to watch my children why should I let her bring her child too? FWIW my nanny doesn't have children and if she did and asked if she could bring them I'd consider it but I don't think it should be a given at all. What makes you think you are so entitled? If I asked my employer if I could bring my children to work she would look at me like I had 3 heads. If you work outside of your home, whether it's because you want to or you have to, it's your choice. If you want a job where you can bring your children it's up to you to find one that would allow it. If you approach it as an entitlement rather than a privledge though you'll never find anyone who wants you to work for them.

OP here- I can somewhat understand where your coming from, but I am sure most if not all nannies who bring their children take a pay cut for it. So it is not an entitlement it is a trade between two people to negotiate price and as you put it "privilege". The point of this thread is not to bash anyone nanny or MB. I respectfully accepted the terms of my employment, and I would not even consider asking my bosses to bring my child. But there are also families who would agree to a share but would not agree for the nanny to being her own child for a pay decrease. So how would you explain that? That seems ill-mannered in my opinion. Idk about the poster who you quoted who clearly had animosity in her response. Buy I do not think it has anything to do with entitlement once it is fairly negotiated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

This was the resentment I was referring to.

I don't get to take my children to work, if I'm paying my nanny to watch my children why should I let her bring her child too? FWIW my nanny doesn't have children and if she did and asked if she could bring them I'd consider it but I don't think it should be a given at all. What makes you think you are so entitled? If I asked my employer if I could bring my children to work she would look at me like I had 3 heads. If you work outside of your home, whether it's because you want to or you have to, it's your choice. If you want a job where you can bring your children it's up to you to find one that would allow it. If you approach it as an entitlement rather than a privledge though you'll never find anyone who wants you to work for them.

Call it whatever you want, but I'd call myself stupid if I considered a nanny job that didn't "allow" me to parent my own young child, as I agreed to parent another child. Just plain dumb. That simple.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

This was the resentment I was referring to.

I don't get to take my children to work, if I'm paying my nanny to watch my children why should I let her bring her child too? FWIW my nanny doesn't have children and if she did and asked if she could bring them I'd consider it but I don't think it should be a given at all. What makes you think you are so entitled? If I asked my employer if I could bring my children to work she would look at me like I had 3 heads. If you work outside of your home, whether it's because you want to or you have to, it's your choice. If you want a job where you can bring your children it's up to you to find one that would allow it. If you approach it as an entitlement rather than a privledge though you'll never find anyone who wants you to work for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of underlying resentment is why older nannies or nannies without children are preferable.

Underlying resentment? I resent no one. I miss my child during the day. Really? Some of you on here have no place to give advice. Always with the snark comments. I love the child I care for and the family as well, I give them my all each day, and the fact that I miss my child does not change the way I perform my duties. No more than it does any other workingl mother.

I wasn't referring to you.

My apologies then. You should quote!

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

This was the resentment I was referring to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of underlying resentment is why older nannies or nannies without children are preferable.

Underlying resentment? I resent no one. I miss my child during the day. Really? Some of you on here have no place to give advice. Always with the snark comments. I love the child I care for and the family as well, I give them my all each day, and the fact that I miss my child does not change the way I perform my duties. No more than it does any other workingl mother.

I wasn't referring to you.

Anonymous wrote:This kind of underlying resentment is why older nannies or nannies without children are preferable.

Underlying resentment? I resent no one. I miss my child during the day. Really? Some of you on here have no place to give advice. Always with the snark comments. I love the child I care for and the family as well, I give them my all each day, and the fact that I miss my child does not change the way I perform my duties. No more than it does any other workingl mother.

This kind of underlying resentment is why older nannies or nannies without children are preferable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

Chill out, Che. We're a rich brown family with a nanny who never brought her child. Pffft!! That was the sound of your theory deflating.

Now you reveal that your nanny's children all grown up. No wonder she didn't bring them to work with her. Duh.

Pffft yourself, to the "brown" poster.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I just can't imagine how awful you rich white women feel, asking your nanny to abandon her own child, just for you. It's not like caring for one child (yours), is superior to caring for two children (yours and hers). Do you really think her child might contaminate yours? Why not enhance your child's experience of real life, by welcoming the nanny's child?

Chill out, Che. We're a rich brown family with a nanny who never brought her child. Pffft!! That was the sound of your theory deflating.

Now you reveal that your nanny's children all grown up. No wonder she didn't bring them to work with her. Duh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP- So your cousin watches your baby for 50 hours/week? Do you pay her? Just curious! You are lucky.

OP here, my cousin does not watch her the whole 50 hours, my husband works less hours than I do, so she watches her maybe 35hrs for the most, and yes I do pay her. But she isn't in childcare, she is a SS benefactor and her husband works so she is just as home. Honestly though I don't think she is that great at caring for children, I've had to teach her A LOT. But it is much cheaper and I know she cares about my daughter.

So she is collecting SS for a disability that prevents her from "working" while illegally working for you?

OP here-
No she collects social security as a benefactor like I said, because her father was a veteran and disabled + exposed to biowarfare that have genetic complications (is that enough info for you?!), and her husband works so they do not need the money for her to work. I don't understand how that is any of your business to begin with. And what I pay her is not even at the point that it needs to be claimed on taxes. So again how is that relative to anything else? Or are you just looking for something to bitch about, if so there are many other threads open to irrelevant bitching.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP- So your cousin watches your baby for 50 hours/week? Do you pay her? Just curious! You are lucky.

OP here, my cousin does not watch her the whole 50 hours, my husband works less hours than I do, so she watches her maybe 35hrs for the most, and yes I do pay her. But she isn't in childcare, she is a SS benefactor and her husband works so she is just as home. Honestly though I don't think she is that great at caring for children, I've had to teach her A LOT. But it is much cheaper and I know she cares about my daughter.

So she is collecting SS for a disability that prevents her from "working" while illegally working for you?