Anonymous
09/27/2013 09:54
Subject: Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Anonymous wrote:OP, don't listen to the posters trying to make you out to be some cheap, scheming witch. I know plenty of nannies who would be perfectly fine with this arrangement and would not balk on the whopping 6 hours of overtime a week in exchange for having drastically shorter days for most of the year. Call it guaranteed hours and pay a set amount each week, just make sure whoever you hire is on board with the logistics. FWIW, many of the people I know who go into this field do so for the flexibility that it can provide (closer employer/employee relationships make negotiating non standard situations more likely, as in your case). You will have no problem finding a candidate who will be fine with your schedule and he/she won't feel like they are being taken advantage of, because they aren't.
Agree!
OP, your schedule is basically my schedule. I don't feel taken advantage of, and I'm not a victim. I am paid wonderfully. Great vacation and sick time, along with health insurance and various benefits.
I'm willing to bet you will find a nanny who would love what you have to offer. Find the right one and she/he will stay. I have!
Anonymous
09/27/2013 07:35
Subject: Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Anonymous wrote:Save yourself the trouble and hire a foreign born nanny, they will more than happily accommodate and actually want to do more.
Do you understand what a gross (in all meanings of the word) stereotype this is?
Anonymous
09/27/2013 07:34
Subject: Re:Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Did you read my post? I told you why it wouldn't work. You have part time nannies, full time nannies, and nannies that need to work multiple part time jobs. OPs needs are essentially a part time nanny during the school year, but needs sick day/holiday/school break coverage, and a full time position during the summer. Most nannies would be interested in one or the other, and for whatever individual reason, not both. A part time nanny would be cool with 32 hours, because she a)has another job b)has another commitment like school or c)she has no interest in working a ton of hours. A full time nanny would be fine with 46 hours not 32. In order to secure the availability of a full time nanny you'll need to guarantee full time hours, at least 40. If you hired someone okay with working and being paid for 32 hours for the majority of the year, why the hell would she suddenly have the availability or the desire to work an extra 14 hours/week (and for the same exact pay, in OPs original plan!)? Its not attractive because of the PT/FT dichotomy and one part of the job would be very nun attractive to most candidates. That was OPs question. No its not an attractive schedule/offer, and its illegal to boot.
Ok- here is the problem with your argument. Just because the 3 types of nannies you mentioned may exist- those who work part-time, full-time, or multiple part-time jobs, does not exclude a fourth type. That would be a really lucky nanny who gets to be paid like a person with a full time job, but likes to work like a person with a part time job (other than a brief period during the summer when she gets into overdrive and puts in slightly over full time). Not to mention, has the opportunity to find part time positions during much of the year, which gives her the opportunity to make extra money if she would like to. There are a lot of nannies who would like that opportunity. You may not be one of them, but then your attitude and rudeness to OP already excludes you from consideration.
Once again, OPs original question was is this an attractive setup. My answer; no its not, for the vast majority of nannies. Sure OP might find the obscure exception. Great. She'd have to be willing to work both a very part time job, then a very full time job, not understand how OT ought to be paid, and be willing to commit to a full year in order to receive her full salary. What would make it a MUCH more attractive offer is guaranteeing 40 hours during the school year, to maintain full time availability, and paying the required OT during the summer. By the way, disagreeing with you does not make me rude. However your attempt at a personal attack is rude.
Anonymous
09/27/2013 00:57
Subject: Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
I would work with that arrangement. Maybe it's illegal, but I'm sure so is hiring off the books, giving cash bonuses, speeding, etc which atleast we all do. Stop acting holier than thou and as if OP is some cheap slave monster making her nanny work for peanuts or something.
Anonymous
09/27/2013 00:37
Subject: Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Save yourself the trouble and hire a foreign born nanny, they will more than happily accommodate and actually want to do more.
Anonymous
09/27/2013 00:31
Subject: Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
PP here again. I work about 30 hours a week for the school year. I actually wouldn't take your position because I don't want to work more hours in the summer, definitely not 46 a week. If anything, I would want to work slightly less than I am now, so I can get a bit of a vacation myself.
I wouldn't want to work more though, and you will find that many who do school year work are in school themselves and summers they would like to travel, visit family, and whatnot while their own school schedule is allowing them to do this.
I wouldn't want to work more though, and you will find that many who do school year work are in school themselves and summers they would like to travel, visit family, and whatnot while their own school schedule is allowing them to do this.
Anonymous
09/27/2013 00:23
Subject: Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Anonymous wrote:So, now that we all now that I am not cheating anyone out of overtie pay...let's get back to my question. If you were a nanny would you be interested in this schedule?
No, I would want an hourly rate, and to just be paid for the hours I worked, and if it went over 40 in the summer, then OT for those hours. If you want to offer guaranteed hours throughout the school year, then great, but you are overly complicating it. I don't want to be paid more during the school year and then if I want to move on to something else, feel guilted because you calculated things on the expectation that I would be around the summer too.
Things change for people, and when dealing with older kids and generally after school care work, you don't plan that far in advance. You try to make it through the school year (which doesn't even always happen with some college students) and then see what their summers are like and if they want summer hours too. Then you ask if they want to do another year towards the end of the summer when everyone is hiring for the new school year.
Anonymous
09/26/2013 20:32
Subject: Re:Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Anonymous wrote:
Did you read my post? I told you why it wouldn't work. You have part time nannies, full time nannies, and nannies that need to work multiple part time jobs. OPs needs are essentially a part time nanny during the school year, but needs sick day/holiday/school break coverage, and a full time position during the summer. Most nannies would be interested in one or the other, and for whatever individual reason, not both. A part time nanny would be cool with 32 hours, because she a)has another job b)has another commitment like school or c)she has no interest in working a ton of hours. A full time nanny would be fine with 46 hours not 32. In order to secure the availability of a full time nanny you'll need to guarantee full time hours, at least 40. If you hired someone okay with working and being paid for 32 hours for the majority of the year, why the hell would she suddenly have the availability or the desire to work an extra 14 hours/week (and for the same exact pay, in OPs original plan!)? Its not attractive because of the PT/FT dichotomy and one part of the job would be very nun attractive to most candidates. That was OPs question. No its not an attractive schedule/offer, and its illegal to boot.
Ok- here is the problem with your argument. Just because the 3 types of nannies you mentioned may exist- those who work part-time, full-time, or multiple part-time jobs, does not exclude a fourth type. That would be a really lucky nanny who gets to be paid like a person with a full time job, but likes to work like a person with a part time job (other than a brief period during the summer when she gets into overdrive and puts in slightly over full time). Not to mention, has the opportunity to find part time positions during much of the year, which gives her the opportunity to make extra money if she would like to. There are a lot of nannies who would like that opportunity. You may not be one of them, but then your attitude and rudeness to OP already excludes you from consideration.
Anonymous
09/26/2013 18:43
Subject: Re:Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
Anonymous wrote:13:33 here.
Why wouldn't what I suggested work? She is being paid the equivalent of a full time job. All she would need to do is budget in order to allow for the varying amounts of the actual paychecks plus bonus. That budgeting would be a bit of pain, and so OP's original proposal was a way to keep those paychecks consistent. but because it isn't legal my suggestion would be an alternative with the same benefit. The nanny would earn a salary equivalent to a full time, year round job (which is a higher income than her actual hours plus OT would bring in alone), and OP would know that her nanny had incentive to not leave for a full time position once things slowed down. The nanny would also have the option to pick up additional part time jobs during the slower time, though she wouldn't have to if she didn't want to, as she was earning the salary of a full time year round job.
Did you read my post? I told you why it wouldn't work. You have part time nannies, full time nannies, and nannies that need to work multiple part time jobs. OPs needs are essentially a part time nanny during the school year, but needs sick day/holiday/school break coverage, and a full time position during the summer. Most nannies would be interested in one or the other, and for whatever individual reason, not both. A part time nanny would be cool with 32 hours, because she a)has another job b)has another commitment like school or c)she has no interest in working a ton of hours. A full time nanny would be fine with 46 hours not 32. In order to secure the availability of a full time nanny you'll need to guarantee full time hours, at least 40. If you hired someone okay with working and being paid for 32 hours for the majority of the year, why the hell would she suddenly have the availability or the desire to work an extra 14 hours/week (and for the same exact pay, in OPs original plan!)? Its not attractive because of the PT/FT dichotomy and one part of the job would be very nun attractive to most candidates. That was OPs question. No its not an attractive schedule/offer, and its illegal to boot.
Anonymous
09/26/2013 15:03
Subject: Re:Nannies - What Would You Think of This Schedule
13:33 here.
Why wouldn't what I suggested work? She is being paid the equivalent of a full time job. All she would need to do is budget in order to allow for the varying amounts of the actual paychecks plus bonus. That budgeting would be a bit of pain, and so OP's original proposal was a way to keep those paychecks consistent. but because it isn't legal my suggestion would be an alternative with the same benefit. The nanny would earn a salary equivalent to a full time, year round job (which is a higher income than her actual hours plus OT would bring in alone), and OP would know that her nanny had incentive to not leave for a full time position once things slowed down. The nanny would also have the option to pick up additional part time jobs during the slower time, though she wouldn't have to if she didn't want to, as she was earning the salary of a full time year round job.
Why wouldn't what I suggested work? She is being paid the equivalent of a full time job. All she would need to do is budget in order to allow for the varying amounts of the actual paychecks plus bonus. That budgeting would be a bit of pain, and so OP's original proposal was a way to keep those paychecks consistent. but because it isn't legal my suggestion would be an alternative with the same benefit. The nanny would earn a salary equivalent to a full time, year round job (which is a higher income than her actual hours plus OT would bring in alone), and OP would know that her nanny had incentive to not leave for a full time position once things slowed down. The nanny would also have the option to pick up additional part time jobs during the slower time, though she wouldn't have to if she didn't want to, as she was earning the salary of a full time year round job.