Anonymous wrote:PP, we aren't talking about charitable pay, we're talking about a living wage. That is something I believe everyone is entitled to, nanny or not, and so it is an ethical failing to choose to pay someone less than they need to live and you can afford, simply because you can. That is what Walmart does, and I'm positive you're better than them.
Actually, charitable pay is exactly what you are talking about. You think a certain wage is a "living wage", because you think it is and that is the number you think is ethical. But, if the market doesn't value you at that rate, then, well, it's only your opinion and you should jump ship and get yourself a job where your skills are more valuable.
You are not owed what you think a "living wage" is. You are owed only what someone is willing to pay. Why can't you understand this simple economic concept?
PP, we aren't talking about charitable pay, we're talking about a living wage. That is something I believe everyone is entitled to, nanny or not, and so it is an ethical failing to choose to pay someone less than they need to live and you can afford, simply because you can. That is what Walmart does, and I'm positive you're better than them.
Anonymous wrote:PP, we aren't talking about charitable pay, we're talking about a living wage. That is something I believe everyone is entitled to, nanny or not, and so it is an ethical failing to choose to pay someone less than they need to live and you can afford, simply because you can. That is what Walmart does, and I'm positive you're better than them.
Artificially inflated wages are one thing, but seeking out a qualified moderately educated nanny and paying her as little as possible simply because she is in the unfortunate position to have to accept anything at that point in time is wrong. We're not talking about clothing or other objects. We're talking about people. You should not be trying to get a good deal on a human being. And if you truly cannot see the difference you are a sad person and I am wasting my time.
Anonymous wrote:A correction was issued...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/pageoneplus/corrections-november-30-2012.html?ref=corrections&_r=1&
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I will never understand this desire of working mothers on this board to pay the person you want to love and care for your child as little as possible. Would you be okay with similar working conditions for your daughter/sister/mother? When you hire a nanny, the wage you pay is more than your childcare costs. Its how someone pays their bills and feeds their children. I know you all say it isn't your job to worry about these things but its the reality. What you pay your nanny is what you are asking her to live on in exchange for caring for your baby day after day.
You can use this argument about ANYTHING which is why it's a totally invalid reason. Under this reasoning, we shouldn't consider public schools. All our kids should go to private school, shouldn't i want the VERY best for the person I love and care about? I also shouldn't buy clothes at consignment - why wouldn't I want the person I love and care about to wear the VERY BEST clothes? Let's all go to Jacadi.
Hiring a reasonably priced nanny isn't about negotiating down quality or services, but finding someone who fits your needs and values INCLUDING no artificially inflated wages.
Artificially inflated wages are one thing, but seeking out a qualified moderately educated nanny and paying her as little as possible simply because she is in the unfortunate position to have to accept anything at that point in time is wrong. We're not talking about clothing or other objects. We're talking about people. You should not be trying to get a good deal on a human being. And if you truly cannot see the difference you are a sad person and I am wasting my time.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I will never understand this desire of working mothers on this board to pay the person you want to love and care for your child as little as possible. Would you be okay with similar working conditions for your daughter/sister/mother? When you hire a nanny, the wage you pay is more than your childcare costs. Its how someone pays their bills and feeds their children. I know you all say it isn't your job to worry about these things but its the reality. What you pay your nanny is what you are asking her to live on in exchange for caring for your baby day after day.
You can use this argument about ANYTHING which is why it's a totally invalid reason. Under this reasoning, we shouldn't consider public schools. All our kids should go to private school, shouldn't i want the VERY best for the person I love and care about? I also shouldn't buy clothes at consignment - why wouldn't I want the person I love and care about to wear the VERY BEST clothes? Let's all go to Jacadi.
Hiring a reasonably priced nanny isn't about negotiating down quality or services, but finding someone who fits your needs and values INCLUDING no artificially inflated wages.
Anonymous wrote:I will never understand this desire of working mothers on this board to pay the person you want to love and care for your child as little as possible. Would you be okay with similar working conditions for your daughter/sister/mother? When you hire a nanny, the wage you pay is more than your childcare costs. Its how someone pays their bills and feeds their children. I know you all say it isn't your job to worry about these things but its the reality. What you pay your nanny is what you are asking her to live on in exchange for caring for your baby day after day.
Anonymous wrote:To this I would add that the $10-12/hour daycare workers are supervised by someone who earns considerably more. These daycare workers are not paid to make decisions, etc. but to maintain order in the class, make sure diapers are changed on schedule, lunch and snack are served, etc. Your nanny is sole charge when you are gone - one would hope you take this into consideration when evaluating candidates and compensation. There is clearly some middle ground between the $10/hour daycare worker and the $20 hour entitled nanny.
I'd actually disagree with this as I've used daycare and had a nanny. The daycare office staff is more focused on the overall running of facilities, business aspects (billing/collecting), compliance with inspectors, hiring etc. While they do supervise the daycare workers the lead worker or teacher as they refer to them really is making the same type of daily decisions that a nanny is making. As much as I really like our nanny, she isn't making big decisions beyond what the infant daycare worker was making on a daily basis.
You could argue that in daycare you could hire workers with far less experience because they can be trained by the more experience childcare givers on site and have closer supervision. However at our daycare all the teachers were required to have child care certifications and the lead teacher/worker in the room needed a degree. Our nanny is great but she like most nannies doesn't have this level of education.
I remember asking a few of the teachers why they chose to work in daycare rather than be a nanny since a nanny paid more. This was long before we decided to go the nanny route so we weren't poaching. They seemed to look down on nannies, certainly didn't view them as individuals who make bigger decisions and saw being a nanny as a stigma.