Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We had the same experience that most of the candidates asking for higher rates were less capable or qualified than candidates asking for lower rates. Being a nanny is seen as easy work that pays well for what it is so it attracts some people that aren't particularly interested in a being a nanny but after easy money. The candidates asking for a lower rate were also the ones asking more relevant questions about the kids and looking for a family that they would fit.

Easy work? Is that why you don't want to do it? Is that why your children are turning out so well?

Get real. Nobody outsources childcare because they don't want to do hard work. In most cases, they outsource because both parents can do better economically by working outside the home, at least in the long run.

Completely agree with 9:09. An ECE background is useful for preschool where class management and designing or executing a curriculum for 10+ preschoolers at different levels of development is necessary. For a nanny position, this is barely to not at all relevant. A loving, patient, engaged nanny who loves to talk with (not at) kids, play with them, read with them, and be outside is the best situation. You want someone who maintains a developmentally appropriate environment and makes the kid's feel loved and valued.

Kids will develop skills if given the environment, materials, and engagement that appropriate for kids which comes from basic things. An ECE nanny can not "teach" a child beyond their developmental abilities anymore than buying Baby Einstein videos will give your child scientific reasoning skills beyond their developmental abilities.

Preschool or daycare teachers don't make very much money. Their jobs are much harder than nannies. They don't have 2-3 hour breaks while this children nap. They can't run their own errands during the day. They can't just decide to take the kids on an outing or spend half the day at a park on a nice day. Unless they work for a school with very low standards, they can't be on their phone constantly. The ECE nannies know that being a nanny is much easier and more lucrative than working for a preschool or daycare. Not only are you paying a premium for skills you don't need, but you are paying someone who is after an easier work environment.

It would be nice if there was a correlation between wages and skills (would make it easier to weed out the bad nannies) but there absolutely is not. Being a good nanny is not correlated to having a higher education either. The best nannies are the ones who are caring, engaging, and loving, and set a good example of patience, social interaction, and kindness for their charges and those traits unfortunately have nothing to do with what nannies charge or what their educational background is. You don't need a higher degree to teach preschoolers ABCs and colors and shapes and model good manners and good behavior. I'd take an engaged, active, patient and kind $15/hr nanny who gets that she's part of a team and wants to work together with us on making good choices for DC over a more expensive college educated nanny who thinks she knows better than I do what is good for my child. In fact, I did do that and several years later, I think it was the best decision I made.

And I say this as someone who had a series of non-educated barely English speaking wonderful warm loving nannies growing up - I am now a relatively successful well-educated adult who continues to maintain great warm relationships with the wonderful nannies I had growing up.

Anonymous wrote:We had the same experience that most of the candidates asking for higher rates were less capable or qualified than candidates asking for lower rates. Being a nanny is seen as easy work that pays well for what it is so it attracts some people that aren't particularly interested in a being a nanny but after easy money. The candidates asking for a lower rate were also the ones asking more relevant questions about the kids and looking for a family that they would fit.

Easy work? Is that why you don't want to do it? Is that why your children are turning out so well?

We had the same experience that most of the candidates asking for higher rates were less capable or qualified than candidates asking for lower rates. Being a nanny is seen as easy work that pays well for what it is so it attracts some people that aren't particularly interested in a being a nanny but after easy money. The candidates asking for a lower rate were also the ones asking more relevant questions about the kids and looking for a family that they would fit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You work your way up with a family. ours started at 15 and gets a dollar raise every year so is at 18 so 21or 22 by the time she leaves us. If she wants to stay at that rate, she'll have to do a nanny share. Otherwise she is back to 15 I guess.

What?

I think the poster is saying that she hopes to retain the nanny for about five years and give her a $1 raise each year so she hits about $22 per hour by the time her services are no longer needed. Then, in order to stay at that rate, the nanny may need to do a share, since very few families start a new nanny at $22 per hour. This is one of the hard truths about nanny work. Raises earned through longevity in one job are not always matched by the starting compensation offered by a subsequent employer, so it is fairly common for nannies to take a pay cut when starting with a new family.

Anonymous wrote:You work your way up with a family. ours started at 15 and gets a dollar raise every year so is at 18 so 21or 22 by the time she leaves us. If she wants to stay at that rate, she'll have to do a nanny share. Otherwise she is back to 15 I guess.

What?

You work your way up with a family. ours started at 15 and gets a dollar raise every year so is at 18 so 21or 22 by the time she leaves us. If she wants to stay at that rate, she'll have to do a nanny share. Otherwise she is back to 15 I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was looking to hire a nanny in 2012, I would have happily paid $20 per hour for someone who marketed herself as a private educator and was committed to teaching my child in an age-appropriate way per a written plan of her own design. I wanted it done through play, but with more pre-planned, adult-led activities than most nannies bother with, covering the full range of skill areas and, eventually, subject matter areas. There just aren't many candidates like that in DC.

I found that the women seeking premium rates were mostly young and deluded about current market rates. A few were older with years of experience, but they were unable to convince me that their 15-20 years of experience would make them better than the $15 nanny with 3-4 years of experience. In fact, some of the most experienced nannies seemed a tired of the work and just in it to pay bills, whereas the ones with 3-4 years experience were still really enamored of kids.

In my opinion, there are three things that will get a nanny to the $18-$20 starting price point: 1) working with a large family or in a share, 2) taking on cooking and housekeeping beyond the usual kid-related services, and 3) formal college-level training in education or child development, coupled with a willingness to translate that training in a planned way to home-based care.

I realize that some experienced nannies can start a new job with one child at that price point, but based on the pool of applicants I encountered, I just didn't feel like the value was there.

I find it quite interesting, that no where in your three points, do I see any skill that would directly benefit your child.

What's with the commas? I wouldn't pay you $10 per hour.
I agree with PP. A college educated nanny does benefit the child.

Where can one find some evidence of that, or is it wishful thinking?

I pay my nanny $16/hr in takoma park. One 7 month baby girl. I interviewed several and that seemed to be the going rate. A lot of nannies in takoma do shares, I think it drives up the price to get a quality nanny to yourself.

Best money we spend each week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was looking to hire a nanny in 2012, I would have happily paid $20 per hour for someone who marketed herself as a private educator and was committed to teaching my child in an age-appropriate way per a written plan of her own design. I wanted it done through play, but with more pre-planned, adult-led activities than most nannies bother with, covering the full range of skill areas and, eventually, subject matter areas. There just aren't many candidates like that in DC.

I found that the women seeking premium rates were mostly young and deluded about current market rates. A few were older with years of experience, but they were unable to convince me that their 15-20 years of experience would make them better than the $15 nanny with 3-4 years of experience. In fact, some of the most experienced nannies seemed a tired of the work and just in it to pay bills, whereas the ones with 3-4 years experience were still really enamored of kids.

In my opinion, there are three things that will get a nanny to the $18-$20 starting price point: 1) working with a large family or in a share, 2) taking on cooking and housekeeping beyond the usual kid-related services, and 3) formal college-level training in education or child development, coupled with a willingness to translate that training in a planned way to home-based care.

I realize that some experienced nannies can start a new job with one child at that price point, but based on the pool of applicants I encountered, I just didn't feel like the value was there.

I find it quite interesting, that no where in your three points, do I see any skill that would directly benefit your child.

What's with the commas? I wouldn't pay you $10 per hour.
I agree with PP. A college educated nanny does benefit the child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was looking to hire a nanny in 2012, I would have happily paid $20 per hour for someone who marketed herself as a private educator and was committed to teaching my child in an age-appropriate way per a written plan of her own design. I wanted it done through play, but with more pre-planned, adult-led activities than most nannies bother with, covering the full range of skill areas and, eventually, subject matter areas. There just aren't many candidates like that in DC.

I found that the women seeking premium rates were mostly young and deluded about current market rates. A few were older with years of experience, but they were unable to convince me that their 15-20 years of experience would make them better than the $15 nanny with 3-4 years of experience. In fact, some of the most experienced nannies seemed a tired of the work and just in it to pay bills, whereas the ones with 3-4 years experience were still really enamored of kids.

In my opinion, there are three things that will get a nanny to the $18-$20 starting price point: 1) working with a large family or in a share, 2) taking on cooking and housekeeping beyond the usual kid-related services, and 3) formal college-level training in education or child development, coupled with a willingness to translate that training in a planned way to home-based care.

I realize that some experienced nannies can start a new job with one child at that price point, but based on the pool of applicants I encountered, I just didn't feel like the value was there.

I find it quite interesting, that no where in your three points, do I see any skill that would directly benefit your child.

What's with the commas? I wouldn't pay you $10 per hour.
I agree with PP. A college educated nanny does benefit the child.

Anonymous wrote:No one in my neighborhood started out paying more than $15 an hour. This board doesn't represent most nannies. Most of the people responding aren't even from this area so whatever they claim to be making in another state isn't relevant anyway.

When we were interviewing, we saw candidates asking for rates all over the map. While I agree that marketing yourself is really important, no amount of marketing is going to overcome a $6 per hour difference between equally qualified candidates. You have to offer something VERY different to justify a 30% increase and I've yet to see any of the nannies offer something that would justify this. There is no point trying to fool people into thinking that the nannies asking for market rate are inferior because they just aren't.

In my experience, the nannies asking for market rates were more thoughtful in their interview questions, appeared to looking for a good fit, we're more flexible, and seemed more interested in finding a job that they would stay at for several years. They also had better job histories and references. Their references were sincerely sorry to see them go, while for several of the $18+ candidates the references were positive but not entirely sad to see them go.

A few references for the more expensive candidates mentioned that they were parting ways because it was just too expensive now, their family had different needs now, they were switching to a part time nanny or au pair, or they liked the nanny but couldn't justify paying her full-time with no housework with the kids in school.

It's because the nannies on here think they're great. Notice all of them saying they go 'above and beyond' and then list all the reasons? Notice the reasons are actually their normal duties and not them going above and beyond. They also get bent out of shape if their employers ask them to clean their nanny vehicle or fold the kids laundry. They are lazy and entitled and if it wasen't for these parents, all those nannies would be working in retail making min wage.

OP, if you're having a hard time finding 16-19 jobs then you're obviously over-selling yourself. Lower your rate and see what happens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Key is understanding your worth. "

Another key is actually being worth $17 for 1 baby.

Indeed. I can't imagine leaving my baby with a person who wasn't worth *at least* $17/hr. Apparently, each of us has different standards and goals.

I can't imagine leaving my baby with a person who wasn't worthy of being left with my baby. I found candidates at the $17 to $20 range who, regardless of experience, just weren't people I wanted helping to raise her. I also found candidates at the $15 price point who were worthy of the job and then some. There just isn't a consistent correlation between rates and quality in the nanny field.

If my child grows up to conduct herself like the nanny we hired at $15/hour, I will be very pleased. That's more than I can say about some $17-$20 nannies.

True, some people don't know how to successfully hire help. However, in every profession, you get what you pay for. There's no special exception just for nannies. You still get what you pay for, unless the nanny is a relative or close friend, maybe.

Are you are bargain in your profession, PP?
Why?

Anonymous wrote:

I can't imagine leaving my baby with a person who wasn't worthy of being left with my baby. I found candidates at the $17 to $20 range who, regardless of experience, just weren't people I wanted helping to raise her. I also found candidates at the $15 price point who were worthy of the job and then some. There just isn't a consistent correlation between rates and quality in the nanny field.

If my child grows up to conduct herself like the nanny we hired at $15/hour, I will be very pleased. That's more than I can say about some $17-$20 nannies.

This was our experience as well. The candidate that we really clicked with was $12 an hour. She's been with us for several years so her salary is at $16 now.

The candidates that were asking for $18-$20 weren't nannies that I would hire anyway. They ones asking for the higher rates were either young 20 somethings with very little experience and a high opinion of themselves, 1-2 nannies with a lot of experience but very poor english and no ability to communicate why they were asking for rates that high, or ones that just didn't very spectacular. It really surprised me because my assumption going into the hiring process was that the candidates asking for a higher rate would have something that would distinguish or they would at least do better than candidates asking for a lower rate.

Both posters above reflect my experience in hiring a nanny. I saw a range of candidates (all legal in the US, all with 15+ years of experience, all with own transportation, etc...) and they each gave me their wage requirements. I got the rates in advance, but was flexible within a fairly wide range as I was more concerned w/ experience and fit than cost (though I couldn't go over $20/hr.) All of them quoted themselves within a $12-20 per hour range. (We didn't interview anyone who quoted less, though we received lots of applications.)

Each nanny handled the negotiations and rate discussions very differently - some were really uncomfortable talking about it and negotiating. Some were very professional, polished and skilled negotiators.

The two we narrowed it down to, and the one to which we offered the job, were the candidates because of their experience and their "fit" with us and the babies. Our final two candidates quoted rates that were more than $6/hr different.

There was no point at which the hourly rate accurately reflected the quality of the candidate we were interviewing. One of the nannies I interviewed was at the very high end of the range, and on paper seemed utterly ideal, but in person she seemed completely uninterested in her profession - she was all about the negotiations, and said very clearly that the family or kids involved didn't matter to her as she could handle anything if the compensation was right.

I think that with a hire so personal in nature the right match of family and nanny is about much more than just money (for everyone involved). I'm not discounting the importance of being well/fairly paid, I'm just saying that it's only one factor, and there are several other at least equally important issues to consider when hiring or accepting a position.