Maybe OP doesn't want to get a new nanny, again.

Good grief! If OP felt taken advantage of she could just say no more to the extra kid. OP is just looking to save a buck

Anonymous wrote:The nanny is absolutely taking advantage of the OP. Nanny is being unprofessional and should be fired.

Absolutely.

The nanny is absolutely taking advantage of the OP. Nanny is being unprofessional and should be fired.

She's not taking advantage of her. OP is the employer, and very easily could have said no. OP is also not an idiot and understands what a share is, but did not propose a reduced rate initially when the idea was proposed.

I'm not sure your nanny would see things the way you do. She probably feels she is doing the other family a favor, and therefore is entitled to her full rate. I could see you being justified in wanting a reduced rate, but if this has been going on for some time and you've always been fine with it, to suggest a reduced rate is only going to make you look cheap. You could limit how often this happens (or if it happens at all) but you have already said you love your nanny and don't mind the extra kid. That only leaves this situation being about the money, so yes you are nickel and diming her.

It doesn't sound like the OP is loving her nanny all that much now that she knows how badly the nanny is taking advantage of her. Just because the employer let a manipulative nanny take advantage in the past, it doesn't mean that the nanny has now earned the right to continue with abusing her flexible nature.

0:44 I think you misunderstood what the PP was saying.

She posted: Nanny here. If OP came to me with this issue, I'd be replacing her. This is shameful, OP, IMO.

What she was saying was that if OP was her employee she would replace her. She wasn't saying that she would replace her employer. She said if OP came to her with this issue she would replacing her which implies if she was the employer she would be firing the nanny that keeps bringing the extra baby along. At least that's what I got from it.

I'm not sure your nanny would see things the way you do. She probably feels she is doing the other family a favor, and therefore is entitled to her full rate. I could see you being justified in wanting a reduced rate, but if this has been going on for some time and you've always been fine with it, to suggest a reduced rate is only going to make you look cheap. You could limit how often this happens (or if it happens at all) but you have already said you love your nanny and don't mind the extra kid. That only leaves this situation being about the money, so yes you are nickel and diming her.

Your options:

1. Tell her " no " all together
2. Tell her you're okay with it, but as long as it's 5-10 hours a week or less. Anything more than that, you'll pay $2 less an hour because it sounds more like a nannyshare agreement, and you're paying for 1 on 1 action from a nanny for a reason.
3. Let it go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She's earning $35/hr when she is watching both families' children. Is this normal? I'm not trying to nickel and dime anyone, it just seems this is why people have nanny share arrangements. Looking for advice here.

How much do you make per hour? She's doing you a favor by being flexible and you ate just being cbeap.

She is not doing you a favor. She's being unprofessional, sneaky, unethical and greedy. You seem in denial.

This is wrong. Bet the other family has no clue that she's taking their baby to work. I'd be angry if I learned this as the baby's parents.

Anonymous wrote:Nanny here. If OP came to me with this issue, I'd be replacing her. This is shameful, OP, IMO.

Amazing. Do you nannies understand that you are employees, not employers and not independent contractors? You don't "replace" your employer. You quit and find another job if you aren't happy with the one you have because, um, it comes with the actual expectation that you won't be doing two jobs and earning two paychecks during the hours you've already committed to your employer. Most of us would be fired for moonlighting at a second job during the exact same hours we've already committed to another employer.

OP, you are absolutely being taken advantage of. I don't know any parent who would be okay with this scenario on more than a very rare basis. Your kids and likely other aspects of the job (laundry, etc.) are not getting the same level of care when the nanny has additional children to watch. It just is not possible. Therefore, you should not be paying the same rate. It absolutely makes sense to tell the nanny your perspective and request contact information for the other parent in order to discuss sharing the nanny (and for responsibility her compensation) on the days either one of you needs backup care. If the nanny refuses, I would tell her that you just aren't comfortable with her bringing the other child to work on your days absent a rate change, and then I would start looking for a new family to partner with on a backup share basis so you will have coverage in an emergency. If the nanny can't get on board with this, find a replacement and then let her go. Contrary to the impression one gets on DCUM, there are MANY great nannies out there who are reasonable and flexible, just like every other professional.

Oh boy.. glad I brought this up on DCUM as it's really opening my eyes to the bigger picture, let alone the pay issue. Thanks a ton. I will need to do more research and inform the nanny I want a formal nanny share if this continues.. thanks all!

OP, I'm a little confused -- have you ever even met these other parents?

Not sure where you live. If you're in MD or DC, and your nanny is driving other children in your car, it could expose you to additional liability.

In MD and DC (and maybe VA, I just don't know), insurance follows the car, not the driver. So, while nanny's in your car, your insurance is primary, even if she has her own car and insurance. So, you need to make sure that your auto insurance has enough coverage to handle an accident wherein nanny and all 3 kids are hurt.

Further, it is possible that you could be personally exposed to liability for the other child. Let's say the nanny is taking one of your kids to basketball practice. The other kid just has to tag along for the ride. Nanny causes an accident. If the available insurance is insufficient to cover the other child's injuries, his parents could have a claim against your personal assets, since the nanny was acting as your agent/for your benefit at the time of the accident. Now, if MD there's a theory called joint venture that could be raised but, without going into a detailed analysis, the point is that there's a risk.

Which is not to say that it's not a risk worth taking. People in nanny shares do it all the time. It's unrealistic to think that as your kids grow up you'll never have their friends in your house or car. I drive my kids' friends all the time. But, going back to my original point, I would think you would at least want to have met this other family.

I wonder if the other family knows she's bringing their baby over to your house all day, driving him in your car while picking up your kids, etc. Personally I would not go for that.