Some of the responders logic on this thread is seriously flawed. Some of you are only thinking of your own healthy eating agendas and not understanding what the real issue here is. It is not a food issue. It is a control issue.
Anonymous wrote:I am amazed at how many of these responders are saying it is perfectly acceptable for an adult employee to be dictated to regarding her diet choices.
Since she was never asked prior to hire nor did she ever agree to eat only healthy foods, it is 100% WRONG of her employer to push her agenda on the nanny! Sure, eating healthy + organic is a great choice for everyone. Esp. young children who are just starting to explore different foods. But it is a PERSONAL CHOICE and as long as it does not negatively impact another person {such as second - hand smoking does}, this lady should butt out. Sure, it is her home..but it is also a place of employment as well. OP, if you contact the labor board in your area, you can even file a claim against her if she fires you for eating Oreos.
Even though it is HER home, by hiring you to provide a service for her and by agreeing to pay you for that service, she is accountable for the same labor laws as everyone else. She cannot fire you at will for your diet.
Many stay at home parents love to micromanage and if you give in and bring carrot juice w/your lunch instead of a Capri Sun, I can guarantee you she will take it that you are one submissive employee and try to get you to change other stuff too. Eventually you will get so fed up with giving in to her requests and demands that you will want to quit.
I have two ideas for a compromise here.
A.) Since she is home while you eat lunch, perhaps she can stay with the kiddos and let you leave the house for lunch. You can walk to a park or drive to Wendy's. YOUR choice. Since you would be doing it based on her behavior, she should still pay you for that time however.
OR
B.) She can provide all of your lunch, snacks and drinks. Since she wants you to eat only healthy in front of the kids, then let her make the lunches from now on.
She sounds like she is on a power trip.
Take this as a red flag.
Anonymous wrote:Some of the responders logic on this thread is seriously flawed. Some of you are only thinking of your own healthy eating agendas and not understanding what the real issue here is. It is not a food issue. It is a control issue.
Let's say OP does what this woman says and decides to change her lunch choices and bring foods she normally doesn't eat for lunch. Well her boss will think she has won this battle and will be on a major power trip. Later on, she will ask her nanny to change something else she is not in agreement with later on. The nanny has already set a precedent with the lunch issue. She has showed her boss that she will comply with whatever her boss requests of her even though these things were not discussed prior to hire. The more the nanny complies, the more of a power trip the MB will be on.
OP, you need to nip this in the bud.
Since she didn't mention this during hire, then you are by no means obligated to follow a certain diet just to satisfy HER. You know, you could eat healthy food all the time just to satisfy her, then on your way to your car, you could get hit by a Little Debbie's snack truck. What you choose to eat is none of her business. Sooner or later, her kids will be exposed to junk food when they get older (school lunch times, birthday parties, etc.) She cannot shield her children from that nor should she. It is her job as a parent to parent HER children. Not you. As an adult, you have free will to manage your own diet. So what if she disagrees with what you put in your mouth? As long as it doesn't affect her or the kids, it shouldn't matter. If she really was concerned it would affect the kids, she would have brought it up during the interview or orientation, etc.
I think she is just trying to show you "who is boss here." She is testing you. If you comply now, she will think she has you wrapped around her finger.
I say bring on the Salt + Vinegar chips and the Cheez-its.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm a nanny, and I agree with everything that's been said about setting a good example and so on, but I do still feel that if this wasn't specified before hiring (because it isn't reasonable to assume anyone's dietary preferences will mesh with yours, and LOADS of kids eat things like chips and cookies) then the MB should be providing food for the nanny's lunch.
She is asking her nanny to make a major dietary change, not to eat out of a separate packaging (kosher) or to leave out one ingredient (peanuts for an allergic child), and that's too much to spring on her without taking her share of the responsibility in the situation. MB wasn't clear upon hiring what her requirements were - that's okay, lots of things come up that you don't think of ahead of time - but now, because she failed to clarify this early on, she should be footing the bill for these healthy lunches.
I don't see the MB asking the nanny to make a dramatic change in her diet. I think most families would be fine with their nanny bringing a sandwich to eat. Having a capri sun isn't that evil either, as long as the kids see nanny drinking lots of water as well and not several capri suns throughout the day. No one is saying she needs to go organic at all. The main thing I see is that she needs to change the types of snacks she is bringing, and we have offered many types of substitutes for her cheetos and oreos, some of which can be very similar to that (like with different puffed snacks). She can still eat those at home, so she is not cutting it out of her diet even, just switching up what she snacks on at work. That is not a major dietary change at all. It WOULD be a major dietary change if she was asked to not eat meat in the house (and she suddenly couldn't) or liked peanut butter sandwiches for lunch daily and was told she could no longer have that for her lunch due to allergies. So if someone COULD make those types of changes easily enough, then she should be able to change the types of snacks she brings. I don't see a need for asking/demanding the MB to pay for her food for something like this. Just because it wasn't discussed before, no, it doesn't mean the family should foot the cost of her lunches. A nanny should be able to adapt to change (she is working with children that are CONSTANTLY changing and evolving!) and if she can't do this after the MB has asked her to stop eating this type of food around her kids, then it doesn't sound like the is the right person for that position any longer. If she doesn't like it, then she can find another position.
Anonymous wrote:I'm a nanny, and I agree with everything that's been said about setting a good example and so on, but I do still feel that if this wasn't specified before hiring (because it isn't reasonable to assume anyone's dietary preferences will mesh with yours, and LOADS of kids eat things like chips and cookies) then the MB should be providing food for the nanny's lunch.
She is asking her nanny to make a major dietary change, not to eat out of a separate packaging (kosher) or to leave out one ingredient (peanuts for an allergic child), and that's too much to spring on her without taking her share of the responsibility in the situation. MB wasn't clear upon hiring what her requirements were - that's okay, lots of things come up that you don't think of ahead of time - but now, because she failed to clarify this early on, she should be footing the bill for these healthy lunches.