Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Obviously, you cannot afford a child if you are making so little money.

Are you saying that if you were richer, you'd opt for daycare? I don't think so. You need to be honest here. Having a nanny is the most elite form of substitute childcare. If you still wish to fight the obvious facts here, what is the most elite form of substitute childcare, in your opinion?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Exactly.

I'm comfortably middle-class and consider myself very lucky to be able to afford a nanny for my children. However, it takes work and sacrifice and, next to our home, is our single biggest financial obligation (by far). My husband and I drive older, basic cars, live frugally, don't take significant vacations (anymore), etc... It also happens that for us and our child situation a nanny is actually cheaper than the daycare options we had.

So get off the absurd elitist thing about rich employers. We're all just people making the best choices we can for our kids and family with the resources we have available.

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Exactly.

I'm comfortably middle-class and consider myself very lucky to be able to afford a nanny for my children. However, it takes work and sacrifice and, next to our home, is our single biggest financial obligation (by far). My husband and I drive older, basic cars, live frugally, don't take significant vacations (anymore), etc... It also happens that for us and our child situation a nanny is actually cheaper than the daycare options we had.


So get off the absurd elitist thing about rich employers. We're all just people making the best choices we can for our kids and family with the resources we have available.

you have actually. I said that I would first put one child (meaning toddler) and then the second (infant when she reaches 18 months or so) in daycare. Now, I have a nanny for both and honestly do not feel that this is the best set up. It feel to me that the toddler is getting a bit short changed. But I do not feel that I can afford a nanny for the infant and daycare for the toddler

Are you saying that if you were richer, you'd opt for daycare? I don't think so. You need to be honest here. Having a nanny is the most elite form of substitute childcare. If you still wish to fight the obvious facts here, what is the most elite form of substitute childcare, in your opinion?

I am not an original PP for this but would like to respond. I have a nanny now and if we were richer, I would put my kids in daycare. So, in my situation, a good nanny we have is better than a crappy day care. Also, we have one toddler and one infant and having a nanny is cheaper than paying for 2 kids on daycare. If I had the money then first one and then both would be going to Montessori. What I am trying to say is that in situations like mine I cannot afford great daycare for multiple kids but can afford a nanny. and nanny is better than a crappy day care I could afford

16:46 here. Maybe I initially misunderstood you, and you said you would not put your infant in any daycare?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Exactly.

I'm comfortably middle-class and consider myself very lucky to be able to afford a nanny for my children. However, it takes work and sacrifice and, next to our home, is our single biggest financial obligation (by far). My husband and I drive older, basic cars, live frugally, don't take significant vacations (anymore), etc... It also happens that for us and our child situation a nanny is actually cheaper than the daycare options we had.


So get off the absurd elitist thing about rich employers. We're all just people making the best choices we can for our kids and family with the resources we have available.

Are you saying that if you were richer, you'd opt for daycare? I don't think so. You need to be honest here. Having a nanny is the most elite form of substitute childcare. If you still wish to fight the obvious facts here, what is the most elite form of substitute childcare, in your opinion?

I am not an original PP for this but would like to respond. I have a nanny now and if we were richer, I would put my kids in daycare. So, in my situation, a good nanny we have is better than a crappy day care. Also, we have one toddler and one infant and having a nanny is cheaper than paying for 2 kids on daycare. If I had the money then first one and then both would be going to Montessori. What I am trying to say is that in situations like mine I cannot afford great daycare for multiple kids but can afford a nanny. and nanny is better than a crappy day care I could afford

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Exactly.

I'm comfortably middle-class and consider myself very lucky to be able to afford a nanny for my children. However, it takes work and sacrifice and, next to our home, is our single biggest financial obligation (by far). My husband and I drive older, basic cars, live frugally, don't take significant vacations (anymore), etc... It also happens that for us and our child situation a nanny is actually cheaper than the daycare options we had.


So get off the absurd elitist thing about rich employers. We're all just people making the best choices we can for our kids and family with the resources we have available.

Are you saying that if you were richer, you'd opt for daycare? I don't think so. You need to be honest here. Having a nanny is the most elite form of substitute childcare. If you still wish to fight the obvious facts here, what is the most elite form of substitute childcare, in your opinion?

I am not an original PP for this but would like to respond. I have a nanny now and if we were richer, I would put my kids in daycare. So, in my situation, a good nanny we have is better than a crappy day care. Also, we have one toddler and one infant and having a nanny is cheaper than paying for 2 kids on daycare. If I had the money then first one and then both would be going to Montessori. What I am trying to say is that in situations like mine I cannot afford great daycare for multiple kids but can afford a nanny. and nanny is better than a crappy day care I could afford

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Exactly.

I'm comfortably middle-class and consider myself very lucky to be able to afford a nanny for my children. However, it takes work and sacrifice and, next to our home, is our single biggest financial obligation (by far). My husband and I drive older, basic cars, live frugally, don't take significant vacations (anymore), etc... It also happens that for us and our child situation a nanny is actually cheaper than the daycare options we had.


So get off the absurd elitist thing about rich employers. We're all just people making the best choices we can for our kids and family with the resources we have available.

Are you saying that if you were richer, you'd opt for daycare? I don't think so. You need to be honest here. Having a nanny is the most elite form of substitute childcare. If you still wish to fight the obvious facts here, what is the most elite form of substitute childcare, in your opinion?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Exactly.

I'm comfortably middle-class and consider myself very lucky to be able to afford a nanny for my children. However, it takes work and sacrifice and, next to our home, is our single biggest financial obligation (by far). My husband and I drive older, basic cars, live frugally, don't take significant vacations (anymore), etc... It also happens that for us and our child situation a nanny is actually cheaper than the daycare options we had.


So get off the absurd elitist thing about rich employers. We're all just people making the best choices we can for our kids and family with the resources we have available.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

This is just silly. Many, many nannies work for middle- to upper-middle class dual-professional families. The fact that these employers have decided to pay a little more for child care than they would pay a daycare center doesn't mean they are rich. There is nothing elitist about hiring or being a nanny/full time babysitter in the DC region.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$18.75/Hr is only $39,000/yr. This is barely enough to live on after taxes. She is taking care of your childten not walking your dog. I hope she finds another job and makes enough money to have a decent life.



Plenty of people live on much less than this. Im a nanny and IMO-and probably that of many others-$18.75 is an incredibly good wage for a profession that requires no formal education/training, licensure or regulation. Teachers, with years of education, both initial and continuing, and strict performance standards sometimes do not even make this much. Nannying is a very important job, don't get me wrong, but it is becoming insane how much people are expecting to be paid for a job that, essentially, anyone could attempt to do.


Like parenting, anyone may attempt the job of caring for a child, but very few know what they're doing. Just look around. Sad.

True, there are many nannies out there who don't know what they are doing. That's why it's outrageous that they think they deserve constant raises and bonuses for such an easy job.

It's your job as an absentee parent, to find the best substitute care you can afford.

True, but that has nothing to do with whether or not OP's nanny should get $20 per hour vs. $21.50 per hour. As we've heard over and over on this board, there is no clear correlation between nanny pay requests and getting "the best" care. Surely you aren't suggesting that parents are obliged pay whatever a nanny asks for solely because they (the parents) work outside the home?

Let's not delude ourselves. Of course there's a correlation between better help and better pay, unless you found a stupid person who wants to make your babysitting job, her charity case. If you cover her basic survival costs, she may even do it almost for free.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Indeed, most of us cannot afford a nanny. If we don't do our own babysitting, we need to depend on family and/or friends to help out. Or God-awful daycare. Affording a nanny is the most elite and exclusive form of childcare reserved for the rich.

Anonymous wrote:Oh my word to the $18.75 comment! $39,000 is barely enough to make a living from?! ... some of us aren't making much more than that, let alone able to pay our NANNIES that much. Good grief, what a closed minded statement! $20 an hour to be a nanny, I'd take that offer hands down! Many people who have paid to educate themselves can't even find jobs making that amount of money. .. Not to say nannies aren't valuable or something. Kids are hard work! .. but that was just a ridiculous thing to say... poor nanny, only making almost $40,000... please!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$18.75/Hr is only $39,000/yr. This is barely enough to live on after taxes. She is taking care of your childten not walking your dog. I hope she finds another job and makes enough money to have a decent life.



Plenty of people live on much less than this. Im a nanny and IMO-and probably that of many others-$18.75 is an incredibly good wage for a profession that requires no formal education/training, licensure or regulation. Teachers, with years of education, both initial and continuing, and strict performance standards sometimes do not even make this much. Nannying is a very important job, don't get me wrong, but it is becoming insane how much people are expecting to be paid for a job that, essentially, anyone could attempt to do.


Like parenting, anyone may attempt the job of caring for a child, but very few know what they're doing. Just look around. Sad.

True, there are many nannies out there who don't know what they are doing. That's why it's outrageous that they think they deserve constant raises and bonuses for such an easy job.

It's your job as an absentee parent, to find the best substitute care you can afford.

True, but that has nothing to do with whether or not OP's nanny should get $20 per hour vs. $21.50 per hour. As we've heard over and over on this board, there is no clear correlation between nanny pay requests and getting "the best" care. Surely you aren't suggesting that parents are obliged pay whatever a nanny asks for solely because they (the parents) work outside the home?