Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why you think your base pay includes hours of downtime and you should be paid extra to not sit on a couch. Parents set rates based on the market, affordability, and financial planning. We had no problem finding great candidates that didn't object to light housekeeping and had done it in previous jobs.

Parents and nannies need to be upfront on what is being required and what is being accepted. However, the job needs do change. Nannies know very well that some tasks go away and others will replace those tasks. Nannies also know how much kids nap which many first time parents don't realize.

I've actually never had time to sit on their couch. The job changes as the child grows - e.g I am not making baby food now but I will happily do so. I am not running around in the park after my change now but will happily do so. My current change sleeps for one and a half hours in his crib during the day - his morning and late afternoon nap are both taken during walks in his stroller (my employers live in an apartment - the baby would get no fresh air if I didn't take him for walks). I have more than enough to do during the hour and a half he is sleeping. AND over 64% of all SIDS cases happen in custodial care - I check my baby-charge every few minutes.

If you have found good nannies who will clean your house you are short-changing your child. Again, would you want your child's teacher in preschool to be preoccupied doing other things?

Anonymous wrote:One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

So true. Jobs change as children age. If a nanny wants to be kept on, especially with guaranteed hours, you might need to take on extra tasks to make it worthwhile for the family to keep you on. If you don't want to do anything other than play with infants and do "developmental research", good luck finding a job that pays premium rates that allow you to do that.

That is your preference. Most parents who pay above market rates will pass on you or let you go.

There are many more nannies than jobs.

You know what they say about assumptions....

I'm going to say it again. I am a nanny. I want to work with kids. As your children age, and spend more time in school than with me, I have no desire to start doing your laundry, do your grocery shopping, or scrub your toilets. You wouldn't have to let me go, I'd move on before it came to that. Also lets cut the crap. Parents who want nanny and housekeeper for the price of one are not paying above market rates. These are the same parents trying to pay as little as possible, not giving raises or giving "3%", $.25 raises, and refusing to guarantee hours. Please do pass on me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

So true. Jobs change as children age. If a nanny wants to be kept on, especially with guaranteed hours, you might need to take on extra tasks to make it worthwhile for the family to keep you on. If you don't want to do anything other than play with infants and do "developmental research", good luck finding a job that pays premium rates that allow you to do that.

That is your preference. Most parents who pay above market rates will pass on you or let you go.

There are many more nannies than jobs.

You know what they say about assumptions....

I'm going to say it again. I am a nanny. I want to work with kids. As your children age, and spend more time in school than with me, I have no desire to start doing your laundry, do your grocery shopping, or scrub your toilets. You wouldn't have to let me go, I'd move on before it came to that. Also lets cut the crap. Parents who want nanny and housekeeper for the price of one are not paying above market rates. These are the same parents trying to pay as little as possible, not giving raises or giving "3%", $.25 raises, and refusing to guarantee hours. Please do pass on me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have had nannies for the past 7+ years. The best nannies have always been the ones WILLING to take on more tasks (note that I say willing, as additional housekeeping is not part of the job description at our house). It's not because I'm looking for a bargain, it's because those individuals had great work ethic, flexibility, and (for lack of a better term) team spirit. Those are the kind of people I want around my kids.

We've had a couple of "I am a CHILDCARE PROFESSIONAL!!!" nannies who would only grudgingly consider emptying a dishwasher and would hand wash a couple of plates just to avoid the dreaded task. Those were the nannies who would be found shoving their iPhones into their pocket if I came home unexpectedly early. The kids were not getting their undivided attention. Those nannies were lazy all around, and we quickly parted ways with them.

We have found that the nannies asking for very middle of the road wages, and OFFERING to lend a hand with other tasks, have been the best. Anyone describing themselves as an "infant specialist" would have gone immediately into the discard pile. Why hire someone with such limited abilities?

Because you love and care more about the welfare and education of your child than you do about having to make your own bed? Just a guess...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

So true. Jobs change as children age. If a nanny wants to be kept on, especially with guaranteed hours, you might need to take on extra tasks to make it worthwhile for the family to keep you on. If you don't want to do anything other than play with infants and do "developmental research", good luck finding a job that pays premium rates that allow you to do that.

That is your preference. Most parents who pay above market rates will pass on you or let you go.

There are many more nannies than jobs.

You know what they say about assumptions....

Jobs end as children age - nothing new about that. And I've never had a problem finding nanny jobs that pay premium rates for childcare only.

I'm going to say it again. I am a nanny. I want to work with kids. As your children age, and spend more time in school than with me, I have no desire to start doing your laundry, do your grocery shopping, or scrub your toilets. You wouldn't have to let me go, I'd move on before it came to that. Also lets cut the crap. Parents who want nanny and housekeeper for the price of one are not paying above market rates. These are the same parents trying to pay as little as possible, not giving raises or giving "3%", $.25 raises, and refusing to guarantee hours. Please do pass on me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So when your gardener comes, does he do your dishes for you, too? How about the electrician? When the electrician comes to your house to fix a light socket, does he wash your breakfast dishes for you? "

Those are not comparable because those people are actually occupied the entire time they are at your house. A comparable situation is the receptionist in an office. She is off and on busy but also unoccupied for stretches. That is why where I work others in the office are encouraged to give her projects for her to fit in during the "down time" periods. This work is not part of "receptionist" duties but it helps to justify retaining a position that other organizations get by without so if push came to shove is not 100% essential. Likewise other office workers that end up with large stretches of down time on a regular basis would get a real stink eye if they just sat around or engaged in busy work rather than pitching in to help as needed.

Nannying is similar to that in that it's not unreasonable to expect a nanny to make herself useful after taking an hour break for lunch or so. It's also not insane for most (not all) ages to expect that some stuff can get done while the kids are awake and safely occupied.

The receptionist would be asked to do administrative other administrative tasks correct? She's not picking up your dry cleaning, or babysitting your kid on a snow day right? I agree with you, that beyond her lunch break a nanny should be working. Where we disagree is on which tasks are appropriate. To me, as a child care provider, those tasks should be related to the care of your child, not simply things you don't like to do. I'm not making your bed, doing your laundry, or scrubbing your bathroom. That doesn't make me a lazy entitled nanny. The desire to have me do so makes you a lazy entitled boss. I will prepared and freeze meals for the child, I will clean and sanitize their toys, organize their bedroom and play areas, do their laundry, plan and set up activities, wash their dishes, and I will keep my developmental knowledge current and sharp.

Agree. I don't know how this could be seen as unreasonable.

It's not unreasonable. For that nanny. However, for us, we don't need help with errands, shopping, cooking, or developmental research. So, much of that would be "make work" I don't think you are getting such strong reactions because you are unwilling to wash dishes (just an example) but because the whole tenor of this thread is how horrid parents are that request housework instead of other duties. The job is what the job is. And if I would rather the nanny spend extra time vacuuming instead of going to the grocery store, that's reasonable as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

That is what is unreasonable to me. That you hold it against a nanny because she wants to be a nanny and not your maid. A nanny does child care. What you want is nanny, housekeeper, assistant, and chef, all rolled into one, and you want to pay a salary not commensurate with the scope of work you are demanding. I'm not a less desirable candidate to a parent who actually just wants a nanny. I'm a less desirable candidate (thank heavens) to a parent who wants me to be any everything for them, while only paying me for childcare. Lets be clear; it does not hurt my feelings that you think I'm less desirable. I in fact have no desire to work for someone like you. For parents truly looking for quality care FOR THEIR CHILDREN, not their homes, I am highly desired and recommended.

Anonymous wrote:

One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

So true. Jobs change as children age. If a nanny wants to be kept on, especially with guaranteed hours, you might need to take on extra tasks to make it worthwhile for the family to keep you on. If you don't want to do anything other than play with infants and do "developmental research", good luck finding a job that pays premium rates that allow you to do that.

That is your preference. Most parents who pay above market rates will pass on you or let you go.

There are many more nannies than jobs.

One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

Anonymous wrote:One further thing. I wouldn't call you lazy or entitled. I would call you disingenuous. It's fine if you don't want to do mom child related housework. But let's be clear that's because that is your preference. Not because of some objective standard about what is appropriate or not for a nanny/sitter/domestic employee.

Having these limits on what you will do makes you less desirable as an employee. Not more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So when your gardener comes, does he do your dishes for you, too? How about the electrician? When the electrician comes to your house to fix a light socket, does he wash your breakfast dishes for you? "

Those are not comparable because those people are actually occupied the entire time they are at your house. A comparable situation is the receptionist in an office. She is off and on busy but also unoccupied for stretches. That is why where I work others in the office are encouraged to give her projects for her to fit in during the "down time" periods. This work is not part of "receptionist" duties but it helps to justify retaining a position that other organizations get by without so if push came to shove is not 100% essential. Likewise other office workers that end up with large stretches of down time on a regular basis would get a real stink eye if they just sat around or engaged in busy work rather than pitching in to help as needed.

Nannying is similar to that in that it's not unreasonable to expect a nanny to make herself useful after taking an hour break for lunch or so. It's also not insane for most (not all) ages to expect that some stuff can get done while the kids are awake and safely occupied.

The receptionist would be asked to do administrative other administrative tasks correct? She's not picking up your dry cleaning, or babysitting your kid on a snow day right? I agree with you, that beyond her lunch break a nanny should be working. Where we disagree is on which tasks are appropriate. To me, as a child care provider, those tasks should be related to the care of your child, not simply things you don't like to do. I'm not making your bed, doing your laundry, or scrubbing your bathroom. That doesn't make me a lazy entitled nanny. The desire to have me do so makes you a lazy entitled boss. I will prepared and freeze meals for the child, I will clean and sanitize their toys, organize their bedroom and play areas, do their laundry, plan and set up activities, wash their dishes, and I will keep my developmental knowledge current and sharp.

Agree. I don't know how this could be seen as unreasonable.