I found my housekeeper (who comes once per week) through a friend. All her clients came to her through word of mouth and she is booked six days a week. It is important to me that the person who has keys to my house is trustworthy. I also have a dog walker I found through personal reference as well. We have developed a relationship with both of these people over the years and I would never trade them in for someone cheaper I found online. I don't have kids, but if I wouldn't trust my home or my dog with a total stranger, I can't imagine trusting a child to someone found through some app.
6
And wrecks the childrens lives also. Have you noticed what happens to children who spend the most of their waking hours in the care of serial, unengaged "carers"?
1
***“White, “professionalized” nannies are hired with better pay and working conditions, while lower-status work goes to immigrants and women of color.”***
I realize this is just an opinion piece, not reporting. But I think it’s reckless to throw out an overarching statement like this without explanation or data or back it up. It devalues the rest of what the writer had to say.
The use of the word professionalized, set off in irony-loaded parenthesis, comes across as seething and insinuative.
Caregivers for hire vary widely in training and experience — whether they are caring for children or the elderly. Their pay varies accordingly, and rightly so. If you have a marketable skill, training and experience, you should command a competitive income. Many people hire undocumented workers to care for their children or elderly parents (I assume this is the population referred to as “immigrants”). Employers (many affluent, but cheap) too often exploit the precarious position such workers live in, and they do underpay and overwork employees who are afraid to complain. This is unethical, but that is how the market works. To state or imply that pay discrepancies are based solely on race, ethnicity or place of birth is to purposely mislead and skew the truth. Trained, qualified caregivers are expensive. Undocumented workers— often untrained and unqualified are not. I have strong options about those who go for the cheapest available workers to care for their family. But so many do.
3
Pardon my goofs: Meant to say quotes rather than parentheses, and autocomplete constantly changes opinions to options. I have no idea why. But otherwise I stand by my statement.
1
I never use Care or any similar apps to find caretakers or helpers. IT is not necessary to pay them - make a few people rich and ultimately do nothing for the people who actually work as caretakers. Just join a few local groups for whatever your need is (i.e. nextdoor or moms group for sitters/nannies, etc) and use the free technology to find people the modern old fashioned way - through word of mouth. This ensures you get the most reliably referred person while cutting out the useless and exploitative tech companies as middle men. I wish more people would abandon these platforms and use their free local resources.
6
Another argument for bringing back the Wobblies!
2
Care and cleaning musn't be lumped together; too bad about the leading stock photo.
The former requires far more expertise than the latter, and the stakes are proportionately higher.
Digital tools should indeed facilitate the supply of commodity services. In the US we can depend on the government to ensure a licensed driver in a roadworthy car is most likely a safe conveyance. We can similarly assume that domestic workers are credibly deterred from threatening the security of our possessions.
Beyond that baseline, it's apples and orange Lamborghinis. Is there really a perception that caregivers are interchangable?
Cleaning my floor is one thing, caring for my loved one is light-years apart.
6
We have a disturbing knack for turning everything into a transaction. This recent obsession with ratings adds another unhappy element to the mix.
32
I swear when tech bros want to make a new app, they find ways that immigrants and other poor people survive and find a way to take it away from them.
25
Check out Freelancers Union.
5
I suspect the title (There's an app for wrecking Nannies' Lives) is click bait, but I disagree entirely.
These apps and agencies are making nannies unaffordable for families with a constrained budget. In addition to being poached on the playground, nannies are using cell phones all day long (while meant to be providing childcare) to find better paying jobs and take time off with bogus reasons to interview. It's a falsehood that they cannot afford a cell phone.
The division is not between white and immigrants of color -- it is between competent and incompetent, able to follow directions and not, reliable and unreliable. "Professionalized" nannies who speak articulately, understand the language of the employer, can be relied upon to handle emergencies, drive safely and legally, are on time, are able to educate in addition to being able to care and look after children, will be in high demand and paid higher than ad-hoc gig workers, with a thin resume. As with any hiring, you need more than just ratings, you need interviews and references. The time to evaluate the employer is during the interview process, not on a website.
You're also lumping together employees and contractors though different rules apply.
Sorry, I'm not buying into these complaints.
20
Five years ago, I had my first child and didn't know anyone that could refer me a nanny. I interviewed almost 10 people and found my wonderful nanny through one of these websites. I had to interview her, run a background check, and call her references. I made an excellent choice because 5 years and 2 kids later, she is still my nanny and the only nanny I have ever had. I pay her a salary with paid vacation and paid sick leave. She has a green card and is paid legally. I treat her like family. She is taking care of the most important people in my life. Why would I try to find someone to pay the cheapest amount to? These websites are ONE way to find help but not the only way. Plenty of people still refer their nanny or house keeper to people through community list serves or other word of mouth. A recommendation from someone you know and trust goes a long way to help someone find a job but websites and agencies are another tool. A person looking for a job has to decide their strengths and weaknesses and seek employment opportunities through what makes the most sense for them. Maybe websites are not the best means for those with limited web access to seek employment but even in a situation where someone is referred through word of mouth, the employee still needs a phone to communicate and get hired.
22
I agree wholeheartedly with this piece. As someone who has done private tutoring, using marketplace-style websites like the ones mentioned here is very frustrating. If you don't reply immediately to a message or posting, you're out of luck. Also, visibility on the site is often determined by reviews and the number of students from that site one has worked with. All my years of experience don't matter in that case.
11
"Care work previously had very few barriers to entry, making it accessible to poor, undocumented and other vulnerable populations of workers."
Well, for one the "undocumented" should not even be in the country in the first place.
21
Despite technology, like any work position, the best ones are still conveyed via word-of-mouth: I found my positions (in medicine) all by word-of-mouth and the best experienced caregivers may not need/ use such services.
Part of my work used to involve making housecalls for the elderly. My nurse would get calls every week from people asking who we/ she would recommend as caregivers. In actuality, we rarely had any suggestions to give. As soon as one patient no longer needed the cargiver's services, they were already "snapped up" by other people. And some had the leverage to negotiate for better salary and benefits. There is a huge demand. Some families will pay to get someone they trust who is good.
I can see this being an issue though for people starting out.
5
Agree. The hubris of the young never fails to astound me - as a boomer I love my iPhone and use Apps but I discern the value of the latter. Excellent point about the young and inexperienced that don't really understand what using a housekeeper/care giver involves. It isn't just another warm body. Like everything, tech is great but it is up to the person to differentiate the uses. I use Apps to gather info, get a car share etc but would always rely on referrals for help at home.
1
Thanks for this excellent and enlightening piece. The biggest takeaway I got was the need for a two-way rating system. It’s outrageous that spoiled, sometimes nasty customers get to post ratings of providers that undermine their reputation, when the providers are blocked from having the same weight of opinion. That by itself would enforce a greater honesty and equality. The larger issue of often very qualified caregivers without access to technology is a hard one. I worry that people who rely solely on the tech gig economy like this are isolated in an elite bubble while everyone else gets disenfranchised.
15
Workers who provide quality are in great demand and will be able to earn more without giving half their wages to agency "middle men."
9
My good friend was a professional nanny with a California teaching credential, and years of classroom experience before becoming a nanny for many children, from newborns up to pre-teens. But care work platforms have pushed her, reluctantly, into retirement.
As an "older" nanny (i.e., not a 20-something,) on-line screening effectively puts her out of the running, in contrast to previous face-to-face interviews where her skills and personality came through in. Those earlier interviews were usually set up by enthusiastic prior employers whose children had simply aged out of needing a nanny. Now, care work platforms encourage customers to go with the cheapest provider.
These days, without really professional head-shots, a smart phone and the willingness to work for sub-minimum wages, Mary Poppins and Mrs. Doubtfire just wouldn't make it in this brave new gig work world.
16
I'm 60 and make it just fine. Last yr I made $36k working part-time. ($25 an hour) I do think ageism is a factor but I make up for it in my profile and personalizing my response to each potential employer. I also bring a "Mary Poppins" bag full of all kinds of treats, ie., bubbles, balloons, stickers, chalk, colors, silly string, bandaids (kids love them), etc. And I am licensed in both peds/adult CPR and AED.
20
I hear that buggy-whip manufacturing employees had a hard time making the switch to becoming employees in the fast-paced high-tech automobile industry. Perhaps Congress should pass a law to stifle or at least slow down innovation so that everyone can adjust.
7
Funny. But do you want a buggy whip taking care of your child?
10
Actually they didn't because they got paid more by Henry Ford, exactly the opposite of what is happening in this article.
10
I don’t look for the cheapest help I look for people that do the job we agree to for the price we agreed. As long as they show up they get paid. If I ask them to do more I pay more and always discuss before the work begins
I have the same housekeeper and gardener since I moved in. I found them through neighbor recommendations
For home improvement I use Angie’s list and always look for the little local guy
Works like a charm. I preferred the service more when I paid for it. Now there is a lot of pollution with paid ads and bigger firms. Liked it better before
But if I was looking for someone to care for my mom I would begin by asking locals in her building and if that didn’t work I would use care.com
8
I love it that you call her your "parenting partner." Nannies, day care providers and full-time babysitters are with your child(ren) through most of their waking hours. They may know more about your child(ren) than you do. They're not just responsible for keeping your child safe, fed, warm, clean, comforted and changed, but they also do a large part of socialization and teach them language skills, so "parenting partner" is a very appropriate term.
3
Most of this sounds awful for workers, but I do like the thought of an impersonal app squashing down on some of the "oh our nanny/maid/housekeeper is like family" rot from people who hire domestic workers.
I get that it's an intimate relationship to care for someone or work in their home. I get that a lot of old ideas are still embedded in our culture, and there is tremendous anxiety from the professional class about paying strangers with cold cash for things that, deep down, they worry that wives should do for free.
But people who employ "help" so often feel entitled to muscle in on their employees personal and private lives. They feel like answering rude, invasive questions is in the job description. They feel like they are owed not just a job done well, with warmth and care, but "love" - complete openness, devotion, genuine affection. The nanny doesn't just have to watch your kids, she has to feel you a story you will feel good about, about how you are a happy part of her life's journey and she's not in it for the money.
And then of course once they are "such good friends" with their maid or nanny, they ask for free work, extra unpaid hours, ever-expanding job responsibilities, because "oh, Sandra doesn't mind; she loves us. She just loves the kids."
So part of me says - Forget it. Make it a relationship based on stars, ratings, hourly rates, and check boxes.
19
'This was a common complaint among care workers we interviewed: that their industry is being flooded with people who are new to care work, who see it as supplementary income rather than as a profession and undercut their wages.'
It's an occupation or a job. It's not a profession. A profession requires professional qualifications, professional skills, professional accreditation and membership of a professional body, none of which these women possess.
Thats the whole point, surely? These women don't have a JD, an MEd etc, which is why they're working for slave wages in dead end jobs with no prospects or guarantees of regular, full time, permanent employment.
13
If I were to ever get a nanny for my children, I would want them to think of it as a profession. There are definitely different professional skills that a nanny requires to be successful. What about nannies with early childhood education? Or teaching credentials. Some nannies have skills even without a western education. They can teach languages, or manners, or learn about different cultures. A nanny is not the same as an uber driver.
15
Mathilda is 100% correct. Unlike driving, which isn't overseen by any regulatory apparatus whatsoever, or even licensing, ALL nannies are vetted and certified by The International Board of Nannies. And being a Nanny is definitely a profession. Unlike being a driver. No one drives for a living, but millions of professionals - men/women/trans - serve their Nations honorably as Nannies.
Those who have teaching credentials, skills even without a western education, and the ability to teach languages and manners are all given an appropriate rating by the IBoN. All sign a stringent code of conduct.
I think people may be confusing "sitting" or "baby-sitting" with being a Nanny. These are two completely different things. Sitters are not accredited or vetted to the extent that Nannies are, and children as young as 11 have been known to "baby-sit." Maybe someday we can have the same institutional infrastructure, knowledge sharing, and regulatory and accreditation standards for sitters that The Nannies have developed - over thousands of years of organization mind you - but these things take time. Patience....patience....
2
international board of nannies?! like the US based baseball or american football world series? you guys live in a bubble.
The commenters who "would never use an online platform" to find a babysitter are making assumptions that word of mouth is the best route to a safe, reliable, skilled caregiver. In fact, whether the initial contact with the caregiver comes from a personal referral or an online application is irrelevant. Either way, the same steps are required to ensure a good hire. Vet the person's credentials; conduct in depth, in person interviews; run a criminal background check; call multiple references and ask enough questions to ensure its a valid reference; and do a paid trial-run before a permanent hire. Care.com offers background checks for a fee. The pool of applicants on care.com is large enough to find a real match for your needs. (Via word of mouth, I never get more than 1 or 2 people to choose from.) I've hired terrific local college students and empty nesters from my town as long term after school sitters this way and it has worked out great.
6
Great more white privilege racists using people who perform manual labor. I'm so disgusted with white people.
7
Well, I'm white and I work doing housekeeping...kind of racist to assume all low paid non-professionals are non-whites.
10
The most common race/ethnicity for Maids & Housekeeping Cleaners is White - from the most recent census and two secs on a google search.
4
I don't think so Nikki.
If the immigrants are legally in the country, that is one matter It is entirely another if they are here illegally. I would strongly suspect that illegal immigration is suppressing wages and flooding the market. Prospective employers need to hire American citizens or legal residents or face hefty fines. Illegal immigrants should face deportation.
12
You can "STRONGLY SUSPECT" all you want, doesn't make it true.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23550/the-economic-and-fiscal-consequences-o...
"The long-term impact of immigration on the wages and employment of native-born workers overall is very small, and that any negative impacts are most likely to be found for prior immigrants or native-born high school dropouts. First-generation immigrants are more costly to governments than are the native-born, but the second generation are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S. This report concludes that immigration has an overall positive impact on long-run economic growth in the U.S."
9
And how many people illegally present in the United States drive for Uber or Lyft? I think that your hostility toward people illegally present in the country has no relevance to the consequences of apps and their deleterious effects upon workers seeking economic stability.
1
Security cameras in the house.
1
What it is is that no one wants to speak frankly, because they find that uncomfortable, so instead of discussing problems and working to resolve them, both parties say nothing and take it out on each other on the Web.
7
Another industry ruined by the little blue nob (some freaking app) designed by some millennial. Wait a few decades, then some freaking robot will do the work of thousands. Just you wait mankind and will regret the day when this comes.
13
And these workers are mostly women, who w/ the low wages, will have crap SS and Trump wants to cut Social Security.. SS has kept many elderly women out of poverty... Where's the Grey Panthers when you need them? And, the unions... If anyone doesn't want to pay the fee, the union should dump them; they would then have to negotiate w/whatever entity themselves, let's see what kind of deal they get then...
12
I think the workers are mostly off the books
5
The super connected online world can exasperate some of the issues with the gig economy. It creates a situation where there is much greater access to a large number of people willing to do a job which can drive down the amount they can charge for the work. As the number of gig workers increases it will be harder for the workers to earn a reasonable wage let alone afford health care.
4
Almost every single thing about the "tech industry" seems to be an effort to undo the gains working men and women have made over the last 100 years on the job and people in general gained in respect for each other and the rights to privacy and government that respects them.
50
I'm on Urbansitter and I love it. They run a background check on each sitter, in addition to employer reviews. I've met wonderful families. It's been an honor to get to know most of these people.
11
Do they run a background check on each family???
9
In some ways they do. For the most part, you get a decent profile on each family, but if they're fairly new to Urbansitter, the company asks for feedback from any sitter who works for them. I know U.S. has dropped some families and sitter for not measuring up.
This is my profile on line:
"My sister says being w kids is my "natural calling," even tho I thoroughly enjoyed being Dir. of Events @ Stanford's Med. Dev. Office before retiring and working for UrbanSitter.
I began babysitting @ 11 years old & served as a nanny during high school & college for a well known family who I still keep up with. I was the “Holiday Au Pair” aunt to 7 nieces and nephews, two of which were 7 weeks premature. Taught Sunday School for 5-9 yr olds at Trinity Episcopal Parish & served as youth director at another church.
I"ve done paid, legal/medical research on Baby/Child Attachment Theory -- don't worry if your child cries when you leave....it demonstrates that you're building a healthy foundation of security.
I’m aware of safety issues & make learning fun. Building a child’s self esteem is critical. In regards to discipline, distracting a child is usually a better alternative to punishment, particularly for the babysitter. I'm empathy & respectful of kids as individuals. I'm a better person, & happier, bc I have children, like yours, in my life.
I am a mom to an 18 year old boy who was born premature. I excel with babies.
I have completed the background check & as of 5/13/17 am certified in Infant/Child/Adult CPR plus AED. I also have excellent financial credit ...... needless to say, I am very responsible. :-) Please check my references and know that I will love your children and keep them safe & happy. kids."
I was at a braiding hair salon one day and one of the lady there had friend as a caregiver for an older man. They were video chatting while the caregiver giving the old man a bath!!! I was horrified. And they were talking about the old man in their language ( their language was mixed with French, so I knew I little since I’m fluent with that language ). I don’t know how to avoid getting someone like that to care for your elders ? By app? By word of mouth ? Good luck !
24
Like anything, you get what you pay for.
Though I'm part of an age demographic that is comfortable with these ride hailing services and uses them prolifically, it's a hard pass from me. I've taken Uber twice, and never again. The first driver kept talking about an Uber driver who roofied and raped his female passenger with the free water bottles (why are you telling me, a female, about this?). The second driver almost got into an accident on the highway, all the while maintaining a white-supremacist rant and maligning African Americans. Scary stuff. My safety and peace of mind is worth more. I've decided it's worth it to pay for a car service the few times a year I need it.
23
And now you know why your mother told you never to get into a car with strangers.
These platforms are great! For example, on care.com, for a very nominal fee, you can contact many potential sitters, that are near you, have a car, went to college, etc. and narrow down very quickly who is good. You can quickly arrange and conduct in-person interviews with them. It just makes the matching process better and quicker. Once you hire the sitter, care.com does not get a portion of the pay. In our experience, there are many social economic groups on the platform, so hopefully discrimination is minimized.
3
If care.com takes only a "nominal" fee, you can be sure that the workers pay to be listed. So whatever it says their hourly rate is, it's lower because of the listing fee.
3
The gig economy can be described in racial terms but it also reflects technology and who owns THAT. I don't mean, who has a smartphone. I mean, who owns the PLATFORM.
2
The gig economy can be described in racial terms but it also reflects technology and who owns THAT. I don't mean who has a smartphone. I mean, who owns the platform. When people speak of the value of socialism it is more about reducing the difference in wealth between the very top and the very bottom than it is about slicing the difference between the poor and the very poor more finely.
1
Roy, I love your "finder's fee" and tax/insurance service ideas!
Walking through any of the NYC parks during the day, you see nannies talking or scrolling on their phones while their charges are otherwise occupied. I have no problem believing that most of them--particularly the younger ones--can harness that same technology to find a job.
While the rise of apps may be detrimental to older nannies, the idea that the apps will "wreck nannies' lives" is most likely a nothingburger.
16
So being a nanny is not a job?
2
You pay to play. The on-line job game runs into lots of cash. Take a look around...
1
Go to that same park on weekends and you will see the same activities if not worse. Parents talking or scrolling on their phones. Posting every single move of their kids on social media while at that park. Showing each other’s post and talking about it. It’s different players but the same play. Believe me.
1
I am not a fan of the gig economy, but nannying or cleaning is not equivalent to delivering food or driving for Uber. If my food is delivered cold or late or not at all... big whoop. But my nanny holds my child's life in her hands and my cleaner literally has the keys to my house. These are high-trust jobs. A personal referral is now and always will be the ideal. I don't know anyone who is willing to just book a random person on Care.com whenever they need a babysitter.
PS - the last person on earth you should nickle and dime is the person watching your children. Your kids will get what you deserve.
69
These are my thoughts exactly.
Nanny jobs seem to be gotten mostly by word of mouth. For those without access to word of mouth, there are agencies that do the screening for you.
And yes, the headline is completely over the top, especially since the apps are still in the start-up phase and show no signs of becoming the next Uber or Airbnb,
6
I agree. I found quality sitters & maids on the Nextdoor app. Word of mouth from local neighbors. I ask my sitters for references. Several people had recommended my cleaning service on Nextdoor. The cleaning company is a group of Brazilians; I’m happy to support this ethnic group which is sizable in the Atlanta area.
I have never used care.com
My parents use a private car service & not Uber.
Some of the Uber stories are scary. How can Uber drivers who commit crimes in their vehicle think they can get away with it?
7
I have successfully hired nannies through care.com. There are thousands that apply to any job. The key is to screen people and then follow up with their references, and observe their reliability and lifestyle. That seems to be what everyone does, as no one wants you poaching their sitter or housekeeper
2
I am a 60+ boomer but unlike what the young woman in the article says about her mother, tech savvy. Not every senior is a tech bonehead as young people like to think! Having said that, I would never use care.com or any of the services that provide housecleaning or personal home help. I would rely on personal referrals and look for those who are already working for a retirement community for house cleaning help. One American lady I know is experienced and thorough. Puzzles me why people think a housekeeper/cleaning lady "gig" is easy. Professional cleaning is a job that requires skill and thoroughness not something I would expect from some young person regarding it as just another gig, i.e., how hard can cleaning be?! In fact older experienced workers have honed a process that gets the job done. And you do pay more for such experienced help - but you get what you pay for.
22
Yes, it's amazing these ageist attitudes are so rarely called out. (Especially since many of us -- including us women -- have been in IT since before the young folks were born!) Anyway: I have used TaskRabbit successfully to hire people to do various odd jobs like packing help, small handyman tasks, etc. It's great for finding people to do tasks that are too random or small for a professional service. But the times I tried to hire a housecleaner through them were a disaster: I got young people who just didn't know what to do! Back to professional cleaning services for that work. Some cleaners work out better than others, but it's definitely a skilled profession!
8
I would think that most mothers would not want to trust their child to an "uber-nanny". But it is likely that the rates will come down. This will be good for parents and it may be good for nannies as well because when the hours go up while the rates go down, you could end up making more money.
It seems like you are advocating a version of more work for less pay, and then spinning it as a boon to the worker. Getting fairly compensated for their work is the benefit that most people want, not the opportunity to work more hours to make up for a sub-optimal pay rate.
If I take you at your word, you are one of the few who would rather work more hours. (Assuming you wouldn’t wish onto others something you wouldn’t want for yourself.)
That means then, that you wouldn’t be upset if your employer told you that you would be working 25% more hours, and getting a 10% pay cut, since you would be making more money overall?
Because that’s how it works when the rates go down, and you have to work more to compensate. Sounds pretty crappy to me, but if that’s how you want to live your life, you do you. Just, please, don’t go endorsing it for anyone else.
10
Exactly. The hubris of the young is astounding. As a tech savvy boomer I use Apps but would never use such a platform for such a personal service. Some young people regard housekeeping or caregiving as an easy gig - it's not. But some of them are lazy and don't appreciate the value of sourcing and personal ties.
16
This is EXACTLY why we need socialism, with a universal basic income and government ownership of these service matching platforms.
In this case, the columnist only hinted at the real monster in the room; white privilege. Undocumented women who lack the privilege of being able to market themselves, who lack good looks, and who possibly lack the ability to read stories in English to young children are being passed over by younger white people who will work for less. This must stop!
If the government - meaning we the people - could manage these platforms, we could ensure that ALL people make the same amount of money, no matter how quickly they respond, how good their English is, and no matter how racist employers have previously rated their work (because in many cases, social media users merely use bad reviews as a mask for their racism and classism).
Furthermore, with central control of these exchanges, we could ensure that all users treat their cleaners with RESPECT, and we could use these platforms to guide the undocumented towards the educational and healthcare and legal resources that they and their families need, to bring them out of the shadows.
All too often, service matching platforms and digital services are just a way for white privilege hoarders to avoid black people, the poor, and the undocumented. They may say they want their luxuries faster, cheaper, better, more transparently, and with more courtesy - but this really just means they want it "whiter."
7
Why would I pay the same money to someone to take care of my children who can't speak or read English well or at all as to someone who can fluently? Makes no sense. And what is wrong with wanting to choose a person who I relate to and trust based on whatever criteria is comfortable for me? These are my children we are talking about, not someone dropping off a package... or my private safe space/refuge - my home. I don't want just anyone in there and it should again be my right to choose based on the criteria that are comfortable for me.
12
I think you missed TCM's sarcasm... The above comment is firmly tongue-in-cheek.
Yes, let’s turn it over to the government - that will make it much better.
4
The Gig economy will kill the middle class under the euphemism, "flexibility."
17
A few points, not in derogation of domestic workers, but confusion about the nature of the discussion.
Except for the clear problem of unilateral rating systems, I do not see any realistic solutions. I acknowledge Uber's scofflaw attitude, but this article is about something different: people without the specific digital resources/skills to survive in a digital age.
In many places, "word of mouth" is not going to cut it. It's just not. Most word of mouth recommendations are about the apps themselves. Also, people are generally expected (in the year 2018) to posses some kind of smartphone. I am not judging someone's WORTH by their smartphone, but I am saying that Pew research indicates that 77% of U.S. adults at least claim they own one. It's almost more relevant than landlines or snail-mail at this point.
A willing person who lacks skills can learn if given the educational opportunities to do so, but education is not exactly in vogue right now for some reason. A working person's inability to afford a basic smartphone says more about suppressed wages and weakened workers' rights than any inherent problem with technology. Easing healthcare and housing costs might help them too, but well, #MAGA and all that...
So what's to be done? Change will come for every industry eventually. We can fight a doomed battle against that, but the bottom line is we either help people adapt or we watch them get left behind. So what's it going to be?
16
We were lucky enough to have found a woman who has her own small company doing housework. For the last 17 years she has come twice a month. She's honest, thorough, flexible, and pays her taxes. We pay her twice the local going rate, and she's worth every dime.
She was recommended by a contractor who also uses her services. Word of mouth, with references. The very best way to find excellent help.
58
Domestic work has always been underpaid and oppressive, e.g., nannies pre- and post-slavery (north AND south), illegal immigrants held captive in wealthy homes, indentured servants, temporary contract workers. The Census Bureau didn't even count domestic workers in employment statistics until the early 1970s - about the same time they stopped assuming that all married women did not work. In a way, the electronic world is bringing the oppression of this work to light. I am not sure it's making it any worse, and there has never been a way other than word of mouth to advertise particularly brutal employers.
17
I hired home care nursing assistants for my mother for about nine years. We went through a local company who employed the care worker and sent them to the house. We paid the company about $16 and hour, the worker received little more than half of that. The company handled the usual payroll deductions and taxes for their employees. Even though we paid $16 or $18 an hour the sitter only received less than $10.
In terms of elder care, those who were new to the job were generally better than those who had decided to make a career out of it. The old "experienced" workers were practiced, adept thieves, about 80% of them. They also were jaded and had their own uneducated ideas of how an elderly person should be treated. They weren't very adaptable to the individual situation. Some of them were even mentally unstable. These are jobs of desperation for people who can't be employed anywhere else. Young, idealistic people, such as nursing students, are the better risk, generally, but even some young people know how to game the interview to get a job.
We didn't see any 'foreigners'. One woman was Philippine, but was an American citizen. She was one of the few who was knowledgeable, experienced and not a thief. The one who stayed with us the longest, for years, and did not steal had ties to the Italian mafia. The crazy ones were white. The black folk didn't smoke, none of them.
16
It is not so much Care.com that is pushing wages down. More the unlimited immigration that the NY Times keeps advocating.
29
As always, blame the employee.
But not the employer.
5
As long as 'under the counter' pay is eliminated, it's a win-win situation for the American tax payer. Plus, one might actually get good help.
6
Another jab at US poor/low-income workers. Diminishing unions or access to technology, under-valuing traditional women's work, sexual harassment on the job, and poor healthcare options make care-taking a low value, miserable situation that could be much better. Anyone who has ever needed care-taking, knows how hard it is.
12
Yet the Times continues to advocate for pumping more low-skill immigration into the country. Here we see the effects.
24
Gee, I guess conservatives no longer want Free-market competition. So much for idealism.
Also, why blame the employee?
Yet not the employer?!
3
I wouldn't use an Uber-like app to hire a housekeeper or a caregiver. Both times I've hired housekeepers without a personal referral they've been unreliable and incompetent.
The wonderful Spanish-speaking housekeeper I've had for years has as much work as she can handle through referrals.
As toxic and horrible as Nextdoor.com can be, it's a great resource for finding a housekeeper or any kind of domestic service.
1
They might be low skill immigrants but they GET THE JOB DONE! Trust me.
5
For caregivers, insurance is frequently a barrier to hiring.
1
I don't find your argument compelling. People bring strangers into their homes all the time when they rent out rooms via AirBnB.
2
Why would you hire a caregiver without insurance??
Yet another mechanism for creating an enforceable or constrained obligation, used I might add, to extract monopoly rent, by a “permanent” upper class, from the laborer who must work within this means of production. Although appearing as if the worker is free to choose their employment, and that that said employment leads to fair wages, quite the contrary occurs; we’re lead to a sort of modern feudalism, where, instead of land held in exchange for service and obedience expected in exchange for protection, we have a sort of virtual “cowing,” where the employee is held captive by an euonymous or auspiciously named digital service and obedience gained through the simple act of this being the only way to gainful employment.
8
We used a couple of online services for hiring domestic cleaners. The people they hired were occasionally good but usually bad and there was a lot of turnover. The services charged a lot per hour and did not pay the workers well. Establishing a relationship of mutual trust and respect was not possible until we hired an individual directly, paying them much more than they could make per hour from the service.
If the online services would offer that kind of a service I think they would have more happier customers and more happier domestic cleaners. Perhaps a "buyout provision" or a finder's fee like a placement agency. The service could continue to provide employment services (payroll, workman's comp, other benefits) for a fee.
13
The thing about hiring an older more experienced person to work as a caregiver or babysitter is that they're less likely to be glued to their smart phones if they do not own one.
68
Yes you are right, like the father I saw at the playground today. His son was doing some tricks and wanted his dad to see it. After calling “daddy look!!daddy look!!” so many times , while the “daddy” was staring at his smartphone. He finally gave up and run to his daddy and cried . The daddy had no idea why his son was upset. There....it wasn’t a nanny.
10
ABSOLUTELY YES. I hired home health aides from a highly recommended agency -- bonded, insured, background checks -- and found that it's mostly a joke anyhow. They charged $22 an hour (in 2013; probably $25 today) and the workers got $9-$12 an hour based on experience. The first woman they sent, robbed my elderly relative of her jewelry, cash, checks, credit cards and a fur coat....in the first 3 days of work. Other subsequent aides did not steal directly but got my relative to buy them "gifts" and took her grocery shopping, filled the cart with fancy foods (shrimp, pastries, wine...that she could never have eaten!) and took them all home to THEIR families. They basically looted her. And that was with ME, making daily unannounced "spot checks", calling on the phone, etc.
My observation of the aides is they ALL spent 90% of the time not engaging my senior relative, or cooking for her, or doing the "light housework" promised....but yapping on their smartphones (they all owned iPhones or similar, despite their low wages!)....though I did not spy on them, what I overheard was a lot of "drama" with boyfriends. They were so neglectful of my relative, that she lost 10 lbs in 7 weeks (already frail!) -- was fed inappropriate foods (nothing fresh or homecooked) -- her "Meals on Wheels" rotted uneaten in the fridge -- she was not bathed regularly and dehydration led directly to a urinary infection (for which they blamed HER for soiling herself!) which they did not report!
2
In 1996 I used a highly respected nanny agency to find our nanny. She provided me with tips for interviewing and told me what a family should do to keep a nanny happy-- that is retain her. The agent sent me 4 excellent candidates. The one I hired had the least experience, but was warm, loving, engaging in the interview and agreed to walk the Widow Bambi (our dog who had recently lost her dog companion) along with the baby! Once hired, she embraced our child-rearing standards over the 3 + years she worked for us, and helped us solve problems as they arose. (correctly diagnosing our baby boy's hernia) She became family-- we attended her wedding, and soon a shower for HER baby, and at 4 months old, the baby came to work with her. What a win! Could I have gotten this through an app? The internet? No-- only a competent agency led me to this great success. Sure I paid the agency a hiring fee, but it was worth every dollar. I recommended that agency to many other moms over many years.
45
May I ask what's the name of that agency? Thanks.
This is just another way to undermine workers. This is what the gig economy is about. It is not about getting the best and safest drivers to deliver you to your destination. It is not about having the most professional and honest home care providers or cleaning people. It is about keeping wages down and not providing benefits.
This is progress for the American worker? My foot
130
Folks, I work daily with homeless people in the southern u.s. They ALL have smartphones. We cannot hold back the march of time. People need to step up and ask kids and friends for help if they need it. It's not the obligation of these companies. We're a capitalist society.
1
The problem being described here actually works in both directions, meaning being young and tech-savvy vs. older and more experienced can hurt or help you depending on where you live. For tutoring platforms, for instance, I've noted that it is much, much easier for myself to find children to tutor on them when I live in NYC, which is most of the time. But when I spend a month or two in a more suburban setting, like Long Island or somewhere in Florida, and I use the same platform to find work, I can't find anything. People aren't posting positions online there; they are talking to friends and neighbors, and looking at fliers posted in public libraries.
11
It all another level of " management " designed to hold down wages for the actual workers, while skimming off a large serving of PROFITS. Just say NO, to working for OR using these " services ". They only hurt the workers, the great majority of whom are Women and minorities.
Seriously.
22
It hurts us even more when no one uses them.
4
I'm not suggesting not hiring help. I'm suggesting hiring from a referral, word of mouth, or an AD from the person doing the actual work. Not paying a middleman, or setting the worker up for abuse. Really.
6
Is this article about housekeepers, as the title says, or about care givers, as the author writes?
Seems to me they are two hugely different jobs with very different requirements.
28
How are they different? They both enter your house: one to clean and one to be a babysitter.
There needs to be a gig economy workers union
55
this org is a good start....
https://www.freelancersunion.org/
3
Wouldn't that be the Freelancers Union?
4
Paying that tax not only removes liability for tax dodging, but stands to make the worker eligible for SS and Medicare. Treating such workers as self-employed makes a lot more sense than considering them employees of each and every client, each one of which would need to hire a bookkeeper to figure out the taxes, benefits and so forth of their part time employee. It's far better that the weekly maid be self-employed or employed by an agency, even if the IRS hadn't heard of self-employed maids when I looked into the tax issues of it years ago.
3
This may be happening to some people in some markets, but many people want a nanny they find via word of mouth who has many years of experience. I, for one, would never use a childcare app to hire a nanny or sitter, and I think many other parents in my circle feel the same way.
34
Another aspect of these centralized services is that they will make it much easier for the government to track these workers.
Everyone who is self employed is supposed to pay self-employment tax of 15.3%, starting from the first dollar of income earned. Of course, most of them don't even bother to file tax returns. But if there is an electronic record of the jobs they took, the hours they worked, and the rate they were paid, it would be relatively easy for the IRS to check on them.
12
The "gig" economy is expensive to independent workers. You need a smart phone, and either you pay for hosting on the various web sites (I'm on at least 5) or your "free" posting appears on page 44, or 144. The rates to appear higher on the "food chain" vary, but is at minimum is $30 per month and a lot more depending on the "plan" you pay for. Some have yearly contracts that are unnecessary for me, though I haven't researched the cancellation options.
As a part time sole proprietor with an overhead of at least 20% (not including "advertising") and and a 15% SS tax, adding the above expenses really cuts into the bottom line. Additionally the competition is crushing. So if you have a big budget you can get a piece of the pie, and if you don't you're in limbo.
6
We employed caregivers for 5 years to take care of our Mother. Her primary aide was an older woman who took better medical care of Mom than I could. She did beautiful housecleaning and cooked like a restaurant chef. She was intimidated by computers.
Many of the younger aides that filled-in seemed to think that just playing with their phone while Mom watched TV was doing a great job.
For us, digital skills became a red flag that they may not be good caregivers.
214
My wife did housecleaning for years, part time, with clients located by word of mouth. She had to quit because of illness and now considers herself retired. But it's unclear how much the high-tech way of bringing clients and maids into contact is used in my area. There are services like Merry Maids that do traditional advertising, send one or more people that are on regular payroll out on service calls, and I'm sure do offices as well as private homes and apartments. I tried care dot com for a different type of gig, part time tutoring, and found that applicants don't just apply, they have to pay what amounts to an application fee to get listing preference as I recall. In other words, at least in areas of low to moderate demand, the care dot com service is more of a scam than a clearinghouse for people interested in providing services. I don't know about other agencies, but I can say that free word of mouth advertising that a provider is competent, honest and pleasant is a better way to bring providers and clients together to get something done. It also attracts clients who allow some flexibility in scheduling and otherwise work more graciously with providers who may have appointments, illnesses or transportation issues.
40
These platforms are simply agglomerators who use Tech platforms as a Services brokerage. It amplifies the disparity at the very low income level where technology is not available which allows everyone to participate fully in the economy. The Dilemma can be solved by providing basic technology access to all classes of people even for free if necessary so all can participate. The Brokerage aspect which provides cash for the tech platforms is however a necessary evil that is inescapable in today's world. Freelancers who demand High wages are still free to go and sell their value-added services in the Open Marketplace.
4
There is a big difference between getting into a stranger's car (even though mom warned against it) or even sleeping in a stranger's bedroom, and letting a stranger into your home. Asking them take your child to the park seems even more dicey. I suspect that "vetting" by an anonymous company will not soon replace word of mouth recommendations from trusted friends. But then I never understood why people want to pay the lowest wage to people they entrust with their loved ones and most prized possessions.
171
Yeah, why pay the lowest wage to care for what is most precious? Never could figure that one out, either.
40
It might work if it is an ad hoc situation where resident is in home and needs a quick cleaning. Turning your home and/or child over to another person based on an app on a regular basis seems really stupid. We will of course get some bad results that will then trigger another complaint about why the government does not do something to fix it. A board to certify nannies and housekeepers? 2018 America in a nutshell.
4
"The ratings systems on marketplace platforms are one-sided: Ratings by employers can reduce a worker’s search ranking and their eligibility for jobs, but care and cleaning workers are not always able to rate or evaluate employers."
eBay, the original gig economy website, practices this.
A buyer that is chronically tardy or remiss in paying for items cannot receive negative feedback from sellers, but eBay allows the buyer free reign to trash the sellers who want to warn others of buyers who are unscrupulous.
While this reinforces the mercantile adage that "The Customer is King", it also promulgates a servility that is contributing to the downward spiral of wages among workers, with or without unions.
49
I've had the same housekeeper for 27 years. And I just hope she'll stay with me for as long as she is willing and able. I trusted her with my children, when they were still around, my pets, my house and everything in it. There's no way I'd give her up for someone l don't even know.
108
Just out of curiosity, I want to know if you treat her as a real employee - ie., 1099, social security, vacation, etc. You're very lucky to have found such a wonderful employee!!
18
I see some movement in the other direction. I now have a massage therapist who is employed by a salon. He gets a salary (and tips) and vacation / sick leave and health insurance (no retirement). I assume the hair stylists, manicurists, etc get paid the same way. I had a music teacher for my children who structured her payment by semester, with built in weeks with no lessons (her vacation). If you paid the whole semester in advance, you got a small reduction in the total amount. Same for my kids karate lessons. Banding together or using the school year as a framework gave these people some stability.
25
This article is an excellent refutation of one of the great clichés of our time: the belief that technologies are neutral. In fact technologies define our lives by defining our possibilities. Technophiles stress that technologies open up new possibilities and freedoms, which is true. They fail to note that technologies also foreclose other possibilities and freedoms. Workers in the traditional economy are no less dependent on computers than workers in the gig economy -- try applying for a job without one. Similarly, most of us require a car to get to and from work. There are countless other examples. In my book (Not So Fast: Thinking Twice About Technology) I call this "de facto technological autonomy." If you think you're free to choose whether or not to use a given machine, think again.
107
Nursing agencies are the precursors to many of these "gig work" apps . Both nursing registries and domestic worker agencies expose problems within the labor force. Physical nursing "agencies" with actual offices may be subject to some local oversight, but it seems that apps escape even minimal regulation. One of the problems with nursing "gig" work was a nurse never really knew what to expect at work. Exploitation was common. Patient care could suffer due to lack of familiarity with the routine on the hospital "floor". Agencies were designed to save money for hospital employers who didn't want to hire full time. It was never rally about a labor shortage. Now labor has to deal with worker "apps", a new form of exploitation that could hit everyone in the end. App developer/owners are usually upper class, educated people who exploit lower paid workers just as "agencies" exploited nursing. Our current crop of Legislators are disinterested in any form of labor protection. These Apps will never help workers move up into the middle class. The "gig economy" is a risk to everyone who is employed. Even physicians, college professors, and lawyers could someday be reclassified as "gig" work and loaded on an app. The only fair solution would be to reclassify our legislators as "gig workers" first.
96
It isn't the "gig economy" hurting these workers. It is the "economy." If we really had such low unemployment, such a robust worker marketplace, Uber and domestic worker apps would fail, for lack of qualified people.
What the apps do, is make niche job markets open to all for at least a short period. People with established customer bases are fine, it is the ones trying to build their business that will suffer.
At some point, the desire to have just anyone clean your house, drive you around, care for your kids for a good price will diminish, and apps will develop that offer exclusive resumes, sought after people. A sort of Homecare Elite, that cuts the crowd down and relies on real input, not yelp stars. But that is in the future, waiting for a clever marketeer to develop. And meanwhile, people find themselves chasing jobs and driving their income into the ground.
26
I’m fine with the original individual gig economy but as a consumer, I hate the new gig economy organized by tech companies that are exploitative for one reason- both the consumer and service provider need to create a “profile”. It’s like signing up for hundreds of dating sites. I just want a place to stay or a ride, I don’t care to like you or be your friend and I don’t want to be a cute and bubbly customer that has to compete for attention. That’s why I use a taxi instead of Uber and hotels instead of Airbnb. I pay you money and you provide a service I need- a clean and uncomplicated transaction.
260
Ugh, for sure, this is a great point. The time-cost on AirBnB of both finding what I want (can be hours and hours) and doing the "social" management before and after is a high burden (especially as I have my own full-time job). I definitely factor in that cost of my own time and attention when looking at hotels vs. AirBnB. Plus there's the trade-off of providing accurate reviews vs. the perception that you're not a nice, easy-going "guest".
20
@JA in MI
Amen. I am totally with you.
In many cases, I want to just make a transaction, not have a relationship. Or worse, I feel like I'm taking time to do a performance review for them and their employment depends on it--that would be a management function that I expect to be paid for! I don't do performance reviews for free.
22
@Jared: believe it or not, I have used Uber. Although I have other issues with it, it's not their profile I have a problem with. I was speaking in general terms about other site/apps, of which there are many, that do make you create an extensive profile. it seems many people agree with me.
please don't behave tRumpster-like.
The professions you write about have always had “gig economy” problems. What’s new is that that the gig economy is expanding, and what were once stable professions now face the same kind of uncertainty. Everyone’s is a “freelancer,” and the internet makes the lowest bidder easy to find. Wages are driven down, and nobody has any health care, retirement, or vacations. The professor is now the adjunct professor, and everyone on the staff is temporary. Everyone works an hour short of being able to qualify for benefits.
188
I would never hire a babysitter from an app or website. We had a nanny once who I found through a friend. She lived next door to one of my friends whose husband was a cop, so I felt safe with her. She still occasionally babysits for us though she is no longer a full time nanny with us, and I let her keep the keys to my house. My whole family loves her! I always paid her when we were on vacation (of course) and never docked her for being sick, or having family drama, even when accumulated, her personal absences were over 4 or 5 weeks a year.
We also use the teachers from my children's current or former preschools for occasional babysitting, as they are educated, certified, have clean background checks, and "have something to lose" (i.e., their main job if I reported them) if they were to do something wrong (which they would be very unlikely to do).
So, no apps or websites for me. I suspect many consumers feel the same.
37
This article merely uncovers a nice example of the hubris of techies. Only a person too young and inexperienced to have ever used a housekeeper or care-giver would think an Uber-type platform will serve for finding that service. And only another techie would think that this model poses a genuine threat to the people operating in the existing organic system. As virtually every comment on here so far attests, people select care workers and housekeepers by word of mouth from trusted sources. And they inevitably form relationships with these people who are invited into their homes. No amount of self-serving glossy web page presentation is going to compete with that. In fact, as most of us accumulate experience with online-sourced services we learn to distrust the facile presentation.
39
I am a hubris-filled youth, it's true, but my partner and I regularly hire housekeepers from a local "uber-type platform" to clean our home. They do a "meh" job for about 1/3 the price of the housekeepers we were recommended through word of mouth. Since we are doctoral students working long hours, we have very little time or money (and relevant health issues that get in the way). When we have salaries, we hope to hire someone great through word of mouth and create a lasting economic partnership with them. The gig economy is likely drawing in part-time customers like us who wouldn't otherwise buy a higher-priced service and who one day hope to have the earning power to hire non-gig-economy workers (which may or may not be the case). This is not a justification but reality. We are part of the problem, but it is what it is; let's at least be honest about it.
2
In care workers, as in every good or service, you get what you pay for. I have experience with this because I needed to hire care workers for my grandmother so that I could continue working myself, as I was not in a position to take years out of the workforce. I did it two ways: by hiring privately via care.com, and also by going through a home health care agency. Each method had advantages and disadvantages.
Hiring through an agency provides a paper trail, which can be important if you need to document how you "spent down" your elder's money for Medicaid eligibility purposes (most will need Medicaid if nursing home placement becomes necessary). The agency handles the screening and is typically bonded and insured. However, they charge a LOT more than the worker actually gets. So I found the quality and commitment often lacking, since I was paying $25 an hour but they were only getting paid $10.
If you use Care.com or something similar, the vetting and insurance risk is on you. It is also up to you to pay taxes (income, FICA, etc.) and keep detailed records. This is either expensive (if you use an accountant's services) or time-consuming if you do it yourself, but failing to do it can get you into trouble with IRS or Medicaid later. However, paying someone $25 an hour directly did buy much more skilled, reliable, compassionate care. A caregiver is not a taxi ride. They are not all the same, and you get what you pay for.
94
this is really the point. the ads for care.com imply that the folks are Vetted THEY ARE NOT! no insurance, no vetting--risk on you. Why be a fool just because they have a pretty picture...
9
We found our beloved nanny through care.com almost a decade ago. Neither the pricey nanny agency we used nor (gasp) craigslist ended up providing us with people who were caring and reliable. But I don't think the method by which we found the nannies was the distinguishing factor--we just finally got lucky. We pay a very high hourly wage, pay when we are on vacation, offer sick/personal days, and have given several raises over the years. We fill out a W2 every year and pay the appropriate state and federal taxes. She is an amazing parenting partner and our family is so fortunate to have her in our lives, so we want to make sure she feels valued. I'm not sure why you would ever not do these things for someone taking care of the most precious and vulnerable members of your family.
35
Sadly, there is a reason one would not be so generous: money. When one is making $12 per hour (at a STEM job, no less), one simply can’t afford to pay a nanny a high wage. You are very fortunate, cg, to be able to treat your nanny so well; and you are correct that she is worth every cent. Many young couples simply can’t afford to follow your example; yet they also are in dire need of high quality child care.
2