I thought discrimination policies did not apply to the nanny relationship. I would never hire a man or a mother with young children to watch my own.
We had several part-time nannies through the years as the children were growing up. All were treated well. Too bad the State is now getting involved in what was a loving family relationship. Now it becomes an 'us verses them' relationship in New York and children will suffer as a result. Sad.
disability insurers charge more than double the rate for female employees... yet as soon as they actually have yo pay something related to women they drop the coverage? nice.
1
Meantime, the nannies ( largely minority and immigrant workers) who take care of our parents in long term care facilities and provide home health service are drawing minimum wage and are exempted from wage and hour rules that apply to non-domestic workers.
Maybe people need to save their money and plan for their own maternity leave. When my friend wanted to take ten months of leave, she banked ten months worth of take home pay. Before you scream that you can’t afford it, well, maybe you can’t afford to have a baby yet. That’s part of being a parent, paying your own bills.
7
So you think your job will be there waiting for you after 10 months of leave? Nope!
So fortunate we found an au pair program that provided us with caregivers who were just graduated teachers. They were fully legal, obtained benefits including medical care and further schooling, provided excellent care but were not ready for families of their own so never had to worry about maternity leaves ( we are still friends with many and are delighted to see pictures of their children now that they are older married and have moved on to full time teaching careers in their country of origin.)
3
The "au pair" program puts a pretty way on bringing in foreign labor, paying low wages and keeping wages depressed for U.S. citizens doing the same work.
Sometimes people use au pairs because they want someone with their babies with a skill that is rare for US citizens doing the same work to have.
People I know have had several Israeli au pairs for their babies because that way they could insure that their children would have the best chance to be bilingual (especially if one or both of the parents were not native Hebrew speakers) .
Danno, book Ms. Brody's friend and the nanny, too.
According to Ms. Brody: "My friend is paying the nanny, a noncitizen, 12 weeks of leave out of pocket because she is paid off the books."
What we need here more than maternity leave is criminal prosecution of Ms. Brody's friend and her partner (the piece refers to we) and review of the noncitizen's immigration standards.
9
Good Lord. Can we talk about the real problem here - the fact that we have created a society that forces parents to leave their own children to take care of other people’s children? When that nanny’s kid grows up and she explains to him that she couldn’t be there for him because she had to take care Johnny in the big house down the street, what do we expect the nanny’s child to think? Will he understand? Will he forgive? Will this make him feel good about himself? The answer is no, no and no. What will Johnny think when he discovers that his beloved nanny left her own child for him? Will he be confused? Concerned? Might he feel a little guilty? Yes, yes and yes. Yet, this happens all the time and we don’t flinch. We can’t afford to see - it’s another one of those costs of doing business. Our economy exists in no small part because of this arrangement. But the children? They see. They see and they never forget. We can count on it.
6
What about a world where it is perfectly normal for both parents, regardless of income, to work and leave kids in the hands of nannies? That's at least as absurd as forcing parents to leave their own kids to become nannies.
This may sound sexist, and maybe it is, but I don't think that kids were intended to be raised by folks other than their parents if at all possible. Now, that's the norm, owing either to economic necessity or some sort of thing where both parents hold jobs because...well, that's a good question. There is no job more important than raising a child, and yet we hire that out as if it's a perfectly normal thing to do. I'd rather have time with my child than a few extra bucks in the bank. Money isn't everything.
7
I am a nurse, I leave my children to take care of sick people. I need to pay my rent and put food on the table... so what?
6
" “I would be interested, but I am waiting for my green card,” said a 39-year-old nanny and home health care aide... "
Back in the early 90s I had a girlfriend from Sweden who was here on a tourist visa and was deported and refused re-entry because she got caught by INS working temporary, part-time job handing out flyers for a business.
My, how the times have changed.
4
What an odd article. Why would you write this from the perspective of the employer instead of the employee? I can only think of a handful of families that ever employed a nanny in my entire life. $1300 a week (two times the current designated average weekly wage). What are you getting paid that you can afford the expense while still being young enough to bear children. These are rich people problems.
7
How selfish of these people to expect their corporations (and my taxes) to fund maternity leave, but they are unwilling to do so for their domestic help!
1
I think for the the male chauvinists out there, this new maternity leave law, combined with the current deluge of sexual harassment accusations, will lead many to now even hiring women whenever possible.
Likewise, I know a few employers who shy away from hiring divorced Dads, because they often have child support garnishment orders against them which leads to a mountain of paperwork for the HR team every payday.
2
What a stupid law! None of the things that make mandatory leave tolerable for employers applies to an employee whose only job is to be trusted with, and by, an infant or young child. That employee MUST be there. If the employee has to take a long spell to care for someone else, the employee needs to find a job that a sub can do the job.
Of course, if we reared our own children, this problem wouldn't arise. The two-earner couple (with kids) is an awful national business model. So, to the extent this law makes parents think twice about outsourcing upbringing, it will have a silver lining. But I don't believe that's the goal...
2
Typical example of the tail wagging the dog.
The question isn't whether leave is "tolerable" given the nature of the work. The question is whether the underlying cause (childbirth) warrants mandatory leave. And it does. You give birth, you need time to recover physically, 8 weeks at least. If you employ a person and not a machine, that's for you to take into account.
1
"Workers are eligible for the paid leave regardless of citizenship or immigration status, but many nannies are wary of applying."
It is preposterous that an illegal immigrant should be eligible for any work-related benefit. Why should the government reward someone for committing a crime, however minor the crime may be? It's in the same vein as those (apocryphal?) stories about robbers who are injured in the homes of the robbed successfully suing the victim homeowner for damages.
7
I just read through the NYS Paid Family Leave information (provided from the link in the article). I am confused - If an employee is required to pay in to this, what happens if they do not ever need to use the paid leave? Do they ever get the money back that they were required to pay? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any info regarding this.
2
Do you get your insurance premiums back?
There you have your answer.
2
Unlike in the corporate world, nannies don’t stay late, work weekends or take work home with them. When the parents come home, the workday is over. Unless the parents have requested that the nanny stay longer, she leaves.
To somehow force families to pay for leave (in addition to having to pay for a replacement), can put families into a very difficult position - like having to fire the pregnant nanny.
If all nannies came with a qualified backup who magically appeared when the nanny was sick, on leave or just running late, mandating paid leave would be a no brained. But the world does not work like that. Far more often, the mother must stay home and risk her own career opportunities.
3
Outrageous really. As a native new Yorker I can say that 100% of the people I know with nannies are two person big earners - for example husband and wife working at leading law firms. After all, a nanny is private day care. So we take a real problem like a total lack of support for raising healthy children, which every European country has solved decades ago, and do not fix it. But then, to make having a nanny a little easier for people who want private day care, we levy a tax on all employees, and run around saying we are doing good for hard working nannies. Buy many of these nannies are immigrants to afraid to ask for the time, or are paid off the books and can't use the deal. The US is a mess. Why should a working class family that will never be able to afford a nanny have anything taken from their pay to cover nanny leave? Clearly the people who wrote this bill have nanny issues. I would have no issue with a small tax on capital gains to pay for nanny leave. Maybe everyone earning more than 50,000 in cap gains in a year could chip in for nanny leave. The hardship caused by this tax could cause some to spend one less day skiing, but their conscious would be clean.
7
You should review the actual law before responding this way. This article focuses on nannies, but the actual act covers anyone taking leave to care for a family member and has absolutely nothing to do with nannies specifically. I will be using it to get some money while I take maternity leave (I'm neither a nanny nor do I have a high paying job by NYC standards), but you can also use it to care for an ill spouse, parent, etc so long as you work more than a certain amount of hours a week and have been with your employer more than 26 weeks. The benefits can be taken advantage of by any New Yorker, not just nannies. The weekly paycheck deduction is capped at around $1.26 and I see no problem. We already have paycheck deductions for social security and Medicare and I don't use those things but I believe in making care available to others. I'm glad NY recognizes that people need to care for their families.
2
"On the books" refers to people who sell services within a business structure or as an employee or sub-contractor meeting all insurance and tax requirements [worker's compensation, disability including paid family leave, social security, sales tax in some cases, liability insurance, etc.]. I live in upstate NY where domestic workers are often working as we call it 'under the table' meaning cash only and no protection for worker, and essentially illegal/risky for the homeowner. I am the co-owner of a home cleaning business which is entirely on the books and it is quite rare, but in the end, we provide family leave, etc. etc. and someday, social security. I actually am shocked that more people don't become sole proprietors or s-corps in order to protect themselves and their clients. It is shocking how many 'work for cash only.' I am sorry for them. Having a business structure is the way to go.
6
When the homeowner BECOMES the employer, it is a big deal: I can hardly believe people will go through all this. Hire a person who already is on the books and not 'under the table' cash only. Look at what is required: https://www.tax.ny.gov/pubs_and_bulls/tg_bulletins/mu/hiring_household_h...
1
I'm European. I was quite shocked when a good friend of mine (in NYC) casually mentioned she paid her nanny (a citizen) cash. Reason being "less hassle, everybody does it and and the nanny wanted it that way". Both she and her partner work respectable corporate jobs. How you can hire someone "under the table" and not fear any consequences in a country supposedly governed by the rule of law is mind-boggling to me.
2
I realize that this is a little arrogant to ask, but the article begs the question: "Why are so many people hiring nannies in the first place?" Because Dad/Mom has a high-paying job? Which suggests that there is an income limit above which the marginal satisfaction of money is greater than the marginal dissatisfaction from not raising your children. Single parents have no choice; but why so many couples? This problem itself speaks volumes about our society.
21
Or maybe parents enjoy their jobs and neither one wants to stay at home with the child? Ask a nanny- full-time child care is not a job for everyone.
8
It's a good question, and it's not arrogant. When Mrs. Proudie married in 1963, the cost of living was much lower than it is today. We could live nicely and even save a little on a lower middle class salary with one parent working and the other at home caring for our two children. How things have changed in 50 years! The cost of living - especially the big ticket items such as medical expenses, taxes, and tuition - have skyrocketed. And the labor market has changed drastically. Now women are expected to work, and the days of job security and long-term employment with a single employer are long gone. I'd say that for many of these couples living in New York, two incomes and a nanny is a necessity.
6
Yes, women work. Women work for many reasons, not only financial, although yes, the period of capitalism we find ourselves in often requires this for a comfortable life. Add to that the fact that extended families are either spread out geographically,and that grandparents are also compelled to work. But your smug condescension is nauseating, frankly. Hiring an extra care giver does not mean one is not raising their kids - often it means they are providing a level of love, care, education and comfort that you clearly envy.
9
Unless they're rolling out more subsidized childcare centers at the same time, this is going to price even more parents out of the workforce. It already typically costs at least one parent's takehome pay to pay for childcare. Most working families can't afford to pretend they're a company paying payroll taxes and benefits. Unlike corporations, we don't get to write off those costs of earning a living. Typical childcare costs in NYC run at least $800/week, plus payroll taxes, and it breaks a lot of careers, most often women's. They stay home because they can't afford to work, and lose out long-term on their career paths.
37
Or, you could forgo child-rearing in order to stay on the career path. There's a choice. With world population estimated to reach 9 billion by 2037 maybe forgoing child-rearing is not a bad idea.
5
It seems like a lot of comments are coming from men, people who don’t have children or people who live in places where nannies are only for the rich.
In NYC, if both parents work (which is the norm) you absolutely need a nanny or a family member who can care for the child during the day. Daycare is harder to get into than private school and does not provide the flexibility for working parents and is extremely expensive, too. We are a middle class family with both parents working and are lucky to have found a wonderful nanny. We provide 2 weeks paid vacation, 9 vacation days, sick/family leave when needed (mostly paid) and taxes. Although all of these things are the right thing to do as an employer and as a human, it has been a significant strain on our financial situation. We basically use one salary to pay for the care, knowing it’s an investment for a short number of years.
Paid maternity leave is a must for nannies but it seems like it’s putting the cart before the horse. This country needs to first provide paid leave to parents for at least 6 months, period. No matter what your job is or who you work for. And a support system for parents for after school, etc. - a healthy economy has a strong support system for parents. How does it make sense to force parents to provide maternity leave to their nannies when they themselves don’t get it?
42
I totally agree with you, Pak S. Commenters seem to think that nannies are only for the rich and that they are the luxury option compared to day care -- neither of which is the case here in New York City.
My partner and I both have full-time jobs and took off as much time as we were able. We considered day care and a nanny, both which cost in the same range. We ultimately hired a nanny after each of our children was born and after our own time off work had been used. We paid her well with salary and benefits well beyond what the law requires, eating up a large chunk of one of our salaries. We rented our apartment (didn't own), and didn't even own a car -- we are middle class.
To the non-NYC commenters. Day cares in New York are very expensive and hard to get in to, and nannies are common place and from a variety of backgrounds -- there are "career nannies" who are frequently immigrants, young mothers working their way through college, and artists with master's degrees who leave your apartment to go perform at night.
And yes, people with Hamptons homes and luxury cars hire nannies too, of course, but not because both parents actually *work* at paid jobs that they go to every day. (The .01% makes almost all of their money from investment income.) Rich people's so-called nannies are more like home managers and make 2-3 times what home childcare providers for the middle class, also called nannies, make per hour.
26
Parents are covered, not just nannies: “With the Jan. 1 rollout of the first phase of New York State Paid Family Leave, that gray area will turn black and white: Just like most of the parents they work for, domestic workers will be entitled to eight weeks of paid leave at 50 percent of their salary.”
1
I think you are missing the point. The nannies can't afford to take care of their children either. Do the nannies get nannies?
11
There go all the "legal" nanny jobs...
Who in real job environment has 8 week leave?
I have a lot of engineering employees, contractors... most have no more than 2 weeks off some have 3weeks...
Is this the real world or a fantasy...? How can anyone making less than half a million after taxes even afford a nanny at $1,300/wk...?
Are you saying that NY nannies make nearly $70K/yr
An engineer, maybe just a young one, is unlikely to make that much... :))
Is this a piece from Life of Rich and Famous...? ;))
21
That sentence was poorly written: it's half the *nanny's* wage (whatever that is) up to a maximum of $652. Almost no nanny makes 1300/week.
8
I had 8 weeks paid leave at 100%.
NY instituted a pay roll tax, and now it is possible to pay maternity leave. Who would have thought? This is a wonderful development for employers of nannies, too, who do struggle with the fact that they can't afford a 100% increase in their pay roll for months (paid maternity leave + paying a temp), but do want to provide a benefit they want as well.
3
Yes, what a wonderful idea. By design and economics, my job doesn't allow me the time, money or energy to have a hobby much less a family yet Cuomo thinks it's a good idea that I help pay for other people's child leave. I can understand a white shoe firm offering this benefit to attract A-List talent, even new hires right out of a top grad school, but to auto body shops and mall security guards? That's absurd.
2
Here in the burbs, nannies are a rarity. We juggle our children between daycare and car pools. I am appalled at the sense of entitlement of these parents. If your partner is unemployed they can/should provide childcare. My husband and I are both professionals. I made career sacrifices and spaced my children so that I could afford expensive daycare. I have no doubt he would have done the same if necessary. At the daycares, the caregivers were obviously underpaid but received predictable schedules, paid time off and other benefits. Many brought their own children to the daycare which was a primary reason that I felt comfortable sending my children. Please!! there is no right to a nanny. Any working mother could easily make the case that they are a necessity. I am getting fed up with the NYTimes relaying the woes of the wealthy.
10
For the price you paid for "expensive daycare", you could have also give a nanny...why do you assume it's only an issue for the "wealthy"? Btw, if you're living in NJ and both you and your husband are professionals, you're very likely in the top 5% or higher of wage earners in the wealthiest country in the world, so...
14
We looked into a nanny in NJ. Twice the price of the daycare. Of course we may have been able to pay under the table and avoid social security payments but could not stomach this ethically. Not sure about the 5% thing but it did not work out financially.
7
As opposed to the woes of the upper-middle class, who can move their jobs around?
Amazed that anyone would write, so cavalierly, that a friend is breaking the law by paying her noncitizen nanny off the books. That's illegal, that's exploitative and it, assuming the nanny is illegal, exacerbates immigration issues. Shame.
47
Paragraph 3: "...domestic workers will be entitled to eight weeks of paid leave at 50 percent of their salary, or $652.96 [half the state's current designated average weekly wage]."
New York State's designated average weekly wage is $1305.92?
How was that number determined? That number is intended to be relevant to
domestic service labor markets [as a floor]? Is it me completely out of touch, or is it the Times' coverage of labor politics?
11
I *think* it's a ceiling, not a floor, for the tax-funded payments, if I remember correctly.
If you go to NYS Dept. of Labor, Occupational Wages for New York State:
https://labor.ny.gov/stats/lswage2.asp#39-0000
The breakdown shows Childcare Workers [with other close categories in near approximation] with a mean annual wage of $28,330, that is, a mean weekly wage of $544.80.
Isn't that in fact what would be applied in this instance, editors?
Or is your utility to those of us who trust you, in fact, much closer to what our opponents say. That self-sanctified "liberal" preaching hypocrisy, or lies, to the deplorables. Imagine someone who just read and trusted this article.
"she’s asked a family member to come fill in while she’s on leave so she can be sure her job won’t be stolen." Isn't it illegal in other professional situations to replace a woman while she is on pregnancy leave? If so, why would it not apply here?
6
All I know is, a woman I'm vaguely acquainted with here fired her maid the moment she realized the maid was pregnant. I don't know about any recourse the maid had.
2
It isn't illegal unless the employer is subject to FMLA, which, I believe, only applies to companies with more than 50 employees and then only if an employee has been with the company for a year and is full time.
Temporary substitution is different from replacement. For example, in medicine, we've had temporary docs fill in for female docs out on maternity leave. After leave ends, the temporary doc leaves and the permanent doc returns. There are docs who opt to be temporary docs as it affords a flexibility and pay that suits their lifestyle more.
‘“I would be interested, but I am waiting for my green card,” said a 39-year-old nanny and home health care aide...’
I certainly hope that people working illegally are immediately eligible. It’d be a shame to inconvenience them. T’would certainly be racist, sexist, or a miscellaneous ist.
9
They can be working legally and not have a green card. You may not be racist or sexist or a miscellaneous list, but you are certainly ignorant.
16
A person can work legally while waiting for a green card in the US--you can fill out this paperwork when applying.
12
Oh, please. The “I’m waiting for a green card” line is a favorite of undocumented workers, especially in domestic situations where no one wants to investigate too closely. A simple google search will confirm the rampant abuse of that loophole.
13
The problems of the .01%. Good grief. I interviewed the domestic of a billionaire, and he was infuriated that we had to verify her taxes being paid (for his government security clearance). The rest of the country, but especially the rest of the US, is just gobsmacked at the income inequality we see in things like this. The same guy screaming at a woman on 62nd Street that "I have an $135,000 car!! would be the same one trying to avoid this requirement. We finally chucked the "Working Mother" magazine after one too many articles about the horrors of life as a wealthy Mom written on the train from Chappaqua. Thank God for these women raising these offspring of the rich. Maybe they'll remember someday what normal people are like when they think of the nanny. Or driver. Or chef. Or.... Never mind.
24
The mystery remains: why live in a supposed "top of the world" city when you can't afford it? Why is the tyranny of stupidly expensive and uncompromising daycare centers accepted? Obscenely expensive urban centers are really for the very rich or the young and childless.
2
When I first looked into hiring a nanny a decade ago the agency I went to laughed when I asked for a nanny “on the books.” They agency’s owner said “that’s only for people who want to run for office someday.” And of the nannies I knew then and now—nobody was/is on the books and some were paid slave wages. Once again the paper I love lives in a strange world 15 minutes away where working couples have on the books nannies, friends of the journalists can scape together 12 weeks of leave (how? Did they sell meth?) and people who earn less than 100k a year mysteriously live in million dollar apartments.
49
Are the nanny 'agencies' offering referrals to 'green card' or 'under-the-table' workers? I am unclear in your comment. Agencies offer referrals or do they do background checks?
1
Nothing quite as amusing as west and east coast liberals convincing themselves that their liberal beliefs don't really apply to their 'personal' situation.... but really more generally to other folks.
37
White people problems. They have a nanny who maybe might not be %100 available to them. A nanny is a poor substitute for a loving parent anyway.
9
I disagree. A nanny can be a stabilizing force in a child life. The issue I have with the concept is not about the nanny's affect on a child, or even the child's childhood, nothing wrong with a good role model that isn't family. Plenty of families are rocked by their own hand.
My issue is with the fact that parents of mid to upper income strata living in expensive cities are sacrificing their own time with their children just to live in a high dollar urban environment.
1
How does having a loving parent make up for lack of food, no heat and possibly having no place to live?
You can be the most loving parent, but you still need to earn a living, which means you need to leave your child somewhere/with someone.
While I’m glad nannies in NY are getting something for maternity leave, how pathetic is it that this article is cooing over 8 weeks at half pay? When are we going to catch up to other countries and offer humane, paid family leaves to all new families? Wasn’t I just reading that Sweden gives 480 days to be split between new parents however they choose? I believe Canada gives women a year. This makes me angry to be a woman in the US.
44
You are correct. My wife got a year off at 85% of her salary.
13
Czech Republic - 3 years, paid, with guarantee of return to job.
As a non-parent, I'm not sure I understand the choice of a full-time nanny after the children are a couple of years old at the most. An employee of mine has her son in daycare and he is not even two years old yet. I'm sure it was an adjustment for her whole family, but having a nanny was not an option for them, as she is pretty early on in her career and her husband is an artist with limited income. I'd love to hear from people who employ a nanny for older children what the value is for them. No snark - very open and curious to know.
2
Where I live, it seems like families with older children are always looking for nannies mainly to use as a taxi service for sports, school activities, medical appointments and getting dinner started. Parents who work in San Francisco can't get back here in time to deal with all of these appointments, so it seems like they hire nannies mainly for transportation purposes.
5
Because good daycares are hard to get a spot in, and most have limited and unflexible hours that do not work with all work shifts and commutes. They also may be unwilling or unable to accommodate children with any special needs. Then there's the situation when you have more than one. Daycares are usually per child, and more than one child is typically over $3000/month. It may not be possible to get into a daycare located close enough to an older child's school to make pickup for both. The tax break for childcare is a joke, it pays for less than a month of care.
8
You want to know the difference between a group daycare staffed by underpaid, overworked folks, vs. a potentially very caring, well paid nanny who gives far closer attention to someone's children?
6
If there is anything worse than taking care of my own children during a nanny absence, it's having to drive MYSELF to a polo match in the Bentley when the chauffeur is a no-show. Man... I really have to get a butler who knows how to drive.
13
Genius, do you realize how many women face serious workplace consequences if not job loss for having to take time to deal with family responsibilities? It can be devastating to a family's economic stability if their childcare is not reliable. Rich people with chauffeurs don't give a hoot, they're not getting fired or disdained for promotion because they took an afternoon when the nanny called out sick.
20
Good Grief Mama, Jim is just making a joke.
3
EK, Jim is not making a joke at all. He's dead serious, and that's the problem. He sees anyone who has domestic help as the Bentley-driving .01%.
4
Wow. I'm glad I live in a state that doesn't requires that lawyers get involved in the hiring of people to work in my own home.
8
If these states can do it, all can. 12 weeks is a drop in the bucket compared to some other countries. Healthy families need time to bind and deal with the stresses a newborn can bring.
9
And if you have a preemie, 12 weeks is not nearly enough
We found ourselves in this situation a few years ago. We did the best we could and paid 2 months of our nanny’s salary, notwithstanding the fact that my partner had just been laid off and was unemployed at the time. We literally scraped to find the money for the nanny’s leave. We were already stretched by paying an hourly wage that was at the high end of the pay range, plus taxes on that. I didn’t receive paid maternity leave at my own job, but I believe in it so we paid for hers. She didn’t seem particularly grateful either. But the problems really began when she tried to juggle taking care of her newborn at the same time as caring for my two children. For several months I tried to be flexible but with no acknowledgement or recognition from her that we were paying her for a certain job, with specific requirements. The blithe comment above that if you can afford to have a nanny then you can afford to pay leave is really obscuring how challenging some of these situations are in real life (and assumes anyone employing a nanny is wealthy, which is not true). It’s a difficult situation that requires sensitivity, flexibility and good communication by all parties involved.
91
Your partner was unemployed when your nanny gave birth and, somehow, that was a struggle? Why couldn't the partner take care of the kid? Stuff happens all the time. "Hey, sorry, but we won't be needing you until my partner regains employment. Very happy to have you back when we've regained our financial footing." That's what most any person I know would say and do, and there's no sin in it. Then to say that the nanny didn't seem "particularly grateful."
Sometimes, I can't fathom the planet/worlds that other people live in. Yes, if you can afford a nanny, you can afford to pay leave--that's the truth. But folks who operate in an underground economy where taxes aren't paid and no one asks for green cards, these are folks who can't afford nannies yet have them anyway (or who can afford nannies but choose to be cheap and break the law). It sounds like your nanny wasn't very good, but you kept her on anyway for far longer than you should have. Why?
I'm guessing that folks just have different definitions of wealth. Where I come from, where I live now, if you have a bona fide nanny, then you are wealthy. Period. The rest of us scrape by with daycare and juggling schedules with partners/spouses and cultivating good babysitters. That's reality in America, or most of it, I think. It is a somewhat alien concept for those of us who do not have nannies to consider the struggles of those who do.
3
If the nanny is here in the US illegally and does so not have a Green Card, the employer is in violation of the law. (As is the nanny.). Paying her “off the books” is illegal too, whatever her residency status. If you cannot afford to do it right, you should seek other child care alternatives.
48
My nanny of 16 years had a baby while working for us. We gave her paid leave and let her bring her daughter to our house for the first 2 years. It wasn’t that hard to do. After that we said “it’s time” for daycare for her daughter. One of my sons is seriously disabled and her daughter had some issues too and it became harder but she worked for us until her daughter was nearly 7.
19
My nanny was always welcome to bring her child. That should be a perk of the job. My nannies were always on the books. It's not too hard to figure out how to report and pay the taxes and print a W-2.
4
If you can afford a nanny, you can afford to treat that employee with dignity. This includes providing leave and following applicable laws around hours, discrimination, etc.
66
You realize that at least in NYC many people have nannies because they cannot afford to have more than one child in a daycare center, right? While nannies charge more for two children in a family than one, they don't charge double the way centers do. Or because most daycare centers don't accommodate parents whose job hours don't gibe with strictly limited center hours.
35
@Working Mama - If nannies in NYC charge half the price of day care centers, then it kind of reinforces Jennifer's point. Nannies should be paid fair wages. etc. versus under the table wages with no rights. It sounds like it might still be cheaper than the daycare centers in the long run.
I happen to work where many nannies bring the children they are caring for. If only some of those parents saw how their nannies operate. Either clueless or not that friendly to the child/children. On the other hand, there are some who are top notch. I makes me wonder about the difference in their pay.
3