Nanny share rates - how much do you pay?

[chantelle]

Hi, I'm on a fact finding mission about how much nanny shares are going for in the area. This is in advance of a pay negotiation in a few months with our much-loved nanny and I want to be fair but realistic.

So - what is the hourly net rate your shared nanny earns?

Many thanks!

[Vickster]

We paid ?6.50ph per family, so ?13ph in total.

[ceebeebee]

God thats so much money! How many children does she look after for that? and is that before tax? We're planning to look for another family to share our nanny with, but at that rate we'd be no better off!

[Vickster]

Two children and yes before tax.

[apenn]

I've also been searching for a nanny share and have been quoted ?6-?7/hr per family.

-A

[Saila]

Tinies agency said that current rate for nannyshare is ?9/?10

It was higher a year or so ago but since the recession and unemployment going up apparently the rate has dropped back

[chantelle]

As I understand it, ?10 is about the upper limit in ED for an experienced, non-share nanny. It seems there isn't really an accepted "going rate" or ceiling for a share. Some nannies seem to feel the extra hassles that can go with a share mean they should get paid more, while others don't seem to see it as a clear cause for a higher wage. (this is based on mumsnet threads I've been on)

[EDZ]

We pay ?9 an hour plus tax on top. This is then split between two families with one child each. I think nanny's have totally unrealistic expectations of what to expect. It is a valuable job and I am not underestimating that the work can be quite damanding, but that hourly rate works rate works out to a full time salary of ?32K a year if they work from 8 to 6. My nanny was previously working for a nursery and I think she made something like ?17K a year (or less). Also, there are things you can do to make the job attractive without just offering a huge salary. If the hours are good (i.e. full time or meet their needs), lengthy holidays, nice working environment (easy going about food, allowing them to do things like host tea parties for other nanny's with kids etc)

[Saila]

junior doctor's basic salary is ?21k a year

[Smiler]

Don't think that comparing a nanny's salary to a junior doctor's is really relevant - totally different job markets!

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

A junior doctor earns more than that:

Pay

Nannies earn from ?6-10 an hour sole charge, so with an extra child, I do not think it is much asking for ?6-7 an hour from EACH family, Lidls the supermarket pays their staff ?7 an hour and they get staff discounts, breaks and so on. Bear in mind we don't get breaks like most people do, we have to fit in around the children. Plus we do extras such as laundry, cooking, some of us run errands also and do extras, babysitting is usually expected in most jobs.

Anyone who has kids or work with full time will know how tiring it is, so after work, most of us are too shattered to do anything! We also start extra early, I know lots of nannies are up at 6am in order to start work for 7/8am, and finish at 6pm, but don't get home until 7pm by the time we usually have a chat with the parents on how the day has been. Its very long hours. Plus if the parents are running late, we cannot go home.

Working with children is pretty demanding, in the nursery environment you are likely to get allocated paid breaks, pension, and so on. Whereas nannies have to do their own pensions, fit their breaks in ( if they managed to get one as not all kids nap) around the children. It is a very active busy day and looking after someone else's most precious thing is quite a serious responsibility to have.

There are always au pairs, childminders if you want a cheaper alternative, or you could get a young new nanny starting out for cheaper, but if you want an experienced nanny then they will be around ?7-10, and I think it is a very fair price to pay.

So basically back to the original question, each family usually pays about ?6-7 per hour for a nanny share so the nanny gets around ?12-14 pounds per hour. I have not met an nanny that charges ?9 from each family for a child especially when you can get a sole charge nanny for that.

[Saila]

sorry - it wasn't meant to be a dig.

i really understand how hard it is to look after children and you're right about the break thing

Just amazed me when someone said that to me considering how many years doctors have to train (7 unpaid) etc etc and the weird hours they have to do (a friend of mine used to do a night shift straight after a day shift... so 24 hours which actually illegal but they HAD to do it and this was in A&E which is pretty stressful).

it's probably equally true that junior doctors should get more money than basic 21k and with the supplement making it 33k

[EDZ]

HeidiHi,

I think you have unrealistic expectations. If a family splits ?12hr for a full-time nanny that is a net income of 600wk but for the families who have to pay tax it represents actually ?906 out of their pocket a week . Annually that is ?47,112. A nanny who earns ?10/hr net costs her employer ?38,636 a year. This is an extaordinary amount of money. Even dividing ?12/hr by 2 each family is paying around ?23,500 a year to share. Considering this needs to be paid from your employers' AFTER TAX income it means they need to earn a very good salary to be able to afford even a nanny share. Frankly, at those rates I don't know how anyone can afford it from their take home pay.

[jam]

Edz

I have never worked for the amount you stated per week so it does not apply to me but I have to say that nannies generally are for people with very high income, these people want their baby to have one on one care and attention. People are willing to pay that for a good experienced nanny. People that cannot afford that use childminders, Au Pairs, Nurseries or a nanny starting out.

I know you find it expensive, but nannies fulfil the criteria for some people, whereas childminders/nurseries fulfil others.

[littleEDfamily]

If there are only 2 children in the share, and you don't offer unreasonable working conditions, I would perservere with trying to find someone who will work for ?10 net. They are out there!

Like any private sector job market, supply and demand ultimately dictate pay rates, but my personal opinion is that any nanny earning upwards of ?12 net (I wish nannies would start to work like most sectors do with gross rates of pay) would need to be very experienced, possibly with decent early years education qualifications (a true professional, as opposed to what is, let's be honest, a relatively unskilled albeit responsible worker) etc etc, to justify such a rate.

[chantelle]

Ok, it's obviously a touchy subject, but I agree with EDZ about what is realistic. I suspect it is a very tiny minority of nanny employers indeed who pay ?12 or more, whether for a share or not. Even in a share, I am paying the bulk of my four day's gross pay to pay my nanny three day's net.

As for what HeidiHi said, I agree that it is a lot of work. (nanny isn't here every day, after all, we do the job too!) But do you actually know any nannies getting ?12-?14/hour? We have one example here so far.

Like EDZ, I came across quite a few nannies, with several year's experience, asking for ?9 net for a share.

And, clearly, nannies are not just for the very rich -- and even for the fairly rich, a near-?50k salary is a significant outgoing against two earners' pay.

[womanofdulwich]

Seeing as some people pay cleaners ?10 an hour - I know it is cash- but good nannies look worth the money to me.

[monniemae]

Saila, would you work 8-6, five days a week, having to take (typically) half your holidays when your employers dictated, knowing that your salary will never jump a payscale, knowing you aren't entitled to benefits like pensions and private healthcare while you look after the children of the privileged, for less than ?32k? Given that nannies have often done their training in appallingly paid jobs nurseries (?10k a year?)I don't think ?32k is unreasonable.

Obviously the cost of a nanny is horrific - you're basically working to earn a salary to pay someone else's salary, and hoping to pocket some difference. I don't think nannies are being any more unrealistic than would-be employers in this regard.

There's also a difference between what different people mean by "nanny share". I've noticed some people see it as 3 days with one family, two days with another, while others mean all at the same time - which is essentially taking on two workloads at the same time. So the scale could be expected to vary widely...If the OP wants the former then she should be able to find a ?6ph nanny.

[Saila]

Monniemae - again i wasn't saying they were paid too much, i was throwing how much junior doctors got paid to put some perspective into the discussion. Perhaps junior doctors should be paid more..

Re holidays - we get to choose 1 week a year in a nannyshare so who's the loser?

Anyway - we aren't going on holiday because we're frantically trying to save money this year. I have been told (as you know) that i could be out of a job in 12 month's time if our firm's fortunes don't turn around. Who's going to hire a woman of childbearing age? You get laughed out of the interivew... i've seen it happen

As for training... nurseries aren't part of the training for nannies? where on earth did you hear that? We are interviewing nanneis now who have had a two day nanny course? Norland nannies are the full on trained nannies.

Costs for Childcare in our family comes to the same as one of our incomes but to step off the career ladder in our fields would be suicidal. So we are 'taking the hit' in the short term and hopefully when they're at school, these costs will fall.

I could be a house wife within the year when i'll be doing the job for nothing. I don't want to, as I think i'd be miserable and hats off to anyone who does it.

So in short i admire people (nannies and mothers/fathers) who are fulltime childcarers so please dont' take what i said the wrong way

[monniemae]

It's just not useful (as somebody already pointed out) to throw junior doctors into the mix. And they are NOT paid ?21k, it's more like ?33k for their first qualified year - a brilliant starting salary in any profession, rising to ?41k in the second year. A nanny is never going to jump pay scales like that. I just wanted to point out that nannies are not being unreasonable asking for ?6-12ph.

And I also know that many employers who worry about "being laughed out of interview" for being of childbearing age are themselves adamant they wouldn't hire a nanny of childbearing age in case they had to worry about treating her fairly.

I think the OP will find a nanny for significantly less than ?32k. ?6ph in a nanny share is ?14560 from each family. ?8 ph is less than ?17k. I don't think there are a tribe of nannies living it up in East Dulwich while their employers scrape by in rags.

[emc]

I share a nanny with one other family and it works out that she gets ?11.50 net, ?14 per hour gross.

So, splitting between two families we pay ?7.25 an hour each gross. It is very expensive and I had no choice as I wanted my daughter to go to pre-school five mornings a week but could not find anyone who could be this flexible with their timings -

I am a single parent so that by the time I have paid my nanny I walk away with about ?30 a day.....but I accepted it would be for a short time and again 'have taken the hit' but will be glad when I no longer need this type of childcare.

[Vickster]

Slightly off topic, sorry, but while I fully understand that as an employer it is your responsibility to pay your nanny's tax and NI, it has always been something that has really frustrated me. As a 40% tax payer (not that unusal around ED I would have thought), to then have to use my taxed income to pay tax and NI for my nanny goes against the grain a bit. This is especially irritating if (not in my case luckily) your employer does not offer childcare vouchers so you are unable to claim the tax breaks available.

This is absolutely not a gripe against nannies, as they are entitled as employees to have this paid for them, and I have happily done this for my nanny for the time she was with us. I just wish the government would recognise that it is not just the fantastically rich who need nannies. If you have a job that requires you to work long/odd hours, for some it is the only workable form of childcare, and the tax element can rule it out for some. I wish there was some way that the costs could be offset against the tax you have already paid but that is clearly wishful thinking.

[littleEDfamily]

I agree, Vickster - corporation tax is much lower than 40%, so it's frustrating that as a nanny's employer you carry all the obligations of an employer, yet because you are not a company and are taxed as an individual on your 'revenue' (ie your pay), and then out of this you need to pay tax again! Not very well explained, but I hope it makes some sense. It is unfair especially since you are providing employment, but as nannies are perceived as being 'for the super rich', I think it's unlikely that there would be broad enough support for any change to the tax set up.

[EDZ]

I just got a note from HMRC saying I had paid ?5600 in tax for my nanny last year. That is from my after tax income. I wanted to cry. I am also a 40% income tax payer. By the time I pay my tax and my nanny's tax I have very little left over. I work long hours so a nanny is necessary. My only other option is to quit my job. However, I feel like the government just thinks I amn rich and should just hand over most of my pay cheque. It's discouraging and unmotivating for working mothers. Maybe that is the governments plan? They all seem to suggest mother at home is best but make exception for working mother's who NEED to work because they are single or such. Government policy is seriously squewed against the middle class working mother who wants a career.

[monniemae]

I thought employers pay a national insurance contribution for their employees, as do the employees themselves, but the TAX is paid from the employee's pay packet? In which case, you're not paying your nanny's tax as such, you're just administering it. Am I wrong? If so I agree that seems even more impossibly steep for most people. But normally when you negotiate a rate, you would negotiate PRE tax ie gross, so why would you do any differently for nannies? Are you saying you offer your nanny ?6/7 ph AFTER tax?

Admittedly I may have completely confused myself, apologies if so...I haven't had to employ a nanny yet. But when I do, myself and MrMae shall be sharing the cost, it won't be a punitive hit just on my pay packet as a middle class working mum.