Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi,


I have two young children and work full-time so never feel I am on top of things. I've heard of an au pair, someone that helps you with your children and household in return for accommodation and food.


I am wondering how does it work in reality and how much money do you typically need to give them for 'pocket money'. Also, how long do they generally stay with you?


Many thanks!

Hi, we had au pairs for years until 2014, when my children deemed themselves too old for an au pair. An au pair lives as part of the family, like having a niece or nephew living with you. Their main priority is the children and they work for up to 25 hours per week. Ours typically started around 8am getting the children breakfasted and ready for school, then walked them to school. When my kids were very little the au pair had use of a car to drive them to nursery. Then, apart from stacking and unstacking the dishwasher, ironing or hanging out some laundry, they were free until school pick up time. They then looked after the kids, took them to any activities booked, and cooked supper for them. They were free from the moment we got home at around 6:30. They would also do a bit of baby sitting for us. if you are wondering what they did during the day; that varied. A few went to language classes, some got jobs (cleaning, baby sitting , bar work). We paid them ?75 per week plus holiday pay and extra pay for extra work = eg looking after the children for extra hours during school holidays or cleaning when our cleaner was off. The au pair lived in in the loft conversion (so slightly separate) with a large room, own bathroom and TV/dvd and laptop, so they could be quite self-sufficient and private when they wanted to be. But we also included them in family day trips and occasionally took them on holiday with us. How long they stayed varied from 9 months to 2 years. I hope that gives you an idea of the whole set up.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • If you want to look for blame, look at McKinsey's. It was their model of separating cost and profit centres which started the restructuring of the Post Office - once BT was fully separated off - into Lines of Business - Parcels; Mail Delivery and Retail outlets (set aside the whole Giro Bank nonsense). Once you separate out these lines of business and make them 'stand-alone' you immediately make them vulnerable to sell off and additionally, by separating the 'businesses' make each stand or fall on their own, without cross subsidy. The Post Office took on banking and some government outsourced activity - selling licences and passports etc. as  additional revenue streams to cross subsidize the postal services, and to offer an incentive to outsourced sub post offices. As a single 'comms' delivery business the Post Office (which included the telcom business) made financial sense. Start separating elements off and it doesn't. Getting rid of 'non profitable' activity makes sense in a purely commercial environment, but not in one which is also about overall national benefit - where having an affordable and effective communications (in its largest sense) business is to the national benefit. Of course, the fact the the Government treated the highly profitable telecoms business as a cash cow (BT had a negative PSBR - public sector borrowing requirement - which meant far from the public purse funding investment in infrastructure BT had to lend the government money every year from it's operating surplus) meant that services were terrible and the improvement following privatisation was simply the effect of BT now being able to invest in infrastructure - which is why (partly) its service quality soared in the years following privatisation. I was working for BT through this period and saw what was happening there.
    • But didn't that separation begin with New Labour and Peter Mandelson?
    • I am not disputing that the Post Office remains publicly owned. But the Lib Dems’ decision to separate and privatise Royal Mail has fatally undermined the PO.  It is within the power of the Labour government to save what is left of the PO and the service it provides to the community, if they care enough; I suspect they do not.  However, the appalling postal service is a constant reminder of the Lib Dems’ duplicity on this matter. It is actions taken under the Lib Dem / Conservative coalition that have brought us to this point.
    • Hello We are looking for a stroller lightweight pushchair to use on holidays etc. Our son is 18 months. Anyone looking to sell one? Thanks! 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...