Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am thinking about a nanny or nanny share having just been informed how much nursery fees for two kids (age 1 and 3) will cost. But I have always thought more about using a childminder rather than a nanny, mainly becaue I'm concerned how it works administratively employing a nanny: setting it up, paying taxes, NI, sick pay, potentially her maternity pay, and generally being the employer etc. It seems like it would be very onerous. Whereas presumably you pay a childminder just as you would a nursery, with a monthly payment, no further hassle. Is it a big hassle to employ a nanny? Are there guides (online or on paper) to show you how to do it?

Also, are the main differences between a nanny and a childminder: the number of children in the minder's care, and the place of work (ie childminder's home rather than your home)? There seems to be such a big difference in price!

Sorry if these are stupid questions!

There is no legal limit on how many children a nanny can watch but typically even with a nanny share you would expect there to be fewer children than a childminder. Yes, the other main differences are a child minder works out of their home and is self-employed (so yes, paid like nursery). My friends have a child minder they love (not in ED) and I think its a great solution if you find someone you click with. If you use a nanny payroll company that helps reduce the admin of employing a nanny but but costs a couple hundred quid. The main things you gain (in my opinion) when working with a nanny are more flexibility (particularly when care is out of your home vs. a nanny share in the other family's home), you can tailor things a bit more, and more individual attention, particularly when its not a nanny-share. Remember though that child minders (like nurseries) charge by the child so a nanny-share is only a bit more expensive than two with a good child minder unless you find one that will charge for only a portion of the day while your toddler is using the free nursery hours.



Good luck!

Thank you LondonMix that's helpful. I am still debating this, as other than the admin point of view, I'm concerned about my children socialising with other kids - my 3YO has made such great friends at nursery and loves the social side of things. However as you say the relative flexibility of a nanny (and, in some cases, a childminder) particularly with regard to hours/pick up is attractive.

I wouldn't worry too much about the "social" element of childcare too much in the early years. Our nanny is great at organising regular play dates so our 3-year old has a group of friends that he has seen a lot over the years. Also, if you can do a nanny share, it's a great way of kids learning to share from an early age. Besides, I don't think kids start playing with each other until they are 2-3.


Our main reasons for choosing our nanny option over a childminder were:


- more flexibility

- can be more involved in how the kids' days are structured, what food they eat, etc.

- I didn't want the kids to be driven around unnecessarily for school runs (not always the case and delends on childminder's charges)


Finally, I wanted as much individual attention as possible in the early days and felt that the right nanny would be best placed to provide this in my absence.


The admin side of things isn't too bad. We use Nanny PAYE for payroll (I think c?140 per year) and the company is great at offering advice.


Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

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

    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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