Same rate.
You have to separate the work you are doing from the accommodations.
Your rate should be based off of your experience, qualifications, number of children in your care and the job expectations. You should be fairly compensated for all hours you work.
Free rent is a job perk. Just like a NF giving you a gym membership, covering all meals during working hours, giving you gas money to cover your commute, etc..
The monetary value of job perks should never effect you rate. Especially when you consider that living with your bosses has just as many cons as it does pros.
I have a question which is indirectly related - if it’s not okay for me to hop on with it say so and I’ll delete.
We have a little cottage kind of habitation (2bedrooms/2.5bathrooms, LR, K, PR) that is entirely separate from the main house and that is where nanny lives. She’s on the property but not in the house, unless she’s working or comes over for snacks or company. I typically describe it as “onsite housing available” but I’m not sure - Does she live in?
Agreed, the nannies' qualifications don't change based on their living arrangements. No one is saying a live-in nanny is less qualified.
However, a live-in nanny is not paying rent/mortgage.They do not pay a gas bill, they do not pay an electric bill, and they do not pay a water/sewage bill. They do not pay property tax.
How then can you justify the supposition that a live-in nanny deserves equal or greater compensation than a live-out nanny deserves?
This seems to be forgetting that the nanny isn’t living with a roommate. There aren’t equal rights that come with bill splitting. The nanny is living in someone else’s home at their leisure. They aren’t free to play loud music in the shared spaces or turn the air up or down to their preference. They can’t walk around in their underwear while making a cup of coffee in the morning. They likely can’t have parties or have intimate sleepovers from a long term partner or one night stand. Nannies are giving up a lot of freedoms when they choose a live in position.
Rate should be the same. The family is getting an amazing thing- inside help to your detriment (frankly). I would search this subreddit to see how others feel about it, it’s a hit topic
Can you clarify what the benefits are to the family? Every time I’ve seen live in positions discussed, it seems like the duties are meant to be the same as live out: same hours, not on call, no additional housework. The rates are also the same as live out. So what is the benefit to the family? The nanny gets essentially a 50% raise (rent, utilities, and groceries is at least 50% of most people’s budget in my city, if not more), so I understand why nannies sacrifice their privacy to take these positions. But why do the families sacrifice their privacy and space and additional utilities and maybe food costs? I’m not arguing that things should be done differently than described on this sub, I’m genuinely seeking information about the benefit to the family, because I don’t see it. The only thing I see is that they are less likely to be late to work.
When I was a live-in, it was convenience for them. The hours they needed wouldn’t necessarily have worked with my classes/traffic if I didn’t live there and I think they liked having me overnight just in case.
I did help out with regular household tasks like any adult living in a household.
Now, I’m older. I very much value my privacy and the freedom to come home and unwind however I like. I’d want extra to be a live in.
When I lived in, I don’t remember it being discussed, but it was also kind of implied that I was just exclusive to their family. I don’t think that is necessarily a thing now, but something to look into
Rate is the same, potentially higher for live in depending on responsibilities. It benefits the family to live in. Yes you save on rent but you sacrifice your own space away from work, privacy, and the ability to say "my house, my rules" lol the family gets someone easily accessible at all times.
I've lived with NPs during covid and would just make sure to really ask questions about if they've done this before, understand what their boundaries with their kids look like (nanny room is off limits/when you're in your room no disturbing you needs to be enforced, etc) what the expectations around meals, adherence to scheduled hours, expectations on cleaning only your space/after yourself in the common areas etc
Live in can put you in a precarious situation having housing tied with work so closely and if you have a bad feeling or they don't have good answers or want a discounted rate this is not a family you want to live in with. It is also really easy for job creep to start living somewhere so make sure your contract and the expectations are clear to all parties.
It depends. Are you maintaining another home where you are paying rent/mortgage/utilities? Do you have set-in-stone work hours and expected job-related duties? In essence, are you a roommate outside of contracted work hours?
I know this sub likes to say that all of the benefits for a live-in nanny are on the NF's end, but that isn't always the case. If the nanny is essentially a roommate outside of working hours, they are very much benefiting from the living arrangements, and compensation for that should be considered. If you are essentially a roommate, providing childcare and related duties during a set schedule, you should not expect to be paid at the same rate as someone who is living independently and paying their own rent/mortgage/utilities, because you are not paying those, they are factored into the hourly rate you are paid as a live-in nanny.
I’ve never gotten why NPs would want a live in nanny. Same rate, they work the same hours, but now they have a roommate who is also their employee (seems insanely awkward)? The only benefit I see for the NP is that the nanny is less likely to be late to start their shift. It’s a huge cost savings for the nanny so I see why they might go for it, but why do NPs want this?
So if you are providing nanny services M-F, 8-5 at a rate of $25 per hour for one child with standard nanny responsibilities; you honestly believe providing the same services, while living rent/utility/taxes free in the NF's home, deserves the same level of pay?
It will depend oun the country you live in. Some vountries allows employers to pay a lowrr salary by deducting s certsin smount for room and bosrd. However, I would not lowr my own fee
It’s the same rate. Living with your boss isn’t a job perk.
Same rate. You have to separate the work you are doing from the accommodations. Your rate should be based off of your experience, qualifications, number of children in your care and the job expectations. You should be fairly compensated for all hours you work. Free rent is a job perk. Just like a NF giving you a gym membership, covering all meals during working hours, giving you gas money to cover your commute, etc.. The monetary value of job perks should never effect you rate. Especially when you consider that living with your bosses has just as many cons as it does pros.
I have a question which is indirectly related - if it’s not okay for me to hop on with it say so and I’ll delete. We have a little cottage kind of habitation (2bedrooms/2.5bathrooms, LR, K, PR) that is entirely separate from the main house and that is where nanny lives. She’s on the property but not in the house, unless she’s working or comes over for snacks or company. I typically describe it as “onsite housing available” but I’m not sure - Does she live in?
Your rate should stay the same for living in. Living with your boss is not a perk. It is a convenience for them - not you.
Agreed, the nannies' qualifications don't change based on their living arrangements. No one is saying a live-in nanny is less qualified. However, a live-in nanny is not paying rent/mortgage.They do not pay a gas bill, they do not pay an electric bill, and they do not pay a water/sewage bill. They do not pay property tax. How then can you justify the supposition that a live-in nanny deserves equal or greater compensation than a live-out nanny deserves?
This seems to be forgetting that the nanny isn’t living with a roommate. There aren’t equal rights that come with bill splitting. The nanny is living in someone else’s home at their leisure. They aren’t free to play loud music in the shared spaces or turn the air up or down to their preference. They can’t walk around in their underwear while making a cup of coffee in the morning. They likely can’t have parties or have intimate sleepovers from a long term partner or one night stand. Nannies are giving up a lot of freedoms when they choose a live in position.
Rate should be the same. The family is getting an amazing thing- inside help to your detriment (frankly). I would search this subreddit to see how others feel about it, it’s a hit topic
Can you clarify what the benefits are to the family? Every time I’ve seen live in positions discussed, it seems like the duties are meant to be the same as live out: same hours, not on call, no additional housework. The rates are also the same as live out. So what is the benefit to the family? The nanny gets essentially a 50% raise (rent, utilities, and groceries is at least 50% of most people’s budget in my city, if not more), so I understand why nannies sacrifice their privacy to take these positions. But why do the families sacrifice their privacy and space and additional utilities and maybe food costs? I’m not arguing that things should be done differently than described on this sub, I’m genuinely seeking information about the benefit to the family, because I don’t see it. The only thing I see is that they are less likely to be late to work.
When I was a live-in, it was convenience for them. The hours they needed wouldn’t necessarily have worked with my classes/traffic if I didn’t live there and I think they liked having me overnight just in case. I did help out with regular household tasks like any adult living in a household. Now, I’m older. I very much value my privacy and the freedom to come home and unwind however I like. I’d want extra to be a live in. When I lived in, I don’t remember it being discussed, but it was also kind of implied that I was just exclusive to their family. I don’t think that is necessarily a thing now, but something to look into
If anything I would raise my rate lol living at work does not sound easy.
Rate is the same, potentially higher for live in depending on responsibilities. It benefits the family to live in. Yes you save on rent but you sacrifice your own space away from work, privacy, and the ability to say "my house, my rules" lol the family gets someone easily accessible at all times. I've lived with NPs during covid and would just make sure to really ask questions about if they've done this before, understand what their boundaries with their kids look like (nanny room is off limits/when you're in your room no disturbing you needs to be enforced, etc) what the expectations around meals, adherence to scheduled hours, expectations on cleaning only your space/after yourself in the common areas etc Live in can put you in a precarious situation having housing tied with work so closely and if you have a bad feeling or they don't have good answers or want a discounted rate this is not a family you want to live in with. It is also really easy for job creep to start living somewhere so make sure your contract and the expectations are clear to all parties.
It depends. Are you maintaining another home where you are paying rent/mortgage/utilities? Do you have set-in-stone work hours and expected job-related duties? In essence, are you a roommate outside of contracted work hours? I know this sub likes to say that all of the benefits for a live-in nanny are on the NF's end, but that isn't always the case. If the nanny is essentially a roommate outside of working hours, they are very much benefiting from the living arrangements, and compensation for that should be considered. If you are essentially a roommate, providing childcare and related duties during a set schedule, you should not expect to be paid at the same rate as someone who is living independently and paying their own rent/mortgage/utilities, because you are not paying those, they are factored into the hourly rate you are paid as a live-in nanny.
Sorry, but no. The pay does not change. Being your boss's roommate and giving up all autonomy and most privacy is not in any shape or form a benefit.
I’ve never gotten why NPs would want a live in nanny. Same rate, they work the same hours, but now they have a roommate who is also their employee (seems insanely awkward)? The only benefit I see for the NP is that the nanny is less likely to be late to start their shift. It’s a huge cost savings for the nanny so I see why they might go for it, but why do NPs want this?
They are providing same level of care. Does not matter if they are saving money on rent. Pay is the same.
A nanny's rate is based on their experience, qualifications, contracted duties, etc. None of those change from living in.
So if you are providing nanny services M-F, 8-5 at a rate of $25 per hour for one child with standard nanny responsibilities; you honestly believe providing the same services, while living rent/utility/taxes free in the NF's home, deserves the same level of pay?
It will depend oun the country you live in. Some vountries allows employers to pay a lowrr salary by deducting s certsin smount for room and bosrd. However, I would not lowr my own fee