How much should I pay an au pair Post Reply

[shaneleone]

I honestly think £400 is not a lot for a young girl trying to experience London - most of them take language classes (the point of being an Au Pair is a cultural exchange), many of them join a gym, then there is sightseeing (again, the point of them working and living in London), a few nights out, a few meals out, the odd coffee, and maybe a day trip to Brighton and I think you'd have easily spent over £400.

[Pentneyprincess]

I rarely comment, but as someone who has actually been an au pair, £90 is nothing. I think if you want a good relationship with your au pair, you pay her fairly and well. I would be more leaning to pay £100-£150 a week, although she sounds like she is doing fewer hours than most. I worked 1-6pm every weekday, and was paid £120 a week ( 4 years ago). I was taken out every weekend (yes I wasn't in London), also I went through a few awful weeks of hospital trips with the father when the mother was away and as a thank you was given £100 extra that week. My phone etc was never paid for, I had to sort that out myself ( I am a Brit and was working for a British family in Portugal).

Anyway, it worked so well that I became the children's godmother and play a big part in their life.

Pay people well and you do get a better relationship, no one likes stingy bosses. I

[gail0810]

I think £400 for 20 hours a week child care (albeit live in) is an absolute bargain! If you wanted some sort of comparison, I have a live out nanny for 30 hours a week and pay £1750 a month (including all taxes) plus a very generous annual bonus and extra hours/babysitting at £10 an hour. Unfortunately child care in this area of London is extremely expensive and aside from nannies, childminders and nurseries can cost anything from £70-90/100 a day (for 10 hours for youngest age children). If £400 a month is too expensive, you could look into an after school nanny share or a childminder -as already suggested, or some nurseries do wrap around care also. That may be cheaper.

[Seriously?]

I have had au pairs doing similar roles, I.e., nursery pick up and 1 or 2 nights baby sitting. Regardless of what other people have said, this is a very cushy deal for an au pair, and it really is just a bit of helping out with logistics. Nothing at all like the responsibilities a Nanny would be employed for, so you can't really compare. Not to mention that an au pair will be like an extra child in your house, not an employee. So Nanny salary comparisons are not very helpful in this context.

80 is probably a little on the light side as although the role will not involve as much as a typical au pair doing school pick ups, you can't really expect to pay less because you don't really have enough hours. 90 would be better but don't underestimate the cost of travel. Maybe pay 100 and exclude travel? It will be cheaper than 80 + travel. Australians sometimes command a bit more though, as they have English and come from a country with very high minimum wage!

When you think of the cost, don't underestimate having the au pair there when you child is sick and can't go to nursery. We have always agreed with our that although they usually do very few hours, we would like them to be flexible and help our more on occasions when, for example, child could not go to nursery. All have been happy to have this arrangement. I didn't pay extra - it all evens out.

Good luck!

[Pentneyprincess]

Seriously? - Having been both an au pair and a nanny, I think you have been a little harsh! (Have you had a bad experience with an au pair?) Anyone who has sole charge of your children plays a big role in the way of family life. It might be a "cushy" deal for the au pair, but no one is forcing the parents to employ an au pair. I agree with gail0810, au pairs are a great cheap way of getting around childcare costs! I was an au pair and I certainly was not another child in the house, I became an incredibly close friend to both the mother and the father. I agree this is an au pair who is not working as many hours as the most, but I only worked 25 hours a week and was paid really well ( £120 a week). I was never bought any toiletries, and travel wasn't really an expense needed as the mother would drive me anywhere I wanted to go (we weren't in London). I would pay £100 a week at least and let her pay for everything except for food. As for the food situation ask her what she likes to eat before she arrives so you have some food in stock for her.

[Herculesmum]

I never dreamed this would be such a contentious topic, but thank you everyone for the inputs. It gives us lots of food for thought before we decide if we go ahead with the au pair and if we do how we proceed. It seems paying slightly more for longer hours works best or if we can't afford the higher rate we don't do it. Simples.

Apologies for going quiet. I don't have any help yet so been running around like a headless chook (Autraliansim).!

[Herculesmum]

On another note I said I'd start a new forum for those of us who want to try living on £400.

I've been very careful to record my sendings so a, well on track to knowing where I stand.

I'll start the new topic now

[Herculesmum]

@Seriously I agree that I wouldn't want to compare a nanny to an au pair. I think that's unfair on nannys who come with significantly higher qualifications and experience (or I should hope so) and so they deserve Significantly higher pay.

I also think I've come around to the idea of pay more but offer less extras. I think you're right I'll end up spendng less and the au pair would feel better off because she'd be getting more cash in hand.