Entry 181: Nanny Woes

So when S and I were first looking into childcare for Lil' S, we considered both a nanny and daycare.  Ultimately we went with a nanny, even though it's more expensive, because we found a nanny that we really liked, and we found a family to share her with to defray the cost.  All was fine and good for five months until said family announced they are moving to Kenya at the end of this month.  Suddenly, having a nanny has gone from "kinda expensive, but doable" to "really, really pushing our budget".  To make matters worse our nanny wants to raise her rates, so, if she has it her way, we will be paying not only the single-child fare she quoted us initially (significantly more than half the double-child rate), but that plus an additional $2 per hour.

But she's not going have it her way, not with us at least.  We simply can't afford it.  All told our childcare would go up $800 a month.  Not go up to $800 a month, just go up $800 a month -- this is in addition to the "kinda expensive, but doable" price we already pay.  We really like our nanny.  She's really good with Lil' S.  If we were Sam and Helen Walmart, we'd gladly give her what she's asking, but we aren't.  If she's going to insist on a raise, then we're going to have to start checking out daycares ASAP.  Anyway, I crafted an email (perhaps the most diplomatic email of my life) stating that we really value her, but can't give her a raise.  We will see what she comes back with.

 [Maybe a down-on-his-luck, posh Englishman will knock on our door seeking a position as a domestic servant, thus solving our childcare conundrum and teaching us that life is more than mere survival, to boot.]

The thing is, she's struggling financially which is why she asked for the raise.  Her husband is a Ph. D. student (sounds familiar), and his funding just got cut (it's not clear to me if it got cut for good, or if it just doesn't pay out during the summer like most Ph. D. stipends).  And now the other family is leaving which cuts her salary, so she's feeling the pinch.  I'm sympathetic, but what can we do?  We can't take out a loan to help our struggling nanny.

S is sympathetic too, but she's also annoyed.  She feels like our nanny is trying to take advantage of us a bit, because we don't play hardball with her (spawning resentment in somebody who's alone all day with your child just seems like a bad idea, in general).  I don't want to go into all the reasons why she thinks this, but suffice it to say, she has good reasons.  We've made some concessions and agreed to some things we wouldn't have if were treating this as a strictly business relationship. But anyway...

[Has an actor with a less athletic affect had more sports roles than Keanu Reeves?  It's weird.  It'd be like if Ving Rhames kept getting cast as Napoleon.]

At this point you might be saying to yourself, "Hey dumbass, just find another family to share with!"  My response to this is twofold: 1) How do dare you? 2) We're trying.  We've put a lot of worms in the water and got a few nibbles, but we haven't been able to bag that buck yet.  Finding another couple whose schedule works logistically with ours and with our nanny's is proving to be daunting.  We didn't realize it at the time, but maybe we were really lucky finding the family we share with now so quickly (or maybe we're unlucky now, I don't know).

We had one actual meeting with a couple; they came to our house to visit with us and the nanny -- feel things out a bit.  They didn't seem like the most exciting couple in the world, but whatever, we aren't looking for Brangelina -- some boring commoners who are responsible and reliable is all we need.  I thought the meeting went extremely well, truth be told.  They seemed genuinely interested, but either they had a change of heart, or they're the world's greatest actors (maybe they're an Andy Kaufman-esque comical genius couple, who pretends to be a boring nanny-seeking couple just to fuck with people), because they never called us after the meeting, even though they said they would.  Then they didn't respond to a follow-up email.

This opens up a whole new topic: What the fuck is wrong with people who can't give you a courtesy response?  I mean, if this couple doesn't want to do the share, fine, but how hard is it to pick up the phone and say, "Hey, thanks, but no thanks".  And then if that's too much for you -- if 15 seconds on the phone is too onerous a burden (you might even get lucky and get voice mail) -- how about that email?  If this couple responded to our email with the single word "no" -- just two clacks on the keyboard, N and O -- it would've been completely acceptable (weird, but acceptable).  All we want is an indication of their intent one way or the other, so we can start planning accordingly.  But, nope, can't do it.  They aren't going to do the share, so their response doesn't directly effect them, so why should they make it a priority?  They don't have to worry about the other couple who has a financial stake in their decision and is eagerly waiting to hear back from them.  Like I said, what the fuck is wrong with people?

[I heard Brad Pitt recently had his nipples surgically removed or something like that.]

The only solace I take in getting snubbed like this is that since I don't behave this way I have a competitive advantage over such people in society.  You never know when being courteous is going to help you, and when being rude is going to hurt you.  What if the husband of the non-responsive couple applied for a job with my company, and I remembered him?  Immediately he'd be set down a notch.  This scenario is obviously extremely unlikely, but it's only unlikely on an individual level.  If you look at all people with whom you interact, it's extremely likely that at some point you will need something from one of them.  The catch is, you don't always know in advance who or what, so you should just be respectful to everybody.  (Or you could do it just because it's the civil thing to do.  There's that too.)

Take my wife, for example.  I'm smarter than her, but she has the more successful career.  Why?  Networking.  She never burns a bridge; she goes out of her way to ensure her bridges stay open.  She's constantly meeting with random connections in her industry for coffee or lunch, or giving advice to somebody wanting to get into the field, or listening to advice from an old-timer, or shooting an ex-coworker an email just to see how they're doing.  She does the exact opposite of not calling people back.  And then when a good position opens up somewhere, guess who knows about it, and who knows somebody (or knows somebody who knows somebody) who can put in a good word for her.

[Not a burning bridge, but some pretty cool footage of the Tacoma Narrows collapsing in 1940.]

Oh, and lest you think S is some sort of amoral Machiavellian, she's not.  This is just her personality; she's a genuinely caring and decent person.  It just so happens that oftentimes decency is self-serving.  That's the beauty of it.

Until next time...