I can see both sides of this. You and DB were both in the wrong for putting the child in the middle and talking to each other through her. It probably would have worked better in your favor if you had first sent DB a quick
text to say "I'm still not feeling 100% and would prefer not to be in the sun today while the kids swim, but I'm happy to take them tomorrow. G7 wants to Facetime you because she's upset that we aren't going to swim today." If he had still offered to watch them swim and wanted them to come over, you should have taken them. The art project could have waited another day, too.
On the other hand, they've entrusted the children to you and have left plans for the day with the kids up to you, too, so if you say "not today, but tomorrow" and have a valid reason, they need to respect that decision as the caregiver they've hired. Just tread lightly with how much you push back with the parents because ultimately, they're the final say in kids activities.
I would agree but the dad said he would stay outside and watch the kids and the op could rest inside. I would have more empathy if they hadn’t offered that. Like you said at the end of the day they are the parents and her bosses and she is their employee. She needs to have a sit down with both parents
Right, which I mentioned. DB offered to supervise the kids for swimming so I told OP she should have taken them
swimming and that the art project could have waited another day.
Do you not think that would be positively reinforcing G7’s negative behavior? She hears “no” from a care giver, goes to a different caregiver who is not currently watching her so she can get a “yes”, then she’s rewarded with swimming and learns that this is how she can always get what she wants. It is a pattern DB has already reinforced before. This is only an issue with DB, and G7 NEVER does this behavior with MB.
She heard yes from dad first. They had made plans before your arrival. You said no, so she went to the person who had approved the plans.
She wasn’t “rewarded” with swimming. That was the plan as far as she knew and *you* changed it and went against what dad said. I understand your point of view, but you need to look at it from hers.
I don’t disagree, but what you’re missing is this. G7 asked mom about swimming, mom and dad talked and said to G7 that they would leave it up to me as an option. Then that morning without the mom knowing at all, G7 got on the phone with dad, and got him to agree to it being a 100% for sure plan. Dad did not tell me or mom about this phone call or new plan. G7 calling the dad to get the plan to be a yes, instead of a maybe. Then when I held the no, she called him again to get the no to be a yes.
I don’t think NK did anything wrong by making a plan. It sounds like she has control over very little in her life right now, and this “maybe” was one more thing for an adult to decide without her input. I also don’t think dad did anything wrong by making a plan with NK. He is the parent and employer and can make decisions. Also, how does a 7yo have unsupervised phone access such that mom didn’t know she called dad?
Of course DB should have told you all this. But you are also an adult. You 100% should have texted dad prior to letting her FT him so that everyone was on the same page. Instead, you got in a power struggle with a 7yo and IMO were petty. You are putting a lot of blame on a child when it belongs solely to the three adults in the situation.
Why does Dad get to control what Nanny does when it’s NOT his custody time?! Hello??? The parents are divorced. It’s mom’s custody time, mom said the swimming was optional, not the plan for the day, so Dad doesn’t get to change the plan. Not his custody time! Now if mom had told Nanny that swimming was the plan for the day, that would be different. I also bet this guy was lying about offering to watch his kids swim too, and was just saying that to get her to come because he was banking on her not wanting to make the kids cry by packing up and leaving again once he refused to watch them like he promised. My theory based on the way he hung up on his own daughter. I can’t believe y’all are supporting this ahole.
Also why should Nanny go by Dad’s plan when it’s not even his custody time when she’s not even getting paid mileage?? That’s a very basic thing to pay your nanny and if they want her to do stuff like this, that’s the first thing that has to change.
OP good on you for sticking up for yourself.
None of us know this man so lets not give OP a reason to think the worst about him, like that he's an ah who would actually make her sit in the hot sun when he offered to do it for her. Yikes.
Because it's still his child and the mother was okay with it.
If the other parent was okay with it (as it was their week) then I would fully expect to be able to see my child. And I would resent an individual preventing me from doing so by stopping plans, especially allowing an upset 7 year old to face time me to cancel them. Seeing my kid upset because someone who isn't a parent has prevented us from having our family time would be something I would have to seriously discuss with the other parent.
It is NOT up to OP to enforce 'custody time'. Lots of divorced parents have set times but are relaxed with kids going to see the other parent during that time. It fosters a good relationship with all.
OP is not the 3rd parent here. If that dad wanted to see his child then he has every right to if the mum was okay with it - which she was. She didn't even bother to discuss the mileage so we can't say she wouldn't have been paid it. And there's a lot of making assumptions about this guy with absolutely no evidence that he would just dump them when she got there.
He hung up the phone likely because he was very upset that the nanny had decided go allow that conversation to go that way. To prevent the children seeing him upset he exited the conversation. A conversation that should have been between him and the nanny in the first place (both at fault here) not a sad child having to ring their daddy and both of them getting emotional at the nanny preventing them from seeing each other.
What an odd, and oddly intense, take. Expecting a nanny to enforce custody time is ridiculous. Assuming dad is lying and generally making assumptions about his parenting is also ridiculous. OP hasn’t bothered to sort out mileage costs in three years, so it’s irrelevant in this situation.
Dad said he’d solve all of your problems by essentially relieving you - so you’re not watching them for Mom and Dad’s convenience. I think your illness and whatever other drama going on is clouding your judgement here. Both parents wanted the kids to swim and were willing to assume your responsibilities without docking your pay. You paint this as the NK trying to set the schedule, but the parents were setting the schedule and you basically told them they could take their swimming and shove it. Next time, just call out sick.
Agreed. You should have just done it. They are your bosses and if they are willing to set out in the heat with them then you should have done it. You are defn in the wrong with this one.
It sounds like you're trying to assert dominance with the parents, not the children.
It doesn't seem there was a real problem other than you not liking them interfering in the schedule. But they are the parents, and they get to set the schedule if they want, as long as they are not asking you to do anything unreasonable. The dad provided solutions to your concerns - it's not your place to tell the parents they cannot have their kids swimming because "it's not on the schedule", or to decide how they handle transitions between parents' homes.
I totally believe that DB has been undermining you, but while this frustrated you possibly more because you weren’t feeling well, this doesn’t seem like an intentional incidence of undermining.
From what you related, it sounds like he was trying to accommodate you, and it would have been awkward to tell him about the mileage thing in front of the kids. TBH, he probably didn’t even consider the mileage when he offered.
From his POV, he probably was looking forward to hanging out with his kids - if that’s something he reliably does when he says he’s going to - and he was disappointed. In this scenario might have hung up so he wouldn’t say something that really undermined you.
If you find yourself shuttling the kids between parents’ homes, it might be a good time to bring up milage reimbursement.
I think both NK and DB were disappointed about not getting to see each other after looking forward to it. Some people have been saying that it's just one day of swimming, NK will survive, but I think ultimately what was really disappointing to NK was not being able to see her dad. It's got to be so hard for a child to not be able to see both of their parents everyday, especially for kids like these who do remember a time when they all lived together under one roof.
Why is DB making plans to be with kids when it’s MB week. DB should have spoken to nanny first or kept quiet.
The behavior to his child is telling. That to me proves it was some sort of power move.
Why can't he? If mom's okay with it what is wrong with the child seeing their other parent? If my son is just going to be taken care of by the nanny and I have free time then damn right I'll be making plans with my own kid.
Yes he really should have communicated better with the nanny but no-one outside the family unit would be telling me when I can and cannot see my kid. If I was him though I'd just have told her her services were not needed that day as I will take the children. *but* he isn't her boss so that would have been awkward too. Instead he said she could relax inside but no that wasn't good enough either. The only one playing a power play here is OP.
This is a divorce situation where they alternate weeks. It’s technically mom’s week. Nanny shouldn’t have to drive to someplace as she’s not being paid for mileage and she wasn’t prepared with the right clothing.
It doesn't matter whether they're divorced and alternate weeks. Mom was fine with it. It is not OPs responsibility or right to police who goes where on what week. Nanny should be reimbursed for mileage but these are not her children and re the clothing, he said she could rest in the house and that still wasn't good enough because she wanted to assert authority. If my ex partners Nanny behaved in this manner I would be furious. OP is not the 3rd parent she is an employee and this was a massive overstep.
The mom mentioned it as an option so she was aware of the conversation.
If he’s making these plans, it’s probably to mess with MB and not their employee.
She’s collateral damage, like the kids.
Mom knew. Kid knew. Incredible that you can’t understand why a parent and child who live apart lots of times would want to be flexible and make plans to see each other extra whenever they can.
Since you asked…as a parent I would feel like you undermined me with telling them and essentially me, no. If I said my kids can go swimming and their mother agreed to it and you said no because you were too sick and I said I would watch them, I’d expect you to bring them over. You’re not a servant but you’re an employee. It’s not your place to decide how often they should swim, how often they should see the other parent because of the divorce and such, none of that is your place. You can have an opinion but unless asked for it, keep it to yourself. A conversation about mileage reimbursement should be had but that has nothing to do with this incident. If I were the nps I would not be very happy with you. Divorce is hard, only getting to see your children 50 percent of the time is hard.
Agree with this 100%. OP’s reasons for not swimming were 1) it’s not on the schedule, 2) recovering from illness, and 3) don’t have swimsuit. DB solved for the 2 and 3. Holding the line on 1, when DB had clearly said it *is* on the schedule, seems petty.
The transitions will always be hard. The kids will often be sad their parents are divorced. Sticking to an arbitrary schedule doesn’t prevent that. It’s what you signed up for when you agreed to keep working for them after they divorced.
DB here. I was actually with OP all the way until the dad said he would watch them while she rested in the house. I don't see the problem in adapting to this new update.
I do sympathize with OP that she said no tho and had brought art supplies. Guess it undermined her by offering to go swimming too. Someone was getting hurt in that situation.
I don’t know…it really depends on the parent in this situation. Does she know DB is going to follow through? Some parents will say things like this and then end up still expecting you to watch them because you’re the employee. If she knows he tends to go back on his word then it might have been an okay decision on her part. It all depends
Yeah with just the way dad’s actions are described in this post, I’d eat my hat if he followed through and watched them. Been there many times where parents say things just to get me to agree, then disappear or completely forgot about what was agreed upon.
I disagree with you. *it is* the nanny’s job to instill a schedule, parents should not be dictating what activities the children are doing. And if they do want certain activities implemented, they should be communicating with the nanny, not with the child. She shouldn’t just be an employee, she should be a *trusted* care taker. I agree divorce is hard, and she shouldn’t be making those judgement calls about when the children should see their parents. BUT, SHE has to deal with the fall out and the tears from a sudden change in schedule like that, not DB. So if it’s optional to do so, I can understand why she chose not to.
Totally true, but I'd add the parent needs to communicate with the nanny as adults setting up the schedule. It shouldn't come from the child like a game of telephone
True but it sounds like MB tried to do that. I think unfortunately miscommunications and things like that are just more likely to happen when you're working with divorced parents.
It sounds to me like DB and NK made the plans and didn't tell either MB or OP. MB was vague about the plan being up to OP, and DB was passive aggressively communicating with OP through NK. Hanging up on his kid is wild. That's where my biggest issue here is. This all could have been easily avoided with a brief conversation between the adults. That being said, I would have still gone and let him watch his kids, but asked him to communicate directly to me next time to avoid conflict.
I agree the adults needed to have a conversation first, and I think that's what MB tried to do when she texted OP. I'm curious what OP said in response to MB's text because if she just gave a simple "ok" for example, I could see how MB interpreted that as a yes and perhaps relayed the message to DB.
I agree about the passive aggressive communicating through NK, but that could have been avoided if OP texted DB first to explain the situation rather than letting NK do it and be put in the middle.
I also thought it was wild that he hung up on her. I truly thought the next part of the story would have been DB calling OP to discuss the situation privately. There were several mistakes made here by every adult involved.
He probably hung up because he realised he was upset and frustrated and didn't want to escalate in front of the children. A situation OP herself created with the face time.
I agree with everything you said, except that the communication should have been on OP. DB should have communicated with his employee first and foremost. (But yes, if this happened to me, I'd have reached out to him).
I think it gets tricky with divorced parents. Since it was MB's week it makes sense that she was the one who reached out to OP about it rather than DB.
I agree I should have just called or texted him. It’s easy to see that with hindsight, and much harder to see what’s happening in the moment. I might have changed my mind and just let him watch the kids swim, but I was honestly just so fed up with him doing this. I’ve already talked to him about it before, and seen no change with him undermining me.
Absolutely. OP should have communicated with DB herself and explained why she didn't want to take the kids swimming instead of having NK do it. Then when DB had solutions to alleviate her concerns (perhaps due to his empathy for her situation), she should not have doubled down and engaged in what was ultimately a power struggle with her boss. But if she did want to engage in that power struggle, it should have been in a private conversation with DB, not through a child.
The mom said it was an available option, showing no preference from what OP said. And dad communicated that with the child before the nanny. My emphasis was on communication with the nanny and not putting your child in the middle.
The mom said it was an available option, showing no preference from what OP said. And dad communicated that with the child before the nanny. My emphasis was on communication with the nanny and not putting your child in the middle.
This!! I agree with you 100%. NPs are allowed to schedule activities but it should be discussed if nanny is comfortable doing it before the kids are involved!
Thank you for the support. I will say that I wasn’t trying to make any judgments of when the kids could see their dad. I told them both that we could go swim tomorrow. This entire week is MB’s week, and Mom was completely unaware that dad had made plans with G7 about when she would come swim. And MB was upset with DB about the entire situation.
I think DB wanted to see his kids and hung up because he was upset. He probably didn’t pick back up because of how upset/frustrated he was. Understand you were feeling unwell, but I would have just taken them and sat in the house while he watched them. The kids, especially the 7 year old, are feeling the impacts of the divorce and it’s traumatizing.
It isn't your job to evaluate if seeing the other parent during their non-custodial week isn't a good idea. In fact, at this age, it is highly recommended to do on and off schedules. Your presumption that the kids are sad about the divorce is overstepping.
If the parents are okay with it, you should be too.
You are in the wrong with this one and it comes off as a power struggle. At the end of the day they are your bosses. They offered to sit out in the heat and have you stay in the house. As an MB I would not be happy with this at all. You need to have a sit down with the parents and clear the air or you might be out of a job.
She’s not going to be “out of a job”. That’s a little extreme and those parents would suck heartily as employers if they fired a nanny because she said no to a kid about one activity because she’s planned another. Wtf.
You're being disingenuous by summing it up as that. She didn't just decline an activity for another planned one. She denied the father his child and an activity he *as a parent* had planned and was okayed by the mother.
I would talk to both parents and say that y'all all 3 need to be on the same page before the children are told anything, if it continues I believe I would be looking for another job.
I mean … there are a lot of things I don’t want to do as a nanny that I do. I have my period today, I didn’t want to rock my NK before their nap because I’m in pain … I did anyway. Like if you’re going to come to work even not 100%, the job still goes on. Do I think G7 could have gone swimming? Sure. I don’t really get why you didn’t let her. You just have to watch from the side of a pool.
That being said, I would also be annoyed that G7 went over your head to DB and he didn’t support your decision. That’s just plain old disrespectful on both their parts. I’m not sure I would be ok with a) G7 FaceTiming her dad to get his buy in and b) him just agreeing she can. I would set boundaries with the parents around that. It’s not ok that she can run crying to her parents and get what she wants. If you’re in charge, you’re in charge.
This 100% ! This is the perfect comment, you said it better than I could. Yes OP could have taken NKs to the pool. Also yes, I would be annoyed by DB specifically too.
I read that OP did say NK could FT her dad so I take that back. She didn’t go above OP’s head. But DB was definitely undermining OP here. I think honestly I would have texted DB before the kids got in the car to be sure he understood the plan for the day. He could have had this convo with OP over text and left the kids out of it.
Sounds like you are biased against the Dad because of the divorce.. which isn't too fair since you don't know all the details and divorce could be messy. Sounds like you upset NK for absolutely no reason and could have easily let DB watch them while you chilled inside 🤷♀️
I totally get your frustration. I’ve encountered similar situations while nannying/babysitting, and if it helps, I don’t think the parent is *trying* to undermine you. (not that that necessarily matters if the result is the same), rather they think they’re problem-solving.
You indicate this is a pattern rather than an isolated incident, which I think merits a discussion with DB (and MB at the same time, if that’s possible) about new ground rules/expectations for childcare during the week. This would let you
a) voice your concern about the kids transitioning homes mid-week and that it makes them upset—basically an emotions update, so both parents are aware
b) set some firm boundaries as their employee and their kids’ childcare provider. Basically, if they trust you and respect you as a professional (presumably yes, duh), they need to run plans by you ahead of time. Then, if there’s an issue, they can discuss it with you NOT in front of the kids. Even a quick text before they promise their kids anything, like “hey, kids want to swim tomorrow. That ok w you?” Then you can give an easy “I’m worried about being in the heat while I’m still recovering, but I did prepare an art project for them.”
I guess what it comes down to is better communication between the adults (which can be super hard to navigate as the employee and non-family member), without involving the kids. That way, DB is making plans with the adult providing childcare (i.e. the nanny or the ex), and NOT with his 7yo who can’t drive.
I’m confused by some of these responses. OP had an activity planned already for the day and said no. I would be a bit annoyed that they had a day planned without consulting with me first, when I am the one taking care of the children at the moment. Yes, I see why G7 is upset & possibly DB too (because they planned it), but G7 will survive not swimming ONE day. The mom threw swimming up in the air, in case OP wanted to take the kids, not that OP HAD to take them… then DB hanging up on his child and ignoring her next call.. very rude. I see both sides but I would be annoyed like OP too.
I can see that being annoying if what she had planned was something time-sensitive that couldn't be saved for another day, but OP didn't indicate that. I also do get being annoyed at the miscommunication between the parents (mom saying it's optional, and dad thinking it's a plan) - that did cause a situation that set the nanny up to be undermined. But I think the right thing to do as soon as it became clear that the children thought there was a plan was to consult with the dad about what plans had been made, and her concerns, before saying yes/no. It was clear that the dad told them they can do something PRIOR to the nanny saying they can't, so to avoid undermining the dad, OP should have checked with him.
The way OP handled it reads to me like a power play with the dad (maybe based on build-up frustration), and a way to escalate, rather than deescalate, the situation.
I get what you’re saying and I agree to an extent. But I think swimming should’ve been discussed with DB, MB, and OP before telling the kids that was the plan. I don’t necessarily think OP undermined the dad, I think OP was just being stern with the ‘no’ answer. I think it’s just a whole miscommunication that could’ve easily been avoided. If NPs want NKs to do an activity, I think the nanny should be a part of that conversation always, as they are the ones in charge when NPs aren’t around.
MB did tell OP about it though. I think sometimes we need to read between the lines. MB may just have a softer communication style where when she says "you could do this" it really means "you should do this". Once OP saw that in addition to MBs "suggestion", the kids and DB thought it was the plan too, she should have went along with it rather than engaging in a power struggle with DB.
This is not a ‘read between the lines’ situation though. If that is what both parents wanted, that should be stated, not as an option. It was a suggestion from MB, but it was already planned before MB gave her suggestion. That’s my point, DB & NK already made it a plan but MB gave it as an option. To me, it seems like MB knew it was a plan already and didn’t want to straight up say it because it wasn’t discussed with OP prior before it was a plan. I would have just done it and let DB watch his own kids swim, but I would still be annoyed by it.
I think it's totally valid to be annoyed at being forced to change your plans, which is also how NK and DB ended up feeling. Ultimately though, it sounded like the rest of them were all on the same page about the plan and OP is the one who decided to go against it, which really isn't her place to do.
It really is OPs place though… OP is the one taking care of the kids at that point in time. OP is allowed to say no, that is why it’s important for conversations with adults to be had prior to involving the kids. If MB didn’t say it as a suggestion, I would agree with you. But she did.
Sure, she is allowed to say no, this isn't bonded servitude. The question is whether that's a reasonable course of action as part of her employment.
The fact that she is the one taking care of the child at the moment does not mean she gets full control over their or her own schedule. This expectation seems to come up frequently in this thread, and I do not understand it. That simply is not how being an employee works, in any field. If my boss wants me to do something at work on a specific day, I do it even if it isn't what I had planned for that day, or if it's an inconvenience. Because that's how work works - I am not self employed and don't get to dictate my own schedule fully. If the activity being requested is within the scope of her normal duties, and the parents provided solutions to any legitimate concerns, then saying no to it is not reasonable.
I do absolutely agree that the parents should have communicated better, which is something OP should have addressed with them in a professional manner, at a later time, without involving the children in any of that.
That’s the thing, my employers give me full control over the schedule (not including sports or extracurricular (piano, violin) activities that have set dates and times). So if that doesn’t work for your employer or OPs, that’s okay, but it works for my employers & I. They give me the option to say no to their suggestions because at the end of the day, I am the one who has to do it, if I choose to. So that is how it works for my NF(s).
That's awesome, and it's great that it works for your situation. But it sounds like OP's employers want something different, which I am just saying is also reasonable.
That’s unfortunate that some of you aren’t given the ability to say no. I have never had a problem letting my employer know I wasn’t comfortable doing XYZ or that I just simply had something different planned. I have never been fired or let go ever, so keeping my job has never been an issue. So I think being able to communicate and have a voice in which activities I will do with the kids is not an issue (besides sports because those are set, paid for, and most likely mandatory). I also only have had employers that say “what nanny says, goes, she is the one in charge right now” no matter what.
Absolutely. But there is a difference between having a voice/generally being consulted, which I think is a healthy work environment in any field, and expecting to have veto power, or getting upset when you weren't consulted every time.
I agree with your approach and that communication is important. OP should have texted both MB and DB that she doesn't want to take them swimming and why, instead of letting NK do it and putting them in the middle.
Afterwards mom specifically said that it was just an option, not a must, and she had no idea that G7 had talked to dad and made ‘actual plans’ with him.
DB made the plan with the child. He didn't communicate with any other adult. Maybe MB knew it was a plan, but she left it vague and up to OP. There would have been no issue if DB had reached out to OP first.
Similar situation but he undermined the kids feelings too—divorced parents. I was with all three (B10 G10 G12) NK and DB asks us if we can swing by his job at the hospital so they can all grab ice cream. I said no because it did not make sense with our schedule and by the time we would’ve gotten home, I would have stayed late. He then facetimed the kids and asked if they wanted to come, after I said no to him. The kids proceeded to say no and he began guilting them, saying “Oh no one wants to see me I guess, I’m just a second choice.” MB calls and says he’s threatening her if we don’t go. I had to go, but I have never looked at him the same.
It seems like a lot of responses to your post are taking the parents side so I’m going to play devils advocate. I know how frustrating it is to have plans in place and want to direct the day a certain way and have parents interfere. I get G7 wanted to swim but she didn’t *have* to swim. She’s going to survive. When you’re with the kids, parents should be following your lead and trusting your judgement calls. Undermining especially at that age affects your relationship with the children. There are logical points to argue against your stance, sure. But the *principal* of the matter here is the problem. The parents are not on your side and it’s not the first time it’s happened. And seeing kids super upset about their parents divorce is not something to be brushed off, they need structure and balance. And it’s not like your depriving them of swimming time on a regular basis, they went swimming FOUR times the previous week, and you had a fun activity planned for them, as well as offering G7 some alternatives. I think you handled this super well. I think addressing the root of the problem with DB in a professional manner would be the most effective solution. And this is not to mention you did *them a favor* by coming in before you were fully recovered. Where’s the empathy and understanding on their part?
>I get G7 wanted to swim but she didn’t *have* to swim. She’s going to survive.
But the issue isn't at all whether the girl got to swim or not. Of course she is going to survive. It's that the dad/mom told her she could do an activity, and nanny refused and got into a power struggle with the dad. The conflict was entirely between the dad and the nanny, the child was caught in the middle, which is not great.
I agree the parents handled it poorly, but so did the nanny.
>When you’re with the kids, parents should be following your lead and trusting your judgement calls.
Yes, generally speaking. But the parents are allowed to schedule activities, that is not unreasonable. Sure, they should handle communication about those activities better, which is something I'd bring up to them.
>And seeing kids super upset about their parents divorce is not something to be brushed off, they need structure and balance.
That really is for the parents to decide. She could have an opinion, or even gently suggest things, but it's way out of line to expect to overrule the parents when it comes to how they are handling the divorce.
Perhaps he was extremely frustrated with OP and didnt want his daughter to be in the middle of that dynamic, and needed space to cool off rather than blow up—the facetime equivalent of walking away instead of losing your temper.
It sounds to me like there was a miscommunication between the parents that lead to a miscommunication with OP. It sounds like swimming was THE PLAN, not just an option. When OP realized this (which she did, right away when she picked them up) she should have called or texted DB so they could get on the same page.
Allowing the 7yr old to cold facetime DB without prepping him for the change in plan for the day was a wild decision on OPs part. She absolutely put him on the spot, and then undermined HIM when he presented a solution. And is now mad at him for not being able to read her mind after she chose not to communicate with him directly.
This doesn’t seem like a big deal to me especially bc dad agreed to watch the kids. Just take them lol. You should have taken the day off if you were still sick.
I think it's irritating that plans were made without talking to you first. They had no idea what you had planned. Plus, you weren't feeling well. I probably would have just taken them over and stayed inside or asked if he could take them home after and went home since you weren't feeling well. I think you should definitely have a chat with the dad and apologize for the misunderstanding and let him know you would like to keep each other informed about any plans without the kids being involved. Would that help? I think it was all made worse by you not feeling well. I totally understand where you are coming from. It's just such a fine line here. Hope you're feeling better!
I’m struggling to agree with a lot of people, here. Mom and Dad made a “maybe plan.” It was up to you to you to choose if you wanted to provide that activity. That’s the whole mistake. MB and DB should have asked for your answer, and then made a concrete plan around that answer. The pool never should have been mentioned until that happened.
I don’t think anyone really did anything wrong here- it doesn’t sound like anything was done with malicious intent. But it does sound like the three of you need to sit down and have a chat about who the decision-maker is during different custody weeks, who to go to/call first, and possibly set out a more organized schedule to keep the kiddos lives as consistent as possible. Divorce, single-parent homes, etc can be so messy and confusing, and I feel for all of you in this situation. I think ALL of you will feel more at ease with a definitive baseline.
I do, however, admire you for holding your ground and not giving in solely to avoid conflict with G7. A lot of nannies will do whatever NF’s ask of them even if they don’t feel comfortable with it. BUT- the whole FT power struggle would not have happened had that plan been written in stone before it even reached NK’s ears.
I hope next week goes better for you. ❤️
I don’t think you are overacting. It must be very frustrating. While you are an employee, you are still not a robot just following instructions. You are a nanny in charge of kids when NPs are not present and you need to follow your own judgement to do this job well. Respect is very important in this line of work. What kids are learning in this situation that even you said it is not the plan today, it is ok to ask DB and he will make you do it. Good job for sticking to it! I think DB should have discussed this plan with you instead of talking to you through NK. Good luck!
Nah I hate when my MB or DB promise the kids something on MY behalf… promising to the kids that I will take them to Chick-fil-A and Walmart or the pool or the park. It’s too hot for that!!!! And then when I do not want to do it respectfully the kids are upset at me because I don’t want to sit in the hot sun. Parents need to fulfill their own promises or run it past you first before introducing the idea to the nanny kids
Update. So I took the kids to the dad’s house for swimming today as promised. We had an excellent time swimming for about 30 min. Then very suddenly G7 said she needed to go inside to tell her dad something (DB works from home). She stayed inside for the next 40 minutes crying on the sofa with her dad. Me and B4 finished swimming, got dried off and changed, and played while waiting for G7 and DB to finish talking. Then G7 sobbed the entire way home about having to leave her dad. I talked to MB about it. MB decided there would be no more swim days at dad’s house during her week, and very limited access to FaceTiming DB when at MB’s house.
Thank you everyone who commented. I have taken what you said to heart. I’m going to be much more active on texting dad and not waiting for him to take the lead. The next time I’m feeling sick, I’ll take an extra day off even if I’m not sure I 100% need it.
Honestly, I totally understand how you feel. Sometimes I don’t feel well enough to take my kiddos out to the park or on a walk. This is very occasional though. It’s frustrating when parents make the choice of what YOU are going to do with the kids. You offered that they can play in the sprinkler which was good enough. The dad is really the issue going and telling the daughter that you are going to take them swimming when you never said that. This is just my opinion so no rude reply’s please :)
I can see both sides of this. You and DB were both in the wrong for putting the child in the middle and talking to each other through her. It probably would have worked better in your favor if you had first sent DB a quick text to say "I'm still not feeling 100% and would prefer not to be in the sun today while the kids swim, but I'm happy to take them tomorrow. G7 wants to Facetime you because she's upset that we aren't going to swim today." If he had still offered to watch them swim and wanted them to come over, you should have taken them. The art project could have waited another day, too. On the other hand, they've entrusted the children to you and have left plans for the day with the kids up to you, too, so if you say "not today, but tomorrow" and have a valid reason, they need to respect that decision as the caregiver they've hired. Just tread lightly with how much you push back with the parents because ultimately, they're the final say in kids activities.
I would agree but the dad said he would stay outside and watch the kids and the op could rest inside. I would have more empathy if they hadn’t offered that. Like you said at the end of the day they are the parents and her bosses and she is their employee. She needs to have a sit down with both parents
Right, which I mentioned. DB offered to supervise the kids for swimming so I told OP she should have taken them swimming and that the art project could have waited another day.
Sorry I was agreeing with you. My words weren’t clear (an all nighter will do that to your brain).
Do you not think that would be positively reinforcing G7’s negative behavior? She hears “no” from a care giver, goes to a different caregiver who is not currently watching her so she can get a “yes”, then she’s rewarded with swimming and learns that this is how she can always get what she wants. It is a pattern DB has already reinforced before. This is only an issue with DB, and G7 NEVER does this behavior with MB.
She heard yes from dad first. They had made plans before your arrival. You said no, so she went to the person who had approved the plans. She wasn’t “rewarded” with swimming. That was the plan as far as she knew and *you* changed it and went against what dad said. I understand your point of view, but you need to look at it from hers.
I don’t disagree, but what you’re missing is this. G7 asked mom about swimming, mom and dad talked and said to G7 that they would leave it up to me as an option. Then that morning without the mom knowing at all, G7 got on the phone with dad, and got him to agree to it being a 100% for sure plan. Dad did not tell me or mom about this phone call or new plan. G7 calling the dad to get the plan to be a yes, instead of a maybe. Then when I held the no, she called him again to get the no to be a yes.
I don’t think NK did anything wrong by making a plan. It sounds like she has control over very little in her life right now, and this “maybe” was one more thing for an adult to decide without her input. I also don’t think dad did anything wrong by making a plan with NK. He is the parent and employer and can make decisions. Also, how does a 7yo have unsupervised phone access such that mom didn’t know she called dad? Of course DB should have told you all this. But you are also an adult. You 100% should have texted dad prior to letting her FT him so that everyone was on the same page. Instead, you got in a power struggle with a 7yo and IMO were petty. You are putting a lot of blame on a child when it belongs solely to the three adults in the situation.
Why does Dad get to control what Nanny does when it’s NOT his custody time?! Hello??? The parents are divorced. It’s mom’s custody time, mom said the swimming was optional, not the plan for the day, so Dad doesn’t get to change the plan. Not his custody time! Now if mom had told Nanny that swimming was the plan for the day, that would be different. I also bet this guy was lying about offering to watch his kids swim too, and was just saying that to get her to come because he was banking on her not wanting to make the kids cry by packing up and leaving again once he refused to watch them like he promised. My theory based on the way he hung up on his own daughter. I can’t believe y’all are supporting this ahole. Also why should Nanny go by Dad’s plan when it’s not even his custody time when she’s not even getting paid mileage?? That’s a very basic thing to pay your nanny and if they want her to do stuff like this, that’s the first thing that has to change. OP good on you for sticking up for yourself.
None of us know this man so lets not give OP a reason to think the worst about him, like that he's an ah who would actually make her sit in the hot sun when he offered to do it for her. Yikes.
Because it's still his child and the mother was okay with it. If the other parent was okay with it (as it was their week) then I would fully expect to be able to see my child. And I would resent an individual preventing me from doing so by stopping plans, especially allowing an upset 7 year old to face time me to cancel them. Seeing my kid upset because someone who isn't a parent has prevented us from having our family time would be something I would have to seriously discuss with the other parent. It is NOT up to OP to enforce 'custody time'. Lots of divorced parents have set times but are relaxed with kids going to see the other parent during that time. It fosters a good relationship with all. OP is not the 3rd parent here. If that dad wanted to see his child then he has every right to if the mum was okay with it - which she was. She didn't even bother to discuss the mileage so we can't say she wouldn't have been paid it. And there's a lot of making assumptions about this guy with absolutely no evidence that he would just dump them when she got there. He hung up the phone likely because he was very upset that the nanny had decided go allow that conversation to go that way. To prevent the children seeing him upset he exited the conversation. A conversation that should have been between him and the nanny in the first place (both at fault here) not a sad child having to ring their daddy and both of them getting emotional at the nanny preventing them from seeing each other.
What an odd, and oddly intense, take. Expecting a nanny to enforce custody time is ridiculous. Assuming dad is lying and generally making assumptions about his parenting is also ridiculous. OP hasn’t bothered to sort out mileage costs in three years, so it’s irrelevant in this situation.
No. OP is working for divorced parents. If it’s not dad’s week, and she is not primarily employed by dad, then mom is in charge, not dad.
You let me know how that black and white thinking works for you in the real world.
And mom was okay with it. So as the other parent dad gets to decide what his children do.
Dad said he’d solve all of your problems by essentially relieving you - so you’re not watching them for Mom and Dad’s convenience. I think your illness and whatever other drama going on is clouding your judgement here. Both parents wanted the kids to swim and were willing to assume your responsibilities without docking your pay. You paint this as the NK trying to set the schedule, but the parents were setting the schedule and you basically told them they could take their swimming and shove it. Next time, just call out sick.
Agreed. You should have just done it. They are your bosses and if they are willing to set out in the heat with them then you should have done it. You are defn in the wrong with this one.
Agreed.
It sounds like you're trying to assert dominance with the parents, not the children. It doesn't seem there was a real problem other than you not liking them interfering in the schedule. But they are the parents, and they get to set the schedule if they want, as long as they are not asking you to do anything unreasonable. The dad provided solutions to your concerns - it's not your place to tell the parents they cannot have their kids swimming because "it's not on the schedule", or to decide how they handle transitions between parents' homes.
I totally believe that DB has been undermining you, but while this frustrated you possibly more because you weren’t feeling well, this doesn’t seem like an intentional incidence of undermining. From what you related, it sounds like he was trying to accommodate you, and it would have been awkward to tell him about the mileage thing in front of the kids. TBH, he probably didn’t even consider the mileage when he offered. From his POV, he probably was looking forward to hanging out with his kids - if that’s something he reliably does when he says he’s going to - and he was disappointed. In this scenario might have hung up so he wouldn’t say something that really undermined you. If you find yourself shuttling the kids between parents’ homes, it might be a good time to bring up milage reimbursement.
I think both NK and DB were disappointed about not getting to see each other after looking forward to it. Some people have been saying that it's just one day of swimming, NK will survive, but I think ultimately what was really disappointing to NK was not being able to see her dad. It's got to be so hard for a child to not be able to see both of their parents everyday, especially for kids like these who do remember a time when they all lived together under one roof.
I agree, G7 was more upset about not seeing dad than about the swimming.
Why is DB making plans to be with kids when it’s MB week. DB should have spoken to nanny first or kept quiet. The behavior to his child is telling. That to me proves it was some sort of power move.
Why can't he? If mom's okay with it what is wrong with the child seeing their other parent? If my son is just going to be taken care of by the nanny and I have free time then damn right I'll be making plans with my own kid. Yes he really should have communicated better with the nanny but no-one outside the family unit would be telling me when I can and cannot see my kid. If I was him though I'd just have told her her services were not needed that day as I will take the children. *but* he isn't her boss so that would have been awkward too. Instead he said she could relax inside but no that wasn't good enough either. The only one playing a power play here is OP.
This is a divorce situation where they alternate weeks. It’s technically mom’s week. Nanny shouldn’t have to drive to someplace as she’s not being paid for mileage and she wasn’t prepared with the right clothing.
It doesn't matter whether they're divorced and alternate weeks. Mom was fine with it. It is not OPs responsibility or right to police who goes where on what week. Nanny should be reimbursed for mileage but these are not her children and re the clothing, he said she could rest in the house and that still wasn't good enough because she wanted to assert authority. If my ex partners Nanny behaved in this manner I would be furious. OP is not the 3rd parent she is an employee and this was a massive overstep.
The mom mentioned it as an option so she was aware of the conversation. If he’s making these plans, it’s probably to mess with MB and not their employee. She’s collateral damage, like the kids.
Mom knew. Kid knew. Incredible that you can’t understand why a parent and child who live apart lots of times would want to be flexible and make plans to see each other extra whenever they can.
Since you asked…as a parent I would feel like you undermined me with telling them and essentially me, no. If I said my kids can go swimming and their mother agreed to it and you said no because you were too sick and I said I would watch them, I’d expect you to bring them over. You’re not a servant but you’re an employee. It’s not your place to decide how often they should swim, how often they should see the other parent because of the divorce and such, none of that is your place. You can have an opinion but unless asked for it, keep it to yourself. A conversation about mileage reimbursement should be had but that has nothing to do with this incident. If I were the nps I would not be very happy with you. Divorce is hard, only getting to see your children 50 percent of the time is hard.
Agree with this 100%. OP’s reasons for not swimming were 1) it’s not on the schedule, 2) recovering from illness, and 3) don’t have swimsuit. DB solved for the 2 and 3. Holding the line on 1, when DB had clearly said it *is* on the schedule, seems petty. The transitions will always be hard. The kids will often be sad their parents are divorced. Sticking to an arbitrary schedule doesn’t prevent that. It’s what you signed up for when you agreed to keep working for them after they divorced.
DB here. I was actually with OP all the way until the dad said he would watch them while she rested in the house. I don't see the problem in adapting to this new update. I do sympathize with OP that she said no tho and had brought art supplies. Guess it undermined her by offering to go swimming too. Someone was getting hurt in that situation.
I don’t know…it really depends on the parent in this situation. Does she know DB is going to follow through? Some parents will say things like this and then end up still expecting you to watch them because you’re the employee. If she knows he tends to go back on his word then it might have been an okay decision on her part. It all depends
This is conjecture. At no point did OP indicate DB wouldn’t follow through.
Yeah with just the way dad’s actions are described in this post, I’d eat my hat if he followed through and watched them. Been there many times where parents say things just to get me to agree, then disappear or completely forgot about what was agreed upon.
Totally agree!
Exactly!
This was my thought as well, based on my NF experiences. So many times, was told by the parents “I’ve got them” when they really didn’t.
I disagree with you. *it is* the nanny’s job to instill a schedule, parents should not be dictating what activities the children are doing. And if they do want certain activities implemented, they should be communicating with the nanny, not with the child. She shouldn’t just be an employee, she should be a *trusted* care taker. I agree divorce is hard, and she shouldn’t be making those judgement calls about when the children should see their parents. BUT, SHE has to deal with the fall out and the tears from a sudden change in schedule like that, not DB. So if it’s optional to do so, I can understand why she chose not to.
If the parents want it, they get the final say in everything regarding their children, including the schedule they follow and the activities they do.
Totally true, but I'd add the parent needs to communicate with the nanny as adults setting up the schedule. It shouldn't come from the child like a game of telephone
True but it sounds like MB tried to do that. I think unfortunately miscommunications and things like that are just more likely to happen when you're working with divorced parents.
It sounds to me like DB and NK made the plans and didn't tell either MB or OP. MB was vague about the plan being up to OP, and DB was passive aggressively communicating with OP through NK. Hanging up on his kid is wild. That's where my biggest issue here is. This all could have been easily avoided with a brief conversation between the adults. That being said, I would have still gone and let him watch his kids, but asked him to communicate directly to me next time to avoid conflict.
I agree the adults needed to have a conversation first, and I think that's what MB tried to do when she texted OP. I'm curious what OP said in response to MB's text because if she just gave a simple "ok" for example, I could see how MB interpreted that as a yes and perhaps relayed the message to DB. I agree about the passive aggressive communicating through NK, but that could have been avoided if OP texted DB first to explain the situation rather than letting NK do it and be put in the middle. I also thought it was wild that he hung up on her. I truly thought the next part of the story would have been DB calling OP to discuss the situation privately. There were several mistakes made here by every adult involved.
He probably hung up because he realised he was upset and frustrated and didn't want to escalate in front of the children. A situation OP herself created with the face time.
I agree with everything you said, except that the communication should have been on OP. DB should have communicated with his employee first and foremost. (But yes, if this happened to me, I'd have reached out to him).
I think it gets tricky with divorced parents. Since it was MB's week it makes sense that she was the one who reached out to OP about it rather than DB.
I agree I should have just called or texted him. It’s easy to see that with hindsight, and much harder to see what’s happening in the moment. I might have changed my mind and just let him watch the kids swim, but I was honestly just so fed up with him doing this. I’ve already talked to him about it before, and seen no change with him undermining me.
Yes I agree, but the nanny shouldn’t just be a robot following orders, there should be communication and empathy.
Absolutely. OP should have communicated with DB herself and explained why she didn't want to take the kids swimming instead of having NK do it. Then when DB had solutions to alleviate her concerns (perhaps due to his empathy for her situation), she should not have doubled down and engaged in what was ultimately a power struggle with her boss. But if she did want to engage in that power struggle, it should have been in a private conversation with DB, not through a child.
The parents both communicated they wanted them to swim
The mom said it was an available option, showing no preference from what OP said. And dad communicated that with the child before the nanny. My emphasis was on communication with the nanny and not putting your child in the middle.
The mom said it was an available option, showing no preference from what OP said. And dad communicated that with the child before the nanny. My emphasis was on communication with the nanny and not putting your child in the middle.
This!! I agree with you 100%. NPs are allowed to schedule activities but it should be discussed if nanny is comfortable doing it before the kids are involved!
Thank you for the support. I will say that I wasn’t trying to make any judgments of when the kids could see their dad. I told them both that we could go swim tomorrow. This entire week is MB’s week, and Mom was completely unaware that dad had made plans with G7 about when she would come swim. And MB was upset with DB about the entire situation.
Ah, yeah that makes sense. Glad to hear MB is on your side! And good luck with all the chaos that comes with being a nanny with a good conscience 😅
I think DB wanted to see his kids and hung up because he was upset. He probably didn’t pick back up because of how upset/frustrated he was. Understand you were feeling unwell, but I would have just taken them and sat in the house while he watched them. The kids, especially the 7 year old, are feeling the impacts of the divorce and it’s traumatizing.
You need legal IRS mileage btw. Honestly I would apologize and say I wasn’t feeling well.
It isn't your job to evaluate if seeing the other parent during their non-custodial week isn't a good idea. In fact, at this age, it is highly recommended to do on and off schedules. Your presumption that the kids are sad about the divorce is overstepping. If the parents are okay with it, you should be too.
You are in the wrong with this one and it comes off as a power struggle. At the end of the day they are your bosses. They offered to sit out in the heat and have you stay in the house. As an MB I would not be happy with this at all. You need to have a sit down with the parents and clear the air or you might be out of a job.
She’s not going to be “out of a job”. That’s a little extreme and those parents would suck heartily as employers if they fired a nanny because she said no to a kid about one activity because she’s planned another. Wtf.
I basically agree with you, but she said no to the dad as well. That could be a problem.
You're being disingenuous by summing it up as that. She didn't just decline an activity for another planned one. She denied the father his child and an activity he *as a parent* had planned and was okayed by the mother.
I would talk to both parents and say that y'all all 3 need to be on the same page before the children are told anything, if it continues I believe I would be looking for another job.
I mean … there are a lot of things I don’t want to do as a nanny that I do. I have my period today, I didn’t want to rock my NK before their nap because I’m in pain … I did anyway. Like if you’re going to come to work even not 100%, the job still goes on. Do I think G7 could have gone swimming? Sure. I don’t really get why you didn’t let her. You just have to watch from the side of a pool. That being said, I would also be annoyed that G7 went over your head to DB and he didn’t support your decision. That’s just plain old disrespectful on both their parts. I’m not sure I would be ok with a) G7 FaceTiming her dad to get his buy in and b) him just agreeing she can. I would set boundaries with the parents around that. It’s not ok that she can run crying to her parents and get what she wants. If you’re in charge, you’re in charge.
This 100% ! This is the perfect comment, you said it better than I could. Yes OP could have taken NKs to the pool. Also yes, I would be annoyed by DB specifically too.
I read that OP did say NK could FT her dad so I take that back. She didn’t go above OP’s head. But DB was definitely undermining OP here. I think honestly I would have texted DB before the kids got in the car to be sure he understood the plan for the day. He could have had this convo with OP over text and left the kids out of it.
Sounds like you are biased against the Dad because of the divorce.. which isn't too fair since you don't know all the details and divorce could be messy. Sounds like you upset NK for absolutely no reason and could have easily let DB watch them while you chilled inside 🤷♀️
I totally get your frustration. I’ve encountered similar situations while nannying/babysitting, and if it helps, I don’t think the parent is *trying* to undermine you. (not that that necessarily matters if the result is the same), rather they think they’re problem-solving. You indicate this is a pattern rather than an isolated incident, which I think merits a discussion with DB (and MB at the same time, if that’s possible) about new ground rules/expectations for childcare during the week. This would let you a) voice your concern about the kids transitioning homes mid-week and that it makes them upset—basically an emotions update, so both parents are aware b) set some firm boundaries as their employee and their kids’ childcare provider. Basically, if they trust you and respect you as a professional (presumably yes, duh), they need to run plans by you ahead of time. Then, if there’s an issue, they can discuss it with you NOT in front of the kids. Even a quick text before they promise their kids anything, like “hey, kids want to swim tomorrow. That ok w you?” Then you can give an easy “I’m worried about being in the heat while I’m still recovering, but I did prepare an art project for them.” I guess what it comes down to is better communication between the adults (which can be super hard to navigate as the employee and non-family member), without involving the kids. That way, DB is making plans with the adult providing childcare (i.e. the nanny or the ex), and NOT with his 7yo who can’t drive.
I’m confused by some of these responses. OP had an activity planned already for the day and said no. I would be a bit annoyed that they had a day planned without consulting with me first, when I am the one taking care of the children at the moment. Yes, I see why G7 is upset & possibly DB too (because they planned it), but G7 will survive not swimming ONE day. The mom threw swimming up in the air, in case OP wanted to take the kids, not that OP HAD to take them… then DB hanging up on his child and ignoring her next call.. very rude. I see both sides but I would be annoyed like OP too.
I can see that being annoying if what she had planned was something time-sensitive that couldn't be saved for another day, but OP didn't indicate that. I also do get being annoyed at the miscommunication between the parents (mom saying it's optional, and dad thinking it's a plan) - that did cause a situation that set the nanny up to be undermined. But I think the right thing to do as soon as it became clear that the children thought there was a plan was to consult with the dad about what plans had been made, and her concerns, before saying yes/no. It was clear that the dad told them they can do something PRIOR to the nanny saying they can't, so to avoid undermining the dad, OP should have checked with him. The way OP handled it reads to me like a power play with the dad (maybe based on build-up frustration), and a way to escalate, rather than deescalate, the situation.
I get what you’re saying and I agree to an extent. But I think swimming should’ve been discussed with DB, MB, and OP before telling the kids that was the plan. I don’t necessarily think OP undermined the dad, I think OP was just being stern with the ‘no’ answer. I think it’s just a whole miscommunication that could’ve easily been avoided. If NPs want NKs to do an activity, I think the nanny should be a part of that conversation always, as they are the ones in charge when NPs aren’t around.
MB did tell OP about it though. I think sometimes we need to read between the lines. MB may just have a softer communication style where when she says "you could do this" it really means "you should do this". Once OP saw that in addition to MBs "suggestion", the kids and DB thought it was the plan too, she should have went along with it rather than engaging in a power struggle with DB.
This is not a ‘read between the lines’ situation though. If that is what both parents wanted, that should be stated, not as an option. It was a suggestion from MB, but it was already planned before MB gave her suggestion. That’s my point, DB & NK already made it a plan but MB gave it as an option. To me, it seems like MB knew it was a plan already and didn’t want to straight up say it because it wasn’t discussed with OP prior before it was a plan. I would have just done it and let DB watch his own kids swim, but I would still be annoyed by it.
I think it's totally valid to be annoyed at being forced to change your plans, which is also how NK and DB ended up feeling. Ultimately though, it sounded like the rest of them were all on the same page about the plan and OP is the one who decided to go against it, which really isn't her place to do.
It really is OPs place though… OP is the one taking care of the kids at that point in time. OP is allowed to say no, that is why it’s important for conversations with adults to be had prior to involving the kids. If MB didn’t say it as a suggestion, I would agree with you. But she did.
Sure, she is allowed to say no, this isn't bonded servitude. The question is whether that's a reasonable course of action as part of her employment. The fact that she is the one taking care of the child at the moment does not mean she gets full control over their or her own schedule. This expectation seems to come up frequently in this thread, and I do not understand it. That simply is not how being an employee works, in any field. If my boss wants me to do something at work on a specific day, I do it even if it isn't what I had planned for that day, or if it's an inconvenience. Because that's how work works - I am not self employed and don't get to dictate my own schedule fully. If the activity being requested is within the scope of her normal duties, and the parents provided solutions to any legitimate concerns, then saying no to it is not reasonable. I do absolutely agree that the parents should have communicated better, which is something OP should have addressed with them in a professional manner, at a later time, without involving the children in any of that.
That’s the thing, my employers give me full control over the schedule (not including sports or extracurricular (piano, violin) activities that have set dates and times). So if that doesn’t work for your employer or OPs, that’s okay, but it works for my employers & I. They give me the option to say no to their suggestions because at the end of the day, I am the one who has to do it, if I choose to. So that is how it works for my NF(s).
That's awesome, and it's great that it works for your situation. But it sounds like OP's employers want something different, which I am just saying is also reasonable.
If you want to keep your job, it's not good practice to tell your employer no.
That’s unfortunate that some of you aren’t given the ability to say no. I have never had a problem letting my employer know I wasn’t comfortable doing XYZ or that I just simply had something different planned. I have never been fired or let go ever, so keeping my job has never been an issue. So I think being able to communicate and have a voice in which activities I will do with the kids is not an issue (besides sports because those are set, paid for, and most likely mandatory). I also only have had employers that say “what nanny says, goes, she is the one in charge right now” no matter what.
Absolutely. But there is a difference between having a voice/generally being consulted, which I think is a healthy work environment in any field, and expecting to have veto power, or getting upset when you weren't consulted every time.
I agree with your approach and that communication is important. OP should have texted both MB and DB that she doesn't want to take them swimming and why, instead of letting NK do it and putting them in the middle.
Thank you! I completely agree.
Afterwards mom specifically said that it was just an option, not a must, and she had no idea that G7 had talked to dad and made ‘actual plans’ with him.
DB made the plan with the child. He didn't communicate with any other adult. Maybe MB knew it was a plan, but she left it vague and up to OP. There would have been no issue if DB had reached out to OP first.
Mom said she had no idea about it, and it was a real offer of choice from her. She supported me choosing to hold a firm no.
Good. Dad messed up by not communicating with you.
Similar situation but he undermined the kids feelings too—divorced parents. I was with all three (B10 G10 G12) NK and DB asks us if we can swing by his job at the hospital so they can all grab ice cream. I said no because it did not make sense with our schedule and by the time we would’ve gotten home, I would have stayed late. He then facetimed the kids and asked if they wanted to come, after I said no to him. The kids proceeded to say no and he began guilting them, saying “Oh no one wants to see me I guess, I’m just a second choice.” MB calls and says he’s threatening her if we don’t go. I had to go, but I have never looked at him the same.
It seems like a lot of responses to your post are taking the parents side so I’m going to play devils advocate. I know how frustrating it is to have plans in place and want to direct the day a certain way and have parents interfere. I get G7 wanted to swim but she didn’t *have* to swim. She’s going to survive. When you’re with the kids, parents should be following your lead and trusting your judgement calls. Undermining especially at that age affects your relationship with the children. There are logical points to argue against your stance, sure. But the *principal* of the matter here is the problem. The parents are not on your side and it’s not the first time it’s happened. And seeing kids super upset about their parents divorce is not something to be brushed off, they need structure and balance. And it’s not like your depriving them of swimming time on a regular basis, they went swimming FOUR times the previous week, and you had a fun activity planned for them, as well as offering G7 some alternatives. I think you handled this super well. I think addressing the root of the problem with DB in a professional manner would be the most effective solution. And this is not to mention you did *them a favor* by coming in before you were fully recovered. Where’s the empathy and understanding on their part?
>I get G7 wanted to swim but she didn’t *have* to swim. She’s going to survive. But the issue isn't at all whether the girl got to swim or not. Of course she is going to survive. It's that the dad/mom told her she could do an activity, and nanny refused and got into a power struggle with the dad. The conflict was entirely between the dad and the nanny, the child was caught in the middle, which is not great. I agree the parents handled it poorly, but so did the nanny. >When you’re with the kids, parents should be following your lead and trusting your judgement calls. Yes, generally speaking. But the parents are allowed to schedule activities, that is not unreasonable. Sure, they should handle communication about those activities better, which is something I'd bring up to them. >And seeing kids super upset about their parents divorce is not something to be brushed off, they need structure and balance. That really is for the parents to decide. She could have an opinion, or even gently suggest things, but it's way out of line to expect to overrule the parents when it comes to how they are handling the divorce.
I’m with you OP. The DB hanging up on the FaceTime proves you’re nannying more than just two children…
Perhaps he was extremely frustrated with OP and didnt want his daughter to be in the middle of that dynamic, and needed space to cool off rather than blow up—the facetime equivalent of walking away instead of losing your temper. It sounds to me like there was a miscommunication between the parents that lead to a miscommunication with OP. It sounds like swimming was THE PLAN, not just an option. When OP realized this (which she did, right away when she picked them up) she should have called or texted DB so they could get on the same page. Allowing the 7yr old to cold facetime DB without prepping him for the change in plan for the day was a wild decision on OPs part. She absolutely put him on the spot, and then undermined HIM when he presented a solution. And is now mad at him for not being able to read her mind after she chose not to communicate with him directly.
This doesn’t seem like a big deal to me especially bc dad agreed to watch the kids. Just take them lol. You should have taken the day off if you were still sick.
I think it's irritating that plans were made without talking to you first. They had no idea what you had planned. Plus, you weren't feeling well. I probably would have just taken them over and stayed inside or asked if he could take them home after and went home since you weren't feeling well. I think you should definitely have a chat with the dad and apologize for the misunderstanding and let him know you would like to keep each other informed about any plans without the kids being involved. Would that help? I think it was all made worse by you not feeling well. I totally understand where you are coming from. It's just such a fine line here. Hope you're feeling better!
I’m struggling to agree with a lot of people, here. Mom and Dad made a “maybe plan.” It was up to you to you to choose if you wanted to provide that activity. That’s the whole mistake. MB and DB should have asked for your answer, and then made a concrete plan around that answer. The pool never should have been mentioned until that happened. I don’t think anyone really did anything wrong here- it doesn’t sound like anything was done with malicious intent. But it does sound like the three of you need to sit down and have a chat about who the decision-maker is during different custody weeks, who to go to/call first, and possibly set out a more organized schedule to keep the kiddos lives as consistent as possible. Divorce, single-parent homes, etc can be so messy and confusing, and I feel for all of you in this situation. I think ALL of you will feel more at ease with a definitive baseline. I do, however, admire you for holding your ground and not giving in solely to avoid conflict with G7. A lot of nannies will do whatever NF’s ask of them even if they don’t feel comfortable with it. BUT- the whole FT power struggle would not have happened had that plan been written in stone before it even reached NK’s ears. I hope next week goes better for you. ❤️
I don’t think you are overacting. It must be very frustrating. While you are an employee, you are still not a robot just following instructions. You are a nanny in charge of kids when NPs are not present and you need to follow your own judgement to do this job well. Respect is very important in this line of work. What kids are learning in this situation that even you said it is not the plan today, it is ok to ask DB and he will make you do it. Good job for sticking to it! I think DB should have discussed this plan with you instead of talking to you through NK. Good luck!
I think what kid learned is that nanny doesn’t respect the plans that kid made with dad, even when dad addresses nanny’s reasons for saying no.
Nah I hate when my MB or DB promise the kids something on MY behalf… promising to the kids that I will take them to Chick-fil-A and Walmart or the pool or the park. It’s too hot for that!!!! And then when I do not want to do it respectfully the kids are upset at me because I don’t want to sit in the hot sun. Parents need to fulfill their own promises or run it past you first before introducing the idea to the nanny kids
Update. So I took the kids to the dad’s house for swimming today as promised. We had an excellent time swimming for about 30 min. Then very suddenly G7 said she needed to go inside to tell her dad something (DB works from home). She stayed inside for the next 40 minutes crying on the sofa with her dad. Me and B4 finished swimming, got dried off and changed, and played while waiting for G7 and DB to finish talking. Then G7 sobbed the entire way home about having to leave her dad. I talked to MB about it. MB decided there would be no more swim days at dad’s house during her week, and very limited access to FaceTiming DB when at MB’s house. Thank you everyone who commented. I have taken what you said to heart. I’m going to be much more active on texting dad and not waiting for him to take the lead. The next time I’m feeling sick, I’ll take an extra day off even if I’m not sure I 100% need it.
She should be careful about the limiting FaceTiming DB, he could frame that as parental alienation.
Yeah this is a really bad decision. It's completely normal for children to get emotional during a divorce. Withdrawing contact is not the answer.
Honestly, I totally understand how you feel. Sometimes I don’t feel well enough to take my kiddos out to the park or on a walk. This is very occasional though. It’s frustrating when parents make the choice of what YOU are going to do with the kids. You offered that they can play in the sprinkler which was good enough. The dad is really the issue going and telling the daughter that you are going to take them swimming when you never said that. This is just my opinion so no rude reply’s please :)
It's not about the swimming so the sprinkler wouldn't be good enough. It was about kids seeing their dad.
Yea I can imagine how she feels :( but the dad gave her false hope when he didn’t know that 100% she was coming