I wrote earlier this week about how child care is becoming a luxury that many families can't afford; and in the post I predicted that, in a prolonged downturn, "full-time child care will be a perk that only the wealthiest two-income families even consider." In yesterday's Wall Street Journal, news that the recession has hit, not just child care agencies, but also the least recession-proof workers of all: nannies.

Unlike child care centers, nannies are often employed by one-income families, and those two-income families whose cash flow never seems (from the outside, at least) to be in question. The Journal has the sad story of a woman whose employers (with their six-bedroom, nine-bath home, with its private movie theatre, its beachfront lushness) "tearfully" laid her off after having had to cut expenses 75%. When children are in school full-time, nannies become less of a necessity, even for the upper-middle class and decidedly upper-class folks. If they ever were a necessity to begin with.

It sucks that nannies have to be laid off. I feel for the people, often immigrants who have a hard time finding jobs outside of household work (where social security numbers are rarely required). However, I have a hard time feeling for the tearful employers who now have to cut down on household help. Maybe the parents will have to spend a little more time with their children now. Sniff sniff.

Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Timing Your Spending

How to pay less by changing when you purchase.

View Course »

Getting out of debt

Everyone hates debt. Get out of it.

View Course »

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum