Mum ridiculed over 'ridiculous' advert looking for babysitter at 28p an hour

People have called out the 'illegal pay' and long hours (stock)
-Credit: (Image: Getty Images)

We all love a bargain.

But when it comes to childcare, paying rock bottom prices isn't advisable. We all want to get the best care possible for our little ones, even though it's expensive.

With this being said, people weren't impressed when a woman hoped to find a babysitter for a ridiculous 28p an hour. The lass, from Arizona in the US, also wanted someone qualified in CPR and first aid.

But unsurprisingly, she was met with a barrage of criticism instead. Her advert, which was posted on Reddit, reads: "A family in Flagstaff, Arizona, is looking for a live-in nanny to care for their two children, ages three and five, for 55 hours per week. The job offers a salary of $600 (£472) per month, which breaks down to about $0.36 (28p) an hour.

"Responsibilities include transporting the children, preparing meals, and maintaining the home's cleanliness. The position includes accommodation from Sunday evening to Thursday evening. Requirements include a valid driver's license, reliable vehicle, clean background check, and CPR and first aid certification."

On the viral platform, people questioned who would even apply for the position. They asked: "This offer raises questions about fair compensation and realistic job expectations. What are your thoughts?"

In response, people branded the pay "illegal" and slammed the mum for her hiring process. One commented: "Even ignoring minimum wage, 55 hours a week, and you're basically on your own for living accommodations for two days a week? How is this nanny supposed to provide for herself with literally the same wages as a prisoner gets?

"Like, I've heard of students and similar taking on jobs like this for less than minimum wage for the place to stay, but they're usually afforded enough "off" time to go to school or work a second job or whatever. There's literally nothing you could do extra with the schedule they're asking."

Another said 28p an hour might have been a great wage back in 1924 – but not in 2024. And a third added: "Damn. I was a live-in nanny in 1988 to 1989 for a family with a two-year-old and a four-year-old. I had access to a car, drove to some activities, did the boys' laundry and picked up after the boys, made some meals. But they had weekly cleaning so I didn't do any deep cleaning, had Sundays and Mondays off. I was paid $250 (£196) a week. Which is worth about $662 (£521) now according to the internet calculator for buying power. Their rate of pay is indenture servitude."