Jump to content

Nanny Needed - Thursdays 1 Day/week - from January 17th


jpeckmum

Recommended Posts

We are looking for a happy and loving part time Nanny 1 day a week, from January 17th 2019. We have a smiley 16 month old daughter. The current day we need is Thursday from 8:00- 18:30pm. We currently have a Nanny we love from Tuesday-Wednesday but she is unable to work Thursday, hence we are only looking for 1 day/week.


We prefer a Nanny share where the children are looked after at our or another child's house. No more than 2 young children per Nanny please. We live in the Peckham Rye neighbourhood near Bellenden road so have easy access to shops and parks.


As a nanny you would:


- Organise and supervise playtime including reading, singing, and other stimulating games suitable for their development

- Arrange outings to the local park, playgroups, and other fun activities (sensory classes, etc)

- Making sure children get daily naps

- Prepare well balanced and nutritious meals appropriate for the needs of the children

- Clean and tidy the nursery, playroom and other areas as agreed with the parents



As with most families we will require id, proof of address, a DBS check, first aid certificate, and references. If you are Ofsted registered or happy to sign up to tax free childcare that would be a plus.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Discussions

    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...