In article m, Brandon
Sommerville says...

On 8 Jan 2004 10:37:49 -0800, Banty wrote:

On the other hand, I used to hire a couple of young babysitters (10 year old
kids who live on my block) to watch my son for an hour or two, provided that
their parents were in the house too, in case of emergencies (this being
understood with the parents). When the father of one found that I paid a 22
year old babysitter, who sometimes does overnights, more than his 10 year old,
he got mad and sent his son for 'the difference'. I sent him back. Dad called.
I told his Dad that, by design of the babysitting job, his boy takes on
considerably less responsibility than the 22 year old - I'm not relying on the
10 year old for responsible action in emergencies; he's not on tap to feed my
son; he doesn't have to get him ready for school. So, that was the end of his
son babysitting. IOW, "no deal".

It sounds like you are relying on the 10 yr old to get their parents
in an emergency, which would be pretty responsible. The dad didn't
have any right to request more money for past work as it was paid at
the negotiated rate, but he did have the right (and probably the
obligation) to ask that the future rate be the rate of the 22 yr old
since that was what you were willing to pay for hourly services of
equivalent responsibility (safety of your child and all).

No, not really. First of all, it's the *Dad* who had approached me with the
idea as a way to introduce his sons to some responsibility. That isn't
necessarily the most important point (except to establish that I wasn't casting
for bargains), but at that time I told him 10 was too young unless my son can go
to his house but an adult is always around. I gave a price; Dad agreed. So, no,
I don't view this as a babysitting job on the order of someone whose experience
and householding abilities (dinner, off to school) I was buying in the case of
the 22 year old. And Dad didn't bring up any concern that he be paid.

In one case a kid is setting time aside to basically play with another younger
kid; in the other someone is holding down a household for many more hours. This
isn't like a 13 year old clearing a sidewalk vs. a 35 year old clearing a
sidewalk.


Essentially the parents are responsible for your child and simply
delegating the actual watching to their children.

Except that particular arrangement wasnt' the one offered. I didn't contract
with the dad for services for him to delegate.

If for some reason I thought the boy was an amazingly capable and mature 10 year
old, and I had him come to my house and his services were avaiable for long
hours including overnights - then, yes, the fact that he's 10 and not 22 should
not have affected how I pay him. But that's simply (and impossibly) not the
case. What he could offer was limited, though useful, and I paid him
accordingly, and it was agreed. Until Dad learned through the grapevine what I
paid the 22 year old, whose services, knowledge, experience, and availability
was on a significantly different category in my view. (BTW, one lesson: - don't
talk money with your neighbors - really, sometimes I think I shouldn't even
mention the current price of carrots in the supermarket.)

Cheers,
Banty