29 April, 2011

Borders Bookstore - W North Ave, Chicago

bad nanny sighting 5
December 2010
Borders Bookstore 755 W North Ave, Chicago. Around noon.

Sorry I cannot give exact date. Originally was not going to report but then I reviewed photos again and thought different. Apparently this was one of the great nanny hideouts where the nannies ignored the children and used their cell phones. I was quite surprised but decided to watch the scene.

In the first photo you can see a black nanny in her late 50's hunched over using her phone. On the floor in front of her is a Caucasian baby girl approx 8 months old with brown hair, sitting flopped over forward because she cannot sit up unsupported. She was completely ignored for over 1/2 hour while nanny texted/used cell.

Next girl was a white girl with blonde hair in twenties with a boy of approx 2/12 that was running around with nanny barely glancing up when boy is trying to talk to her. Mostly scenes of neglect, but I know I wouldn't pay someone for this. Just a concerned mom.

Photobucket

Photobucket

54 comments:

nycmom said...

I appreciate these sitings, OP. This is exactly the kind of thing I originally started using ISYN for. Of course, obvious abuse is much worse but I think that is easier to pick up on. It's the subtle texting, cell-phone using, disengaged caregiver I worry about. No, I wouldn't fire someone over just this post, but I would look a lot more closely.

aNYCnannynotsohappy said...

I sure hope the next time I'm at Borders or Barnes and Noble, and decide to take a second to text someone back that I don't get caught and some random stranger takes my picture and posts it. Because apparently, I'll be considered a "bad" nanny.

I understand sitting on your phone the whole time texting/calling is bad. I just don't understand someone taking my picture and posting it for the world to see. So rude, so wrong, and the reason this website should be taken down, because, it should not be allowed.

MissDee said...

Very well said, NYC Mom. It kind of makes me wonder when parents state in ads for both nannies and babysitters that they are "seeking an active individual who enjoys working with children. Our children enjoy puzzles/books/art..." When a qualified individual with years of experience and the park bench nanny apply, the park bench nanny always wins. Park bench nannies are so good about lying to their bosses about their day, somehow they walk out with a job offer after initially presenting themselves as a loving professional nanny who cares about making a difference in the life of a child. The sad part is the parents cannot see through the smoke and mirrors. A few months into the position, the nanny's true colors appear: lazy, park bench, texting all day. Does the minimal amount of work with the children to make it appear to the parents that she worked hard all day, when in reality she was ignoring the child, collecting the paycheck.

The same can be said for babysitters. Parents claim they want a sitter to engage their child with activities for a few hours, even though there is a difference between a nanny and a sitter. They also claim they want an individual have a education or child development major, and like working with children. When someone with years of exeperience and a different school applies, the parents become imtimidated at the thought of a professional entering their home to babysit. A college student with no to mimimal experience is hired, often not able to handle the job, given the short time frame.

I am always looking for babysitting jobs in addition to my part-time job. I have 27 years experience in childcare as a babysitter, childcare teacher and nanny, can make five different kinds of paint, read a book to children that keeps them entertained using "silly voices", and can make food out of playdough. I don't have a college degree, am not attending the prestigous local university and am close to 40. I have however, spent the last 13 years in daycare working in a variety of classrooms, and socioeconomic settings, which I think make me a diverse childcare provider. I also started babysitting in middle school, which adds to my experience. However, when parents seeking a sitter see 27 years of experience on a resume, they don't even bother to get to know me, much less give me a chance. A mother sent me this message yesterday regaring babysitting:

"We got a large number of applicants and decided on a different sitter. Thanks for applying."

Her ad stated she wanted someone who likes interacting with children, and pursing a degree in early childhood education. I possess both "qualifications".

I am sure these parents made a list of "qualifications". Look what they got for a nanny.

missdeemiltownssupastar said...

When I move to Chicago I will make sure to watch the nannies. When they see me interacting with my charges, they may take my picture and post something about me here doing my job!

WeCan'tAllComeAndGoByBubble said...

I am a Nanny, and never text or take personal phone calls when the children are awake. I DO however, answer calls/texts from the Parents. They sometimes call/text when we are at a public play area. Sometimes they talk to me for 20 minutes or we will text back and fourth 20 times.
I had an interesting experience 2 weeks ago with a Mom.
I took my charges (ages 3 and 4) to a large indoor play area. I played with them for the first 30 minutes, and then told them to play with the other kids while I sat down to take a break. They happily did. Their Mom started texting me, and I was texting her back. A Mom who was there with her 4/5ish year old daughter, came right up in my face, and said, "Excuse me! Are you a Nanny?" I told her that I was. She then clicked a picure of me with her phone, and said that I was a horrible Nanny for using my phone! I told her that I was texting the children's Mother. She laughed in my face, and said there was no way that I was texting their Mother. I didn't say anything else. I got down and started playing with my charges again. The Woman came up behind me and said, "just so you know, I am going to post this picture on the web for all to see!" My charges stopped and looked at the woman. Another Mom came up to try to calm the woman down. I really didnt want my picture posted, so I offered to call my Boss, and have it confirmed that I was being truthful. I called, and explained the situation to my Boss. I then handed my phone to the hysterical Woman, and my Boss told her off!! The Woman took her daughter and left. I felt violated and disrespected! I let my charges play a little more, and then we went home for lunch. On the way home, my 4 year old charge said, "why was that lady with yellow hair being a meany head to you?" I told her that sometimes big people have tantrums and need time outs too :-)
I am not saying these Nannies in your post were talking to their bosses. That poor little baby needed help, and the Nanny looked very lazy! We just have to be careful with what we assume sometimes.

MissDee said...

Bubble: That must have been an interesting experience. Chatting with MB is no different than the parent who calls their child's daycare or preschool checking in on their child. That mother apparently doesn't understand childcare.

unicornsparkleprincess said...

i agree with a NYCnannynotsohappy

i love my charges very much, and am ALWAYS aware of their activities and where they are or what they are doing. however, i can always answer a quick text or something, half of which are from the parents. i think unless the child gets hurt or is seriously ignored when the child wants or needs something, then that most definitely calls for a 'bad nanny sighting'. it seems like people are quick to call it otherwise when they see a cellphone.

NVMom-movedtoTX said...

True, one has to be careful when looking at any adult/child interaction. But the OP was clear, an infant sat for a 1/2 hour unassisted. That's just wrong. For the second sighting, she said the nanny ignored the boy while he talked to her. She could have either stopped what she was doing and gave full attention or at least told him when she would be done, esp. if she was texting her boss.

unicornsparkleprincess said...

@NVMom
i totally hear what you're saying, my comment was mostly in regards to comments i've seen in this post and in others in regards to cell phone use.

j.d.c.f.b. said...

How does anyone really know that this baby sat hunched over for 1/2 hour? Did it ever occur to anyone that the OP could be exaggerating a tad bit? Picture proves nothing, both of them as a matter of fact.

nanny2 said...

I guess I just work with very active kids, but if I sat around like that at B&N, they would have every.single.book off the shelf and would be taking a joyride on the escalators. I'm always relieved when I can get them to sit down and actually read some books!
As far as the infant is concerned...honestly if my baby was just going to sit around like that without any interaction, I would prefer she do it at the park (where at least she's getting fresh air) or at home (where it's probably cleaner than the floor of a store).

nycmom said...

j.d.c.f.b,

No one knows anything with certainty on ANY posting (barring a video) because the only one there was the OP. However, I generally choose to take the OP's at their word since there is much potential positive to be gained by doing so and little downside. Any good employer viewing a concerning siting is going to do it with good judgment and a sense of the nanny as a whole. I do understand cases where an OP might have a personal vendetta type motivation to lie, but those are rare and certainly don't seem to apply to something that happened 4 months ago with two separate nannies.

MissMannah said...

Anonymous...are you projecting your own problems on these lazy nannies? If a nanny is ignoring her charge, I'm not really going to care about her point of view or if she works long hours.

unicornsparkleprincess said...

people sure like to throw around the word 'lazy'.

MissMannah said...

I see two ladies sitting around texting rather than paying attention to their charges. In other words, they aren't doing their jobs. Do you have a better definition of lazy?

aNYCnannynotsohappy said said...

So again I ask....If I take a text/call from my BOSS, for one minute...I'm considered a lazy nanny??

unicornsparkleprincess said...

again, missmannah i am not necessarily referring to these nannies pictured, i'm talking about IN GENERAL when it comes cellphone use. but i also don't know the whole story in regards to this siting because i wasn't there and i don't know how long the child was not being interacted with.

Just pissed about this said...

I find it so wrong that the OP put this lady's face on the web like this and while you were busy snapping pictures and investigating the "nanny hangout" where the hell were you children? I hope you were paying attention to them?

nanny2 said...

It's not that hard to notice a toddler running around unsupervised and talking loudly, asking tons of questions with no response. Even if you are there with your own kid reading books. Some people are capable of multitasking, unlike, apparently, the people pictured here.
I hate to say it, though, but the second picture could definitely be a mom.

MissMannah said...

Maybe you were talking in general, but I wasn't. I specifically referred to the picture. I call 'em like I see 'em. I suspect one too many nannies here in the comments section are getting up in arms because they are projecting. If you're not in the picture, why are you getting upset? No, of course I don't think taking a quick call or text makes you lazy. It makes you human. Ignoring your charge makes you lazy. I already said that!

unicornsparkleprincess said...

i'm pretty sure we're going in circles here.

Reese said...

The first woman (black woman in her fifties) is actually sitting in front of her charge which is a lot closer than I see other nannies sit. If the child is slumped over and in pain, he or she would be crying, but it seems as if the child is just sitting and being a typical eight-month old here. My kids used to do this when they were that age and they are fine now.
In the second photo, I agree that unless we know w/out a shadow of a doubt that this nanny was being negligent, it is unfair to post her picture since she is clearly shown here and if she were to find out, a defamation lawsuit would surely follow. Imagine if someone posted a clear as day photo of you w/out knowing 100% the situation. Perhaps this woman was distracted this particular day, maybe she is worried about her mother who has cancer or maybe she is having health issues, etc. It could be anything. Perhaps she is sick, but had to work since she needs the income and/or doesn't want to put the parents out. It may be just a bad day..who really knows?

As a nanny, I get calls/texts throughout the day from my bosses inquiring about the child's meal intake, diaper activity, sleeping schedule and general disposition. I always get dirty looks from other people when they see me talking on my mobile phone or texting. It's like they are saying, "What an irresponsible nanny...to be talking to her boyfriend while ignoring her charge!!" People are too quick to judge another's actions these days.

CaliNanny said...

How do you even know the 2nd lady was a nanny?

NJmom said...

I think the first lady is obviously a nanny and doing nothing wrong. The Second lady is definitely not a nanny, and totally a mom. These pictures should be taken off this website. Let me tell you that if I found my picture on this website, I would take legal action. Unless I am physically harming the child, no ones picture should be in view. Their faces should at least be blocked or something. I'm telling you, legal action if someone ever takes my picture and posts on this website.

Reese said...

I especially think the second picture of the blond lady is really violating her privacy. If she were seen truly abusing or neglecting her child, then that is one thing. However, she is clearly facing the child in question here so from what I see, she is clearly watching him from an up close vantage point.

OP, you state that she is not being very attentive. Well if that is the case, you need to show a picture that proves your point. This one you submitted proves nothing to us.

Just pissed about this said...

It's also not hard to mind your own business unless they hit the child. I'm not a nanny I work in a daycare center we're not allowed to have our cell phones on at all during work hours however it would be nice to be able to take an important phone call during the day rather than finding out someone died in your family at 5:31pm

Florentina said...

OP, I read then re-read what you wrote and I don't even see any neglect in both photos. In the first one, the nanny is clearly sitting in front of the child and yes, she is looking at something, but the child is clearly within her reach. You claim the child was slumped the entire thirty minutes, but he or she probably was fine. If they weren't fine, you would have heard continuous squealing which would probably have gotten them kicked out by management. The second woman is more than likely the mother and even if she is the nanny, what is she doing wrong? Again, she is clearly in front of the child and the child appears to have adequate supervision. I don't see any neglect by his body language.

Stop defaming people who are doing nothing wrong and posting stupid stuff like this. What a waste of space.

MissMannah said...

The OP said the woman in the 2nd picture wasn't listening to the boy when he was trying to talk to her. If she's the nanny, and you're right, we don't really know, then that means she's not doing her job.

Just pissed, does your daycare not have a telephone? I'm sure they'd let you give out the number to your family for emergencies. If my boss even sees our cell phone, we immediately get written up. That's because some of the younger staff was caught hiding in corners, texting or playing on facebook all day.

Anni said...

Agreeing with everyone saying that a baby can sit "slumped over" like that and be perfectly fine and just playing. Babies are very flexible, and while you might not want to sit like that, a lot of adult women can't do a full split and most babies can.

I also agree that I'd be pretty incensed if I had to contact the mother (and I had a mother who would text and call every 5 seconds) and someone shot me and called me a bad nanny.

Marypoppin'pills said...

Jane and I have gone over this before but for some of you that may not know:

The average person is caught on a surveillance camera up to 12 times per day.

You are legally allowed to photograph a person in public... and that includes libraries, beaches, parks, etc.

You may not however, take a picture of someone when reasonable privacy is expected, ie: a restroom, dressing or changing room, etc.

Understand that when an OP sends in a sighting, we are giving them the benefit of the doubt because we were not there. This OP stated she watched these Nannies for a period of time long enough to warrant a complaint.

Marypoppin'pills said...

nycmom,

I wish I knew what this glitch was all about... I saw your comment in my mailbox but it didn't post to this thread for some reason. I hope you don't mind my putting it up for you.

I appreciate your thoughts on this subject and believe you expressed your opinion much better than I did:

nycmom has left a new comment on your post "Borders Bookstore - W North Ave, Chicago":

I believe this issue has been addressed by JD and MPP many times and I know I have also researched it. It is not illegal to take someone's photo in public (i.e. not on their own personal property) and post it online. Google maps has numerous photos of people in background pics. You can complain; you can be angry, but you won't win a lawsuit.

Secondly, I think the outrage about these postings tends to come from nannies who fear they could be caught in similar situations. I truly never see the nannies that I "know" from years on here - and am confident are good people/caregivers (MissDee, MissMannah, Tales, Jacqui) - complain about these postings.

I know this viewpoint will be unpopular given that for reasons I still don't fully understand this site is 95% nannies, but I can't imagine why you would personally feel threatened by this if you don't do it. The potential good for the child outweighs the possibility that a nanny might need to discuss this issue with their employer. I guarantee if my nanny were posted on here with one of these pics, I would not fire her. I would discuss it and take it as one piece of information in the whole picture of her employment.

OP did not make any inflammatory accusations. She simply described what she witnessed:

"nannies ignored the children and used their cell phones."

"8 months old with brown hair, sitting flopped over forward because she cannot sit up unsupported. She was completely ignored for over 1/2 hour while nanny texted/used cell."

"boy of approx 2/12 that was running around with nanny barely glancing up when boy is trying to talk to her. Mostly scenes of neglect, but I know I wouldn't pay someone for this."

OP is quite clear that this is not one text or one brief call, but a pattern of disinterest/neglect lasting at least 30 minutes. Why not give the employers this information and let them address it?

Posted by nycmom to I saw your nanny at May 3, 2011 7:55:00 PM

_________________________________

As a sidenote about Google Maps:

When I looked up my house... I faintly saw my freshly cut grass, my motorcycle in the driveway... and my neighbor sitting in a lawn chair in the front yard, lol.

nycmom said...

Thanks MPP! I did notice it had not posted, but was too tired to retype it.

Regarding the glitch, after having it happen 2-3 times now, I think this is the cause: When I click "Preview" to read my post before posting (for grammar, etc), then click "Publish Your Comment," it does not post. If I just click "Publish..." directly without previewing, it always posts. Don't know if that helps!

unicornsparkleprincess said...

why is it bad that there are a lot of nannies on here? i feel that there are not enough nanny sites out there that offer SO much feedback and that's why i like this site so much.

nycmom said...

Unicorn,

I did not say it was BAD that the site is mostly nannies. I said I simply don't understand why the demographics have shifted that way. There were more moms here years ago, and there were a lot more sitings. It has now become more of a nanny support board, which is fine and not bad, just different than my expectations. I stay out of habit and to learn about things I can do to be a better employer, but there really aren't many employers on here otherwise (though there are a few other parents who are prior nannies).

Marypoppin'pills said...

nycmom,

You bring up a very good point. This site was originally meant to alert Parents about bad Nannies. We do not mind that there is a good support system for those that visit this Blog because it may help them to be better Nannies and that still accomplishes our goal of protecting the children... however, we will continue to keep ISYN's original intent and that is to report those caregivers that provide less than adequate supervision for children held in their trust.

I said...

I'm neither a nanny nor a mom. I just find this site interesting to read. Also, I learn a lot! =]

Tanya said...

You guys are totally missing the point. People on here do not have a problem with posting someone's picture online without permission (though I think it is very unethical to do so....), we have a problem with posting a picture of someone online and then saying derogatory things about them that are just opinions. I spoke to my Business Law Professor tonight about this very same thing and she told us that someone cannot sue just for posting a pic, however if defamatory comments are included with the pic, the person online can sue someone for defamation of character. Remember Katie Holmes just won a lawsuit because Star published a photo of her stating she used drugs. That is the same offense as posting a picture of someone in a public forum claiming they are neglecting a child.

Tanya said...

My Professor stressed that in order for a lawsuit to be successful, the defamatory words need to be specifically related to the person in the picture..they cannot be random.

Taylor said...

@Tanya: I have heard the same thing as well at school, but am not really sure about laws. It may differ from State to State. On an ethical level, I just couldn't live with myself if I posted a picture of someone I didn't know online just because I "thought" she was ignoring her charge. Unless you know for sure this is indeed a childcare provider, then you have no right to identify her as one. Also, by posting this picture online for such a minor offense, what you did OP could ruin many people's lives. If others in her town see this, she may not be able to get another nanny position and her current family may fire her. She may have a family to support and bills to pay and your actions could cause her a lot of grief. Unless you know for sure that a child is being abused by a nanny, then you have no right to post these pics.

By the way, I have seen a lot of "Nanny Cam" footage on the News of nannies doing worse things than this. I have seen nannies throwing children down on the floor, the couch and infants being hit. Yet, in all cases the nannies are never prosecuted because it does not look like a crime has been committed.

Anonymous said...

I am the original OP that posted this sighting. Wow! Quite the discussion. Let me clarify some things. I have worked as a private investigator and can professionally analyze a behavior/scene quite quickly. I didnt do this lightly and only posted because I was sure of the facts.
First, both women were definitely nannies because I asked. Second they were both using their phones the ENTIRE 1/2 HOUR looking down. I had to leave and I can only assume this continued on after my departure. When the toddler in orange tried to interact with her many times she did not stop or look up to talk to him. She would give a rare glance and then sometimes try to answer him while still staring at the phone and texting.
The second nanny with the baby was sitting in the corner away from the view of most patrons in store with good reason. I had a hard time getting that photo but the baby is in an uncomfortable position and fidgeting because her legs are straight in front of her and she is bent forward with her chest laying on her legs unable to get herself up out of this position. She had no interaction the entire time.
The whole point of them choosing that area was to be able to use the cell phone. It is quiet there & mostly out of sight.
If some people are ok with this that is fine. Most people I know are not. If they were both talking/texting their employers over 1/2 hour..... well, lets just say I'll hand in my license. I said from the beginning it was mostly neglect. Nothing to get too riled up about.

another nanny said...

Ha, OP is a private investigator! FTW.

Sometimes I have to read and respond to texts from my employer while on the job. Rarely I might need to return a personal text while with the kids. I am never really worried that someone might think I am neglecting the children while I do so...because I'm not. I text as necessary, while making sure to keep the kids in my sight and also responding to them if they're talking to me. Non-essential communication can wait until another time (e.g. when the kids are back in the stroller and we're walking home)

Blah Blah Blah said...

I wish people would mind their own damn busy and pay attention unless someone is SERIOUSLY BEING HURT!

NJNanny said...

SO glad I'm not a nanny in Chicago. Apparently taking a few texts/calls from my boss, or whomever, will get my picture posted for all to see. BE WARNED CHI-Town nannies...Former Private Investigator turned nanny in on the prowl!

ESQ said...

I'm so amused at how absolutely retarded most of you are about the law. You're going to sue because someone took your picture? Seriously, how stupid are you?

Marypoppin'pills said...

Badgering the OP is exactly why most are afraid to send in a Sighting.

The intent of ISYN was to help children that were being neglected or abused and that is starting to fall away. Traffic is higher than it's ever been but if we can't serve it's original purpose then all of this other shit is just fluff.

I am not sure how much longer this Blog is going to last...

Tales from the (Nanny)Hood said...

With so many nannies here, and a majority of them seeming to feel the need to leap to the defense of any nanny sighted possibly doing something other than caring properly for their charges, anyone sending in a sighting to be posted needs to have thick skin.

I think we all know that it POSSIBLE a nanny on her cell is checking in with the parents, or that a nanny sitting on a park bench while her under 2 charges play is POSSIBLY trying to encourage independence, or that a nanny yelling at her charge is POSSIBLY having a bad day and doesn't mean to be a jerk.

So really, we don't have to be reminded of all the POSSIBLE scenarios every time a nanny sighting is posted. We all know the POSSIBILITIES, and we all know that there are truly crummy nannies out there who shouldn't be caring for kids.

So ease up people. If you're a nanny, don't post your knee jerk reaction. Think a bit, and consider whether maybe, just maybe, the person who submitted an account of bad nannying might have a point.

Of course, if the behavior described in the sighting mirrors YOUR behavior on the job, we do understand the insta-defensive attitude. After all, if you are glued to your cell, ignore toddlers on the playground, or yell regularly at your charges, you'll leap to the defense of a nanny like you. And when you post all sorts of defensive crap, we then know what sort of nanny YOU are.

nycmom said...

Well said, Tales.

MPP - This is my concern also. Seems the focus on protecting children has been lost somewhere along the way. I don't have the answer, but I completely understand the sentiment.

Tales from the (Nanny)Hood said...

Mpp, if the storm of "but maybe she was just blahdeblah!" is overwhelming, why not simply disable comments on sightings? I know you feel strongly about allowing people to have their say, but I would hope that instead of dumping the site entirely you and Jane might consider elimnating the dogpile nature of sighting posts instead.

I know it's easy for me to say, since I don't have any responsibilities WRT the site, but in this case a little commonsense censorship might be the way to go.

Marypoppin'pills said...

Tales from the (Nanny)Hood,

Thank you for your comment at 3:24... I should post it as a permanent link somewhere on the front page!

And to nycmom, I really appreciate your sentiments, also.

I abhor censorship but something has to be done where Readers feel comfortable enough to post their Sightings without having to worry they will be flamed. I have considered disabling comments but it just doesn't seem feasible. Quite often other Readers are familiar with the area of the Sighting and I want their input. It may piss some people off but I guess the only solution would be to delete comments attacking the OP.

I don't mind ISYN being a place where Nannies and Parents can come for advice and camaraderie but really want it to stay with it's original intent and that is to protect the children.

Tales from the (Nanny)Hood said...

Thanks for the compliment MPP! I've emailed you.

Mrs. Billy Lamar said...

Are Tales and nycmom the same person? The writing styles and opinions are so in sync.

I'm just saying................

Marypoppin'pills said...

Mrs. Billy Lamar,

No, I can promise you... they are not the same person.

oh well said...

I do not think that a parent would fire their nanny based on one of the
typical bad sightings reported here. However this should prompt them to investigate and to make a decision based on what they find, and I am grateful to ISYN for making this possible. It seems natural that most parents want to believe that their nanny is doing a good job. If you think you are going to get fired because someone takes a picture of you texting in a bookstore, there must be a number of other things that you must be doing wrong.

nycmom said...

Mrs. Billy Lamar,

No, Tales and I are not the same person. If you scroll down to a recent post DITL from 4/26/11 you will see where we both give our basic (still anonymous) identifying information and suggest others do so do to avoid exactly this kind of confusion.