# How much should each family pay the baby sitter?

#### kdonnel

##### DVC-BCV
My neighbors are in a fight with their brother over splitting the cost of a baby sitter.

Couple one has 2 kids. Couple two has 1 kid.

The baby sitter charges \$12 an hour for 1-2 kids and \$15 an hour for 3 kids.

At the end of the night couple two offered up just \$3 per hour of money and couple one said no we should split it 50/50. At the moment it has been two weeks since that night and they have not spoken since couple two grabbed their kid and left in a huff after ultimately agreeing to pay \$7.50 an hour.

My neighbor asked me what I thought. I agreed that it was only fair to split the cost 50/50. If they had each got a baby sitter they would each be out \$12 an hour. There are certain fixed costs for the baby sitter and those costs should be split 50/50.

#### wvjules

##### DIS Veteran
I'd say 50/50 is more than fair. Still way cheaper than if both got individual baby sitters.

#### HopperFan

##### "It's a bug-eat-bug world out there, princess."
\$15 divided by 3 kids = \$5 per kid
Family of 2 pays \$10
Family of 1 pays \$5

They both saved money and both pay their fair share.

And in the future they do not share services.

• #### piccolopat

##### DIS Veteran
I agree that it should be split 50/50.

#### PlutoRocks

##### Mouseketeer
\$15 divided by 3 kids = \$5 per kid
Family of 2 pays \$10
Family of 1 pays \$5

They both saved money and both pay their fair share.
This seems the fairest method to me.

#### sam_gordon

##### DIS Veteran
\$15 divided by 3 kids = \$5 per kid
Family of 2 pays \$10
Family of 1 pays \$5

They both saved money and both pay their fair share.

And in the future they do not share services.
This.

I've thought about something similar... let's say two families are renting a villa. Family 1 is a couple and three kids. Family 2 is just a couple. That shouldn't be 50/50. So to me, you split the cost by total number of people, then each family pays for the appropriate number of people. So if the rental is \$700 (for example), family 1 pays \$500 and family 2 pays \$200. Seems simple to me.

#### Klayfish

##### DIS Veteran
\$15 divided by 3 kids = \$5 per kid
Family of 2 pays \$10
Family of 1 pays \$5

They both saved money and both pay their fair share.

And in the future they do not share services.
Not only that, if they're arguing about something that petty (IMO), then they clearly have bigger issues.

• #### HopperFan

##### "It's a bug-eat-bug world out there, princess."
This.

I've thought about something similar... let's say two families are renting a villa. Family 1 is a couple and three kids. Family 2 is just a couple. That shouldn't be 50/50. So to me, you split the cost by total number of people, then each family pays for the appropriate number of people. So if the rental is \$700 (for example), family 1 pays \$500 and family 2 pays \$200. Seems simple to me.
YUP and we have done exactly this is many situations on vacation etc.

Not only that, if they're arguing about something that petty (IMO), then they clearly have bigger issues.
Which is why I said in the future they shouldn't plan things involving shared expenses again. I would have had all this settled in advance, the fact that it wasn't makes me think they have ongoing issues and avoid getting things settled.

If I had more kids I would expect to pay more. But honestly I hate drama, so to avoid a conflict I probably would have just paid the sitter the full amount myself and moved on with my day!
This triggered a thought .... we have family members that will take advantage, try to get more than they should, try to get out of paying their fare share. Maybe this was such a simple and obvious arrangement that the one family was simply fed up with being taken advantage of and held their ground. Now I think they were both wrong in their calculations so not sure who the user would be but it could have been a last straw.

Again, these two need to never share anything that involves money. Obviously there is way more to their history and story.

Last edited:

#### ENJDisneyFan

##### DIS Veteran
If I had more kids I would expect to pay more. But honestly I hate drama, so to avoid a conflict I probably would have just paid the sitter the full amount myself and moved on with my day!

#### Anchored

##### Mouseketeer
\$15 divided by 3 kids = \$5 per kid
Family of 2 pays \$10
Family of 1 pays \$5

They both saved money and both pay their fair share.

And in the future they do not share services.

This.

2/3 of the kids, 2/3 of the price
This should have been discussed ahead of time, though

#### Cannot_Wait_4Disney

##### Ok all you A cattle, get in ...
My neighbors are in a fight with their brother over splitting the cost of a baby sitter.

Couple one has 2 kids. Couple two has 1 kid.

The baby sitter charges \$12 an hour for 1-2 kids and \$15 an hour for 3 kids.

At the end of the night couple two offered up just \$3 per hour of money and couple one said no we should split it 50/50. At the moment it has been two weeks since that night and they have not spoken since couple two grabbed their kid and left in a huff after ultimately agreeing to pay \$7.50 an hour.

My neighbor asked me what I thought. I agreed that it was only fair to split the cost 50/50. If they had each got a baby sitter they would each be out \$12 an hour. There are certain fixed costs for the baby sitter and those costs should be split 50/50.
\$3 is out. Couple two should pay \$5 and couple 1 \$10. That's 1/3 the cost for one third of the kids and 2/3 of the cost for 2/3 of the kids. No. The advantage of the 3 kid discount should not go entirely to the couple with one kid.

##### DIS Veteran
More importantly - how much do they tip her?

#### Cannot_Wait_4Disney

##### Ok all you A cattle, get in ...
More importantly - how much do they tip her?
They should immediately run to the dis and post about our out of control tipping culture.

#### Hikergirl

##### DIS Veteran
How old are the kids?
If they are all the same age I say couple #1 pays \$10, and couple #2 pays \$5.
However if couple #2 has an infant or a toddler in diapers or who is potty training, and couple #1 has older kids, a 50/50 split isn't unfair IMO.

#### Turksmom

##### Mouseketeer
\$15 divided by 3 kids = \$5 per kid
Family of 2 pays \$10
Family of 1 pays \$5

They both saved money and both pay their fair share.

And in the future they do not share services.
That was my first thought, but 1 kid family would never be able to hire a sitter for \$5. They would have a \$7 savings and 2 kid family would only have a \$2 savings over individual cost. I'm just stirring the pot- I would have just let them pay the \$3 and not done it again.

#### Hikergirl

##### DIS Veteran
Another way to look at it is if they were individually paying this babysitter, each family would be giving her \$12 an hour since that is what she charges for 1-2 kids. If they split the \$15 equally they are both receiving an equal discount.

#### HopperFan

##### "It's a bug-eat-bug world out there, princess."
That was my first thought, but 1 kid family would never be able to hire a sitter for \$5. They would have a \$7 savings and 2 kid family would only have a \$2 savings over individual cost. I'm just stirring the pot- I would have just let them pay the \$3 and not done it again.
But you could say the family of 2 was paying the full amount they would have paid without family 2. AND the babysitter is now not focusing their time on just their two children but having to share that attention on a third child.

And for the family of one, yes they would have paid more but their child would have full and total attention of the babysitter, not sharing with two others.

I likely would have asked for \$5 for their share. If they said no they only wanted to pay \$3, I would have said fine if you want to be that way but know we won't share any other services again.

#### kdonnel

##### DVC-BCV
\$3 is out. Couple two should pay \$5 and couple 1 \$10. That's 1/3 the cost for one third of the kids and 2/3 of the cost for 2/3 of the kids. No. The advantage of the 3 kid discount should not go entirely to the couple with one kid.
I dismissed the 1/3, 2/3 option because there are certain fixed costs with getting a baby sitter that both sides should pay.

It would appear in this instance that the baby sitter has decided that 1-2 kids is \$3. So following that logic it cost \$9 an hour just get the the baby sitter to come out, an additional \$3 for the first 1-2 kids, and \$3 for each additional kid. That works out to each couple paying \$4.50 of the fixed costs plus \$3 for their kid(s).

#### sam_gordon

##### DIS Veteran
If they split the \$15 equally they are both receiving an equal discount.
Sure. But family 1 is getting "more bang for their buck". That's why the percentage works. IMO of course.

#### LSUmiss

##### DIS Veteran
50/50 b/c if each of them had used the sitter individually it wound have been \$12/hr for the 1 kid or the 2 kids. How many hours was this for? Seems like a ridiculous thing to fight about. I can’t see where it would be more than the difference of \$15 vs like \$40. Not a huge amount of \$ either way. How petty!