Is It Worth Paying a Window Cleaner?

"For that price, my employee can do it." By some distance, that is the sentence we hear most often on 01 89 19 68 69 when a manager opens a window cleaning quote for their Paris offices. The question is entirely fair: a window gets cleaned with a cloth and a three-euro spray. So why pay someone for it?

We're going to answer without selling. Below you'll find the full calculation, our real price ranges in Île-de-France, what we actually find on sites where windows have been cleaned in-house, and above all the situations in which we advise against hiring a professional. They exist, and an honest provider should say so.

The real calculation: what in-house window cleaning actually costs

The most common analytical mistake is comparing a €300 quote to a €0 budget. That isn't the right comparison. Window cleaning done by your own staff isn't free — it is simply paid from a different accounting line: payroll.

The time factor: a ratio of one to four

This is the figure that surprises our clients most. On the same set of windows, an untrained employee takes around two hours. A professional window cleaner takes thirty minutes, with a better result. It isn't about motivation: it's about the squeegee, the applicator, the technique and the water.

Translated into euros, an employee whose loaded cost sits between €25 and €35 an hour — standard for an administrative role in the Paris region — costs €50 to €70 for two hours of window cleaning. With two people, double it. And during that time, nobody is doing the job they were hired for.

Equipment: the line item nobody budgets for

Doing windows properly requires kit that bears no relation to a bottle of glass cleaner and a roll of paper towel. Here's what we bring to an office job:

• A carbon pole, which lets us work up to fifteen to eighteen metres depending on the setup, without scaffolding.
• A purified (reverse osmosis) water system: demineralised water that dries without leaving a single mark, and which cuts chemical use dramatically.
• Professional squeegees and applicators, with rubbers replaced regularly — a worn rubber leaves a line on every pass.
• Specialist scrapers, used only where the glazing type allows it, never blindly.

What we find when staff have been doing the windows

We regularly take over glazing that has been maintained in-house for months. Some damage can be recovered. Some is permanent. Here, in order of frequency, is what we actually find.

Scratches: the irreversible damage

The scenario is always the same. A microfibre cloth falls on the floor. Someone picks it up. It has caught a single grain of sand. The next pass across the glass leaves a scratch that nothing will undo. We also see glass marked by metal scrapers used without first checking for abrasive particles or the nature of the glass. Scratched glass doesn't get cleaned — it gets replaced.

Frames and seals: the collateral damage

We regularly find aluminium frames bleached by acidic products, and seals degraded by bleach. Both are very common reflexes — "it cuts through better" — and both are expensive mistakes. Anodised aluminium can't be repaired once it's pitted, and a damaged seal becomes an entry point for moisture, with the mould problems that follow.

Streaks: the problem you see every morning

The supermarket glass cleaner plus paper towel combination produces the same result every time:

• drying marks, especially visible against the light — which is exactly when your visitors walk in;
• a greasy film that builds up with every pass and ends up attracting dust faster than before;
• paper fibres stuck around the edges and in the corners.

The factor nobody costs in: legal and insurance risk

In our view this is the most underestimated argument in the debate — and paradoxically the heaviest financially. Many managers ask an employee to climb a step stool to clean a window three metres up. That apparently trivial act has precise legal consequences.

Working at height is not a trivial act

French labour law governs temporary work at height (articles R.4323-58 and following): the employer must prioritise collective protection, provide equipment suited to the task, and organise the work safely. An office step stool is not work-at-height equipment. If someone falls, the question won't be whether the employee was clumsy, but whether the employer provided the equipment, training and organisation required.

What insurance does — and doesn't — cover

Our professional liability insurance covers damage we might cause during the job: a broken pane, a damaged frame, damage to furniture. When your own staff clean the windows, that safety net doesn't exist: a broken pane is on you, and an injured employee falls under your liability as an employer. That's a difference in kind, not in degree.

The break-even point: when to pay, and when genuinely not to

Here's the part most cleaning companies don't write, because it doesn't serve their quote. We'd rather give it to you: it'll save you time, and save us a pointless site visit.

Cases where we advise against hiring a professional

There are situations where the gain really is small. We identify them as follows:

• Two or three windows at ground level, cleaned regularly, with no particular build-up. Twenty minutes with a decent squeegee is enough.
• Premises with no public access, where the state of the windows has no commercial impact.
• Someone already equipped with a professional squeegee and applicator who has the technique. In that specific case, a provider adds very little.

Cases where a professional quickly pays for itself

Conversely, as soon as one of these criteria appears, the equation almost always tips towards the provider:

• More than about ten windows. Beyond that volume, the speed gap between a professional and an amateur becomes the dominant term in the calculation.
• Any height or difficult access. This is the clearest tipping point, for safety reasons as much as for results.
• Shopfronts, large glazed bays, a street-facing façade. Here the glass is part of your commercial image, not part of your housekeeping.
• Premises receiving clients or patients — retail, medical practices, showrooms, offices with a glazed meeting room.
• Glazing never properly maintained. The first restoration requires specific know-how; it's also the job where an amateur does the most damage.

Case study: an architecture practice in the 8th arrondissement

Around 120 m² of glazing, a large street-facing façade and a fully glazed meeting room. The practice hadn't had its windows professionally treated in over a year: maintenance had been done ad hoc in-house, without suitable equipment.

The first visit was invoiced at €420. That's a restoration rate: Paris pollution had bonded to the glass, and the street façade needed a full treatment including frames and sills. Maintenance then settled at €230 per visit, every six weeks.

The client's feedback a few months later was about something we hadn't sold: the offices had become noticeably brighter, and several visitors had commented on it unprompted. For an architecture practice, whose work is partly judged on the space it occupies, that's not a small detail.

Decision table by situation

Here, in summary, is how we answer the question ourselves when a prospect calls. The frequencies shown reflect what we actually observe on the ground in Île-de-France.