Temporarily furloughing nanny? Strategies?

[Anonymous]

No, 9:36, but perhaps you'd raise their children for them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does OP not have a contract with the nanny? Furlouging a nanny is a breach of contract and in essence she is laid off. So she can claim unemployment, which will raise the OP's nanny taxes
OP is not government and nanny is working for family, not government.
The nanny is most likely looking for new employment by now.

I thought the nanny is supposed to be an "at will" employee, meaning she can be fired on a dime (or quit without notice), regardless of what might be in the contract. Is that true?

[Anonymous]

Pay her until you are simply not able to (that was our plan, regardless of whether I was at home and furloughed) - that is the best you can do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does OP not have a contract with the nanny? Furlouging a nanny is a breach of contract and in essence she is laid off. So she can claim unemployment, which will raise the OP's nanny taxes
OP is not government and nanny is working for family, not government.
The nanny is most likely looking for new employment by now.

I thought the nanny is supposed to be an "at will" employee, meaning she can be fired on a dime (or quit without notice), regardless of what might be in the contract. Is that true?

True
But the nanny can claim unemployment. The dept of labor descides who can get it. You cannot argue your right to not pay and she will be able to claim

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does OP not have a contract with the nanny? Furlouging a nanny is a breach of contract and in essence she is laid off. So she can claim unemployment, which will raise the OP's nanny taxes
OP is not government and nanny is working for family, not government.
The nanny is most likely looking for new employment by now.

I thought the nanny is supposed to be an "at will" employee, meaning she can be fired on a dime (or quit without notice), regardless of what might be in the contract. Is that true?

True
But the nanny can claim unemployment. The dept of labor descides who can get it. You cannot argue your right to not pay and she will be able to claim

No it is not true. contractually parent needs to abide by the terms of the contract. If she breaches the contract by laying off the nanny without cause without the contractually required notice than the nanny can sue for breach of contact. Will she, maybe, can she, who knows? Is there any requisite notice in the nanny contract, I thought OP had said 2 weeks, maybe she didn't say. But any decent employment contact has a notice provision protecting either side. Whoever claims that a notice provision is null and void simply because the employment is for a nanny provision is wrong.

An at will employee is an employee that is not under a contract, or if they are under contract it specifically states "at will". I work i. Biglaw, my "contract" is considered my one page offer letter which states my position, salary, start date and the at will provision

What is at will? Either party can terminate the relationship at any time. for the emoloyer it means they can terminate for ANY reason BUT an illegal reason, (big ones are race, gender, religion,etc). The take this job and shove it method. But if there is a contract, the terms apply.

[Anonymous]

OK, so the parent must abide by the contract, but if the parent descides to not pay a salary, nanny can go and claim unemployment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does OP not have a contract with the nanny? Furlouging a nanny is a breach of contract and in essence she is laid off. So she can claim unemployment, which will raise the OP's nanny taxes
OP is not government and nanny is working for family, not government.
The nanny is most likely looking for new employment by now.

I thought the nanny is supposed to be an "at will" employee, meaning she can be fired on a dime (or quit without notice), regardless of what might be in the contract. Is that true?

True
But the nanny can claim unemployment. The dept of labor descides who can get it. You cannot argue your right to not pay and she will be able to claim

No it is not true. contractually parent needs to abide by the terms of the contract. If she breaches the contract by laying off the nanny without cause without the contractually required notice than the nanny can sue for breach of contact. Will she, maybe, can she, who knows? Is there any requisite notice in the nanny contract, I thought OP had said 2 weeks, maybe she didn't say. But any decent employment contact has a notice provision protecting either side. Whoever claims that a notice provision is null and void simply because the employment is for a nanny provision is wrong.

An at will employee is an employee that is not under a contract, or if they are under contract it specifically states "at will". I work i. Biglaw, my "contract" is considered my one page offer letter which states my position, salary, start date and the at will provision

What is at will? Either party can terminate the relationship at any time. for the emoloyer it means they can terminate for ANY reason BUT an illegal reason, (big ones are race, gender, religion,etc). The take this job and shove it method. But if there is a contract, the terms apply.

Love it when "big law" lawyers don't know what they are talking about. You can have a contract AND be at will. The contract can specify terms of employment like pay, duties, severance, etc, but still allow termination "at will" by either party. When you agree to a certain salary or wage that is a contract (for the work performed) even if nothing is written down. Nobody here has any clue what is in the OP's contract with her nanny.

[Anonymous]

Hey PP, read what "BIglaw" poster wrote, poster did say you can be under contract and also be at will. It sounds like previous previous poster stated something to the effect that despite having a termination contract in a nanny employment contract, the fact that the employment was for a nanny superceedeed the so called termination provision, which is I agree isn't true. So don't get your panties all in a bunch, sock puppet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:60% of our HHI is from Government contracting.

Due to the shutdown we lost 18% of our HHI and are down to 82% HHI

If the shutdown goes on past 2 weeks our income will go down to 40%. of our original HHI

We are ok as of now but if we go down to 40% we cannot afford the nanny until the shutdown is resolved.

What would you do in this situation?

this is the funniest post I've seen all morning. not sure if OP is trying to be funny and sarcastic? or if he/she is truly this ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you could try, knowing your nanny has her own life and own decisions to make. if I were her, and you "furloughed" me, I'd look around for a family with more stability. And are you sure you're saying you simply can't "afford" the nanny or because you're home you don't "need" her and therefore want to play the financial card to pick and choose what you need and don't need. Please be sure you're being honest about your reasoning.

How would we be able to afford the nanny. It's not like I want to be at home not working.

Savings...

That's stupid and besides who is going to hire anyone right now anyways?

Holy crap are you the pediatrician poster