Au Pair just asked for more money

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think someone should whistleblow and start the authorities on an investigation of DMV families with live in au pairs and nannies. Starting with this board. The stuff I’ve heard here is no joke and is criminal! You cannot deduct room and board for a live in employee, check the law! I hope you all pay up in a class action. That’ll teach you to pay the living wage and treat people properly

You can deduct it, if living in is their choice.

Really?! You can advertise a live in, pretending it’s nanny’s choice, pretend to pay the living wage, then deduct so much that they are left with $200 or less per week. That is EXACTLY what the PP said.

In MA for au pairs they are allowing to deduct 13% max; not 40%.

PP said it's not legal to deduct. It is legal to deduct. Of course you can advertise for nannies who agree that's a good deal for them because they want to live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as a fellow host mom the dynamics have changed a lot and many au pairs - now scarce and in demand - are understandably leveraging the new dynamic.

That said, I think if you can afford to pay her more, do so, make her show you she is stepping it up. I think the PP at 5:55 is spot on, but I would phrase it more positively.

Trump froze au pair visas for the pandemic. Biden might lift that but I doubt he’ll do it in the first 90 days while we’re staying at 500,000 Americ as is dead. The au pair deserves more money especially if the kid(s) are home 24/7.

A normal nanny, even with board, would be 2x this for multiple kids.

Depends on the number of hours. Starting live-ins frequently make minimum wage, and if they’re working doing less than 25 hours per week, they could easily gross less than $200.

Good nannies made $25./hour plus benefits, plus holiday bonus, plus overtime - this was almost 20 years ago. There is good reason women pay for au pairs - and the grandmothers brag in bridge class, like their daughter who has an au pair has "made it" - no, your daughter is just cheap, and can't afford a real nanny.

Then, there are the families who think $10./hour plus a uniform for a nanny is "normal" in the U.S. - no, no it's not.

An au pair is bargain for the mom, and the mom, only. It's almost free child care.

It's all relative. A nanny would never be grateful for a live-in job for $10/hr that was only 25-35 hours a week but a split schedule. Au pairs think they're getting a great deal, and are grateful for the money and perks. I'd rather have a happy au pair than an impossible to please nanny, who knows some nanny out there is getting $100k with private jet trips to Aspen. We have had wonderful experiences with au pairs. We could easily afford a nanny, but they've been much more reliable and less entitled than nannies, so we stick with them.

Also, even if I accepted your premise that only parents are getting a good deal, it's just as much a good deal for fathers. Check your misogyny.

We KNOW it’s a great deal for fathers. That’s a no1 complaint of au pairs. Handsy creepy fathers

It certainly is not. The #1 complaint is going over hours. Have you actually met au pairs or are you just a bitter nanny?

OMG. Here it goes. People saying there are Covid cases in schools are teachers; people thinking Trump who’s by the way rushing to execute as many people as possible before 1/20 needs to be held responsible are Socialists, people saying you should respect not the letter of unjust law but do the right thing which is already the law in parts of our land are Nannies! No, big law partner mama here. In DC proper. With kids

[Anonymous]

MA ruling:
Host families can deduct up to $42/week for meals provided to the au pair and take a room deduction of up to $35/week. For an au pair that works the maximum 45 hours in a week, their pay will be no less than $528.65/week (40 hours @ $12.75/hour + 5 hours @ $19.13/hour – $77 for room and board).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as a fellow host mom the dynamics have changed a lot and many au pairs - now scarce and in demand - are understandably leveraging the new dynamic.

That said, I think if you can afford to pay her more, do so, make her show you she is stepping it up. I think the PP at 5:55 is spot on, but I would phrase it more positively.

Trump froze au pair visas for the pandemic. Biden might lift that but I doubt he’ll do it in the first 90 days while we’re staying at 500,000 Americ as is dead. The au pair deserves more money especially if the kid(s) are home 24/7.

A normal nanny, even with board, would be 2x this for multiple kids.

Depends on the number of hours. Starting live-ins frequently make minimum wage, and if they’re working doing less than 25 hours per week, they could easily gross less than $200.

Good nannies made $25./hour plus benefits, plus holiday bonus, plus overtime - this was almost 20 years ago. There is good reason women pay for au pairs - and the grandmothers brag in bridge class, like their daughter who has an au pair has "made it" - no, your daughter is just cheap, and can't afford a real nanny.

Then, there are the families who think $10./hour plus a uniform for a nanny is "normal" in the U.S. - no, no it's not.

An au pair is bargain for the mom, and the mom, only. It's almost free child care.

It's all relative. A nanny would never be grateful for a live-in job for $10/hr that was only 25-35 hours a week but a split schedule. Au pairs think they're getting a great deal, and are grateful for the money and perks. I'd rather have a happy au pair than an impossible to please nanny, who knows some nanny out there is getting $100k with private jet trips to Aspen. We have had wonderful experiences with au pairs. We could easily afford a nanny, but they've been much more reliable and less entitled than nannies, so we stick with them.

Also, even if I accepted your premise that only parents are getting a good deal, it's just as much a good deal for fathers. Check your misogyny.

We KNOW it’s a great deal for fathers. That’s a no1 complaint of au pairs. Handsy creepy fathers

It certainly is not. The #1 complaint is going over hours. Have you actually met au pairs or are you just a bitter nanny?

OMG. Here it goes. People saying there are Covid cases in schools are teachers; people thinking Trump who’s by the way rushing to execute as many people as possible before 1/20 needs to be held responsible are Socialists, people saying you should respect not the letter of unjust law but do the right thing which is already the law in parts of our land are Nannies! No, big law partner mama here. In DC proper. With kids

Great! Then your ignorance about au pair woes is for other reasons! Why don't you educate yourself, mama. As a fellow biglaw lawyer, I know you have the skills if you actually want to find out. Handsy dads are appalling, but rare. Dads who think traffic problems aren't really their fault as 10 hours stretches into 10.5, now that's common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MA ruling:
Host families can deduct up to $42/week for meals provided to the au pair and take a room deduction of up to $35/week. For an au pair that works the maximum 45 hours in a week, their pay will be no less than $528.65/week (40 hours @ $12.75/hour + 5 hours @ $19.13/hour – $77 for room and board).

This is very important information for people who live in Massachusetts.

[Anonymous]

And more in room and board: so no you cannot deduct to where someone is left with $200/mo (exact scenario for Nanny not Au Pair that PP posted):
According to the IRS, families who employ a live-in nanny can exclude the cost of room and board from their nanny’s pay as long as the meals and housing are provided in the family’s home, for the family’s convenience. If you choose to deduct this amount from your nanny’s wages, you still must pay them an hourly rate at or above the prevailing minimum wage.
(You are allowed to deduct only The employer must not charge more than $1.50 for breakfast and $2.25 for lunch or dinner, and the deduction must not be for more than the actual cost; and $35 a week for a room with 1 person — look up DoL; so no way you are ever at $200/Mo).

In some states, like Massachusetts, you aren’t allowed to deduct the cost of housing from your nanny’s pay if the job requires them to live in your house. You may also be deemed a landlord if you take room and board out of your employee’s wages because now your nanny is considered to be paying rent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MA ruling:
Host families can deduct up to $42/week for meals provided to the au pair and take a room deduction of up to $35/week. For an au pair that works the maximum 45 hours in a week, their pay will be no less than $528.65/week (40 hours @ $12.75/hour + 5 hours @ $19.13/hour – $77 for room and board).

This is very important information for people who live in Massachusetts.

You should not try to the bare minimum, Ivanka.

[Anonymous]

I will make it my personal mission that we go the way of MA because it will be easier than finding you all a conscience

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MA ruling:
Host families can deduct up to $42/week for meals provided to the au pair and take a room deduction of up to $35/week. For an au pair that works the maximum 45 hours in a week, their pay will be no less than $528.65/week (40 hours @ $12.75/hour + 5 hours @ $19.13/hour – $77 for room and board).

This is very important information for people who live in Massachusetts.

You should not try to the bare minimum, Ivanka.

I pay significantly over stipend. But I can understand the law. You should stop practicing law without a license, it makes you look foolish. And even worse, if you have a law degree...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as a fellow host mom the dynamics have changed a lot and many au pairs - now scarce and in demand - are understandably leveraging the new dynamic.

That said, I think if you can afford to pay her more, do so, make her show you she is stepping it up. I think the PP at 5:55 is spot on, but I would phrase it more positively.

Trump froze au pair visas for the pandemic. Biden might lift that but I doubt he’ll do it in the first 90 days while we’re staying at 500,000 Americ as is dead. The au pair deserves more money especially if the kid(s) are home 24/7.

A normal nanny, even with board, would be 2x this for multiple kids.

Depends on the number of hours. Starting live-ins frequently make minimum wage, and if they’re working doing less than 25 hours per week, they could easily gross less than $200.

Good nannies made $25./hour plus benefits, plus holiday bonus, plus overtime - this was almost 20 years ago. There is good reason women pay for au pairs - and the grandmothers brag in bridge class, like their daughter who has an au pair has "made it" - no, your daughter is just cheap, and can't afford a real nanny.

Then, there are the families who think $10./hour plus a uniform for a nanny is "normal" in the U.S. - no, no it's not.

An au pair is bargain for the mom, and the mom, only. It's almost free child care.

It's all relative. A nanny would never be grateful for a live-in job for $10/hr that was only 25-35 hours a week but a split schedule. Au pairs think they're getting a great deal, and are grateful for the money and perks. I'd rather have a happy au pair than an impossible to please nanny, who knows some nanny out there is getting $100k with private jet trips to Aspen. We have had wonderful experiences with au pairs. We could easily afford a nanny, but they've been much more reliable and less entitled than nannies, so we stick with them.

Also, even if I accepted your premise that only parents are getting a good deal, it's just as much a good deal for fathers. Check your misogyny.

We KNOW it’s a great deal for fathers. That’s a no1 complaint of au pairs. Handsy creepy fathers

It certainly is not. The #1 complaint is going over hours. Have you actually met au pairs or are you just a bitter nanny?

OMG. Here it goes. People saying there are Covid cases in schools are teachers; people thinking Trump who’s by the way rushing to execute as many people as possible before 1/20 needs to be held responsible are Socialists, people saying you should respect not the letter of unjust law but do the right thing which is already the law in parts of our land are Nannies! No, big law partner mama here. In DC proper. With kids

Great! Then your ignorance about au pair woes is for other reasons! Why don't you educate yourself, mama. As a fellow biglaw lawyer, I know you have the skills if you actually want to find out. Handsy dads are appalling, but rare. Dads who think traffic problems aren't really their fault as 10 hours stretches into 10.5, now that's common.

I HAVE found out. Pay the minimum wage or above; or reduce hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will make it my personal mission that we go the way of MA because it will be easier than finding you all a conscience

My pay/hours pass the MA test. And yet I'll keep correcting people posting incorrect information. Truth still matters, even after Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as a fellow host mom the dynamics have changed a lot and many au pairs - now scarce and in demand - are understandably leveraging the new dynamic.

That said, I think if you can afford to pay her more, do so, make her show you she is stepping it up. I think the PP at 5:55 is spot on, but I would phrase it more positively.

Trump froze au pair visas for the pandemic. Biden might lift that but I doubt he’ll do it in the first 90 days while we’re staying at 500,000 Americ as is dead. The au pair deserves more money especially if the kid(s) are home 24/7.

A normal nanny, even with board, would be 2x this for multiple kids.

Depends on the number of hours. Starting live-ins frequently make minimum wage, and if they’re working doing less than 25 hours per week, they could easily gross less than $200.

Good nannies made $25./hour plus benefits, plus holiday bonus, plus overtime - this was almost 20 years ago. There is good reason women pay for au pairs - and the grandmothers brag in bridge class, like their daughter who has an au pair has "made it" - no, your daughter is just cheap, and can't afford a real nanny.

Then, there are the families who think $10./hour plus a uniform for a nanny is "normal" in the U.S. - no, no it's not.

An au pair is bargain for the mom, and the mom, only. It's almost free child care.

It's all relative. A nanny would never be grateful for a live-in job for $10/hr that was only 25-35 hours a week but a split schedule. Au pairs think they're getting a great deal, and are grateful for the money and perks. I'd rather have a happy au pair than an impossible to please nanny, who knows some nanny out there is getting $100k with private jet trips to Aspen. We have had wonderful experiences with au pairs. We could easily afford a nanny, but they've been much more reliable and less entitled than nannies, so we stick with them.

Also, even if I accepted your premise that only parents are getting a good deal, it's just as much a good deal for fathers. Check your misogyny.

We KNOW it’s a great deal for fathers. That’s a no1 complaint of au pairs. Handsy creepy fathers

It certainly is not. The #1 complaint is going over hours. Have you actually met au pairs or are you just a bitter nanny?

OMG. Here it goes. People saying there are Covid cases in schools are teachers; people thinking Trump who’s by the way rushing to execute as many people as possible before 1/20 needs to be held responsible are Socialists, people saying you should respect not the letter of unjust law but do the right thing which is already the law in parts of our land are Nannies! No, big law partner mama here. In DC proper. With kids

Great! Then your ignorance about au pair woes is for other reasons! Why don't you educate yourself, mama. As a fellow biglaw lawyer, I know you have the skills if you actually want to find out. Handsy dads are appalling, but rare. Dads who think traffic problems aren't really their fault as 10 hours stretches into 10.5, now that's common.

I HAVE found out. Pay the minimum wage or above; or reduce hours.

I do both! Lower hours, pay over minimum wage in my state. A full month of vacation, all education expenses (not just the family contribution minimum) paid. That has nothing to do with your claim that the #1 problem au pairs have is sexual assault from fathers. A truly absurd and incorrect claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MA ruling:
Host families can deduct up to $42/week for meals provided to the au pair and take a room deduction of up to $35/week. For an au pair that works the maximum 45 hours in a week, their pay will be no less than $528.65/week (40 hours @ $12.75/hour + 5 hours @ $19.13/hour – $77 for room and board).

This is very important information for people who live in Massachusetts.

You should not try to the bare minimum, Ivanka.

I pay significantly over stipend. But I can understand the law. You should stop practicing law without a license, it makes you look foolish. And even worse, if you have a law degree...

Enjoy while the exploitation lasts. Tick tock... While we all wait with our popcorn, ask yourself why it’s not ok to get either the $ or hrs to where you are not exploiting someone below min wage?

[Anonymous]

The system is exploitive. $200 fab week is crazy cheap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MA ruling:
Host families can deduct up to $42/week for meals provided to the au pair and take a room deduction of up to $35/week. For an au pair that works the maximum 45 hours in a week, their pay will be no less than $528.65/week (40 hours @ $12.75/hour + 5 hours @ $19.13/hour – $77 for room and board).

This is very important information for people who live in Massachusetts.

You should not try to the bare minimum, Ivanka.

I pay significantly over stipend. But I can understand the law. You should stop practicing law without a license, it makes you look foolish. And even worse, if you have a law degree...

Enjoy while the exploitation lasts. Tick tock... While we all wait with our popcorn, ask yourself why it’s not ok to get either the $ or hrs to where you are not exploiting someone below min wage?

Are you drunk? It says right there I pay significantly over stipend. Quick eat that popcorn and sop up the wine.