Au Pair just asked for more money

[Anonymous]

Thank you to the poster who shared https://fairlaborrecruitment.files.wordpress.com
It was shocking to learn that au pairs were paying agencies up to $2500 to participate and the families up to $10,000 to the same agency.

[Anonymous]

That’s a really good point: maybe not only the au pairs were taken advantage of (by the families and the agencies)
but also the families (by the agencies)

[Anonymous]

“Shortchanged: The Big Business Behind the Low Wage J-1 Au Pair Program” debunks the myth that the poorly regulated au pair program is a cultural exchange. The report analyzes existing data on the au pair program, and includes findings from in-depth interviews with current and former au pairs.

“Shortchanged” was authored by the International Labor Recruitment Working Group (ILRWG), Centro de los Derechos del Migrante (CDM), the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, and the National Domestic Workers Alliance (NDWA).

[Anonymous]

Also learned that if an au pair is sent home during the program by a complaint from her host family, she forfeits her fees. And if she chooses to leave her host family during the program, she has only 2 weeks to find a new host family or she is sent home, again forfeiting her fees.

[Anonymous]

Really puts the PP comments about au pairs’ being overgrown toddlers into perspective. And the other PP who said that if she had to pay 15/hr she’d get a real nanny. So much for the cultural exchange and how much we don’t understand about the program.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I left the main part out. It was something like I would send her home... and get a real nanny (if I had to pay her a min wage).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone said to another poster: "You're clearly a disgruntled nanny who has too few skills or motivation to actually get a job that you'd actually enjoy. So now you're taking your rage at having to care for children (which you consider to be a terrible and exploitive job at its core) out on host parents."

That remark is rude and uncalled for. But most (not all!) of the host families here seem like great people who are kind and attempting to follow the spirit of cultural exchange. The real problem seems to be with the agencies: the lack of clear communication, and their lack of managing complaints. I'm glad that reform is coming.

Amongsts pages and pages of nonsense post after poorly informed nonsense post, the prior poster called host dads molesters. Stated that all host parents are terrible parents with poorly behaved kids. And compared all host parents to slave owners, accuaing them of child trafficking, exploitation and a litany of abuses. Let's keep rude in perspective.

[Anonymous]

That’s absolutely not true. Even if it were, it’s no excuse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The existing limits on pay deductions for housing and food strike many families as unreasonable. The maximum deduction for housing is $35/week and the maximum deduction for food is $6.00/day. For more detail see the minimum wage regulations.

I agree that in the context of the homes where au pairs are most likely to be retained, these numbers look low. Yet, I do not think that adjusting these numbers is a promising idea. First, from a practical legislative standpoint, raising these numbers basically means cutting the minimum wage; we cannot carve out au pairs for different allowances. Cutting the minimum wage is not what we are trying to do right now. Second, the truth is that from a marginal cost standpoint, the numbers are not so far off. It does not actually cost a family anything to let an au pair use empty space in the house. Similarly, one more plate at a family table does not necessarily generate the same cost as it would to prepare a single meal from scratch.

Addendum: This note has generated push back. I fully appreciate that the marginal costs of having an au pair in a house are not zero. I fully appreciate that families are likely to spend much more than the housing and meals allowances. I’m just responding to some who seemed to suggest that the allowances should be compared to market rents.

I don’t disagree that the marginal cost is not the same as market rent - but that’s why you don’t compare the market wage to the au pair stipend. Please explain how it makes sense to compare market wage rate to au pair wage rate if you refuse to use market living costs (rent, food, etc) and instead use marginal living costs?

It is not the market rate; it’s the minimum wage, with live in costs deducted at allowed levels; in no way is it market competitive for a live in nanny (unless you’re exploiting Prior to March 2020, the average rates we saw were $20-25/hr for nannies and $25-30 for Family Assistants. Since COVID, we’ve seen the market shift to $25-30/hr across the board due to the highly competitive nature of the market. Live in nanny’s earn more with the same DoL deduction rules plus healthcare insurance travel education and many other competitive rules. I applaud the PP as well for summarizing the solution space: good intentions by most, welcoming the reform nonetheless because it is needed. The rates above for DMV

A live in nanny is treated entirely differently than an au pair. An au pair is expected to be treated like a member of the family. If the family goes out to dinner on a Saturday night, the au pair is invited. If the family goes to Kings Dominion for the day, the au pair is invited and the family pays. If the family goes to the beach for a week, the au pair is invited. If she works for even a minute of her time at the beach, she gets her own bedroom/hotel room with a door (at the family's cost). The au pair is invited to all family gatherings and included in all family activities, from trips to the movies, to apple picking excursions, to ice skating, to Zoo lights, to skiing, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also learned that if an au pair is sent home during the program by a complaint from her host family, she forfeits her fees. And if she chooses to leave her host family during the program, she has only 2 weeks to find a new host family or she is sent home, again forfeiting her fees.

If an au pair steals from a host family, abuses their children or gets drunk in the families' home in front of the children, the host family still has to host the au pair for those two weeks. The host family also end up without childcare and in a major lurch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s absolutely not true. Even if it were, it’s no excuse

Clearly you haven't read the whole thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also learned that if an au pair is sent home during the program by a complaint from her host family, she forfeits her fees. And if she chooses to leave her host family during the program, she has only 2 weeks to find a new host family or she is sent home, again forfeiting her fees.

If an au pair steals from a host family, abuses their children or gets drunk in the families' home in front of the children, the host family still has to host the au pair for those two weeks. The host family also end up without childcare and in a major lurch.

For the record, the family also loses a big chunk of their fees.

We had friends have an au pair show up from training school and after her 4 days to acclimate to the family (with no work) she declared she wanted to go home in two weeks. She then used the two week period as a US vacation, partying with friends. Turns out she had a boyfriend back home and never intended to stay. She took the brand new iPhone they'd purchased for her with her. It cost them thousands of dollars and they had to scramble for back up childcare.

[Anonymous]

Oh, I have. As well as the judge ruling and the whole bill sponsored by our Vice President. And the report Shortchanged by our very own AU Law (American University not Au Pair), amongst other. But it might be that something untoward happened to the thread while you weren’t looking. “What’d you guys do, take it and do something crazy to it?” (Credits to Melissa Carone and the SNL)

[Anonymous]

Just an observation. Why are all the normal people on during the normal hours and hostage taking moms and cat lady lawyers on at night? Yes, I know how that sounds, but i was up watching the SNL. I get my news from the Weekend Update cause I see the world these past 4 years the same way.

[Anonymous]

Au pairs report wage theft, coercion, sexual harassment, retaliation, and misrepresentation, among other abuses. Among the range of temporary work visas available to domestic workers, the J-1 au pair program is the only program masquerading as a cultural exchange. Indeed, au pairs report that work, rather than cultural exchange, is the central component of their experience.

Au pairs report that their sponsor agencies communicate competing narratives about the program to them and to their host family employers: while sponsor agencies and their foreign affiliates promise au pairs a cultural exchange program at the time of recruitment, sponsor agencies advertise the program to host families as an affordable and flexible childcare program, electing not to emphasize the educational and cultural exchange components. Sponsor agencies’ profit motives prevent au pairs from accessing support when they face abuses. When au pair and host family interests come into conflict, au pairs report that sponsor agencies side with families, putting au pairs at risk of coercion, labor exploitation, and human trafficking.