Au Pair just asked for more money

[Anonymous]

Here is an excellent Harvard Law article by a law prof from AU: THE U.S. AU PAIR PROGRAM: LABOR EXPLOITATION AND THE MYTH OF CULTURAL EXCHANGE

https://harvardjlg.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2012/01/2013-summer.1.pdf

On the one hand, the “cultural exchange” rubric enables the U.S. government to house the program under the Department of State rather than Labor and to delegate oversight of this government program to private recruitment agencies that have strong financial incentives to overlook and even hide worker exploitation.

On the other hand, the “cultural exchange” rhetoric used in the au pair program regulations and practice reifies harmful class, gender, and racial biases and tropes that feed society’s stubborn resistance to valuing domestic work as work worthy of labor protection.

Together, these dynamics render au pairs vulnerable to abuse and threaten to undermine the tremendous gains otherwise being made on behalf of domestic workers’ rights. The Article concludes with a proposal to reform the au pair program with an eye toward promoting decent working conditions for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the US Appeals Court ruling detailing rejection of the appeal (Supreme Court also refused to hear the case):
http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2140P-01A.pdf

MA is now studying the au pair program to see if claims by host families have any merit. That study should be ready by January.

Meanwhile, some observations others shared from this process:

There is no simple solution to [the childcare] crisis, but we believe everyone will agree that creating a child care program that requires primarily young women from other countries to work for sub-minimum wages is not the answer.

As we join with other organizations to fight for longer-term solutions, we hope that there can be short-term solutions to ease the financial burden on host families that do not come at the expense of au pairs. The au pair program has many costs, particularly the upfront program fee of up to $10,000 that host families pay to the sponsor agencies -- almost as much as the families pay to the au pairs themselves. The sponsor agencies are largely for-profit businesses and, in some cases are part of multinational corporations. These sponsor agencies profit both from the fees paid by families and au pairs. We hope that all stakeholders, including sponsor agencies, can be part of the conversation about making the program more affordable, while still compliant with the law.

Bolded is a red herring. The nonprofit agencies don't have particularly lower fees.

[Anonymous]

Fundamentally, these are inconvenient truths that the families are unlikely to willingly admit.

[Anonymous]

Both of my former au pairs were definitely here to meet husbands. Both got married right after (well, one technically was before) finishing the program. Both are very happy with their husbands - one is pregnant now.

[Anonymous]

We've had two au pairs and both are like family members to us. We have visited their families in their home country and have hosted their family visiting the U.S.

We treat the au pair program as a true cultural exchange. Our au pairs are welcome to come on every family trip with all expenses paid. We pay for their gym membership, cell phone, gas, car insurance, food and pay a stipend that is above the required amount. We also buy whatever they need- shampoo, nail polish remover, blow dryer, what ever.

We love our au pairs and they love us. It is a mutually beneficial relationship and our au pairs say they wouldn't trade their experience for anything!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ISN'T THIS A CULTURAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM?

When this program was formed decades ago, its original intent may have been to be a cultural exchange, with au pairs serving not as full-time child care providers, but as “mothers’ helpers” for stay-at-home mothers. Over time, between the increased demand for affordable childcare due to the lack of investment in childcare (and other benefits such as parental leave) from the government and families’ workplaces, rising living costs, stagnant wages, spotty government regulation and questionable business practices of au pair agencies, the program has transformed into a full-fledged labor program — as the U.S. Department of State itself has acknowledged.

So part of your critique is rooted in misogyny that shames mothers for working outside the home - noted.

[Anonymous]

I love the people who come on here claiming worker abuse for au pairs, then send their kid to a daycare or aftercare that pays $9/hour without benefits to its workers.

DCUM, keeping hypocrisy alive in 2020!

[Anonymous]

Someone in this thread is definitely having a normal one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Both of my former au pairs were definitely here to meet husbands. Both got married right after (well, one technically was before) finishing the program. Both are very happy with their husbands - one is pregnant now.

TBF I think this was the real purpose of the program. There were waaaay too many young women after WWII in Europe with worse prospects of marrying because of the massive casualties among men their age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fundamentally, these are inconvenient truths that the families are unlikely to willingly admit.

There are inconvenient truths that critics of the AP are also unlikely to willingly admit. There are HFs who take advantage of an imperfect system and accordingly, there are APs who have poor experiences. There are HFs who should be barred from the program and have exploited APs, going against the express rules of the program. There are HFs whose reason for having an AP is rooted in language. There are HFs who are single professional women who need full-time child care. There are HFs who are people of a color. There are HFs who are middle class. Some of the criticism of the AP program is a product of sexism that says women should raise their kids and not work. Some of the critics of the program believe that only UMC or wealthy families (mostly white) are entitled to have an AP who essentially serves as a low-cost limo service ferrying kids to after-school activities for a few hours a week maximum, and anything beyond that is exploitation. If we re-imagine the AP program the way that critics would have it - the program would have largely white, wealthy HFs with HMs who do not work outside the home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love the people who come on here claiming worker abuse for au pairs, then send their kid to a daycare or aftercare that pays $9/hour without benefits to its workers.

DCUM, keeping hypocrisy alive in 2020!

+10000
Daycare workers do not have it as good as my aupair.
I don't know about other host families, but we do not exploit our aupair. She works 20 hours a week, if that, and is here to be a kid driver. She's got it made for her time here in the US without one bill which she has to pay on her own plus stipend.

The Nanny unions have been tryin to demonize the aupair program for years. There are aupairs out there who are the absolute worst and host families who want full time nannies but pay aupair wages. Aupairs are hardly young, naive, scared little girls who are being exploited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is an excellent Harvard Law article by a law prof from AU: THE U.S. AU PAIR PROGRAM: LABOR EXPLOITATION AND THE MYTH OF CULTURAL EXCHANGE

https://harvardjlg.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2012/01/2013-summer.1.pdf
Together, these dynamics render au pairs vulnerable to abuse and threaten to undermine the tremendous gains otherwise being made on behalf of domestic workers’ rights. The Article concludes with a proposal to reform the au pair program with an eye toward promoting decent working conditions for all.[/quote


Harvard Law article is excellent, thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both of my former au pairs were definitely here to meet husbands. Both got married right after (well, one technically was before) finishing the program. Both are very happy with their husbands - one is pregnant now.

TBF I think this was the real purpose of the program. There were waaaay too many young women after WWII in Europe with worse prospects of marrying because of the massive casualties among men their age.

Except the program didn't begin in the US until 1989.

[Anonymous]

The way the proposed DC bill would work is $15/hr, $77 deduction so for families currently not paying above stipend, a $400/wk extra. However, some offsets from agency fees. Of course, ability to charge some expenses like cell phone for personal use (but most have unlimited data), plane tickets for family vacation but only if au pair is not working on that vacation (which is almost never the case). I can see how allowing for fewer hours written into the contract would make this work better for families and support the cultural exchange/education/travel better anyway. In any case, the au pair would share a clear charter of rights and legal protections, and no longer depend on the hosts’ largesse.

In MD and VA, min wage is lower and domestic worker provisions have to date been defeated. It would be very interesting to see how the market would play out with such a difference between the city and the surrounding states. Would all the best au pairs end up in DC?

It is very hard to argue in the face of evidence that the MA law is unfair. Reforms to the program to even out the playing field are necessary, including some to help the host families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The way the proposed DC bill would work is $15/hr, $77 deduction so for families currently not paying above stipend, a $400/wk extra. However, some offsets from agency fees. Of course, ability to charge some expenses like cell phone for personal use (but most have unlimited data), plane tickets for family vacation but only if au pair is not working on that vacation (which is almost never the case). I can see how allowing for fewer hours written into the contract would make this work better for families and support the cultural exchange/education/travel better anyway. In any case, the au pair would share a clear charter of rights and legal protections, and no longer depend on the hosts’ largesse.

In MD and VA, min wage is lower and domestic worker provisions have to date been defeated. It would be very interesting to see how the market would play out with such a difference between the city and the surrounding states. Would all the best au pairs end up in DC?

It is very hard to argue in the face of evidence that the MA law is unfair. Reforms to the program to even out the playing field are necessary, including some to help the host families.

DC will have a similar carve-out exception for APs like in MD and VA.