Au Pair just asked for more money

[Anonymous]

No, hopefully, it will not.

[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.

Someone earlier up thread made the point that this guts the program except for those very wealthy families who may not need full time childcare and may have a stay at home parent or older school age children who really only need car service. Full stop. If that is your aim, then just be clear you think this is only something that should be accessible to a very small subset of the population. I might spend 35k on my au pair but I’m not spending 60k and creating a weird employee type dynamic. These are 20 year olds hanging out for shopping money not people trying to scrap together a living. It’s not reasonable to expect me to spend 35k at a minimum and then have all of the extras I’d want to give to treat someone as part of the family.

When the MA legislation came out, many of the au pairs had to rematch or go home when host families left the program. Lol. You actually think all the au pairs tried to run to Ma because there were just so many openings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Someone earlier up thread made the point that this guts the program except for those very wealthy families who may not need full time childcare and may have a stay at home parent or older school age children who really only need car service. Full stop. If that is your aim, then just be clear you think this is only something that should be accessible to a very small subset of the population. I might spend 35k on my au pair but I’m not spending 60k and creating a weird employee type dynamic. These are 20 year olds hanging out for shopping money not people trying to scrap together a living. It’s not reasonable to expect me to spend 35k at a minimum and then have all of the extras I’d want to give to treat someone as part of the family.

When the MA legislation came out, many of the au pairs had to rematch or go home when host families left the program. Lol. You actually think all the au pairs tried to run to Ma because there were just so many openings?

You and the other families would still spend the same amount (20-40k/yr) but more of it would go your au pair to spend as she wishes vs. to the agency or what you think au pairs should like. Even at the high end, it would still be a fraction of live-in nanny unless you are involved in illegal arrangements. I agree there’s an issue with affordable childcare in the US but it cannot be solved by excluding a cohort of people from labor protections.

[Anonymous]

Other than the still very high agency fees, what the agencies outline as the HF obligations in MA seem perfectly reasonable. It’s very hard to argue with a 30 hr/wk cultural exchange and childcare program at $305/wk or 40 hr/wk at $433. Sounds perfectly reasonable, and even favorable to the HFs while fair to the APs.

If you’re still against the program reform, please explain why after reading the details of the difference published by the Cultural Care (not a domestic worker advocacy agency). I can think of only two reasons: no room left for ambiguity and exploitation in terms of hours and duties and au pairs no longer depending on your largesse for any perks.

https://culturalcare.com/massachusetts-pricing/

[Anonymous]

For goodness sake, cleaning fees are $200/wk unless you pay under the table! All the perks you outline are incremental. Did you really buy a new car for your au pair? I don’t think many did (it’s the use of the car). If you don’t like doing things that are making your children safe and the au pair feel welcome on top of what even at the MA rates is $10/hr for live-in childcare, you are not in it for the right reasons and it is not a good situation for the au pairs.

Simple as that. So quit the bellyaching over not being able intice or coerce an au pair into extra hours or duties out of bounds while paying $4 bucks an hour. Come on!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Someone earlier up thread made the point that this guts the program except for those very wealthy families who may not need full time childcare and may have a stay at home parent or older school age children who really only need car service. Full stop. If that is your aim, then just be clear you think this is only something that should be accessible to a very small subset of the population. I might spend 35k on my au pair but I’m not spending 60k and creating a weird employee type dynamic. These are 20 year olds hanging out for shopping money not people trying to scrap together a living. It’s not reasonable to expect me to spend 35k at a minimum and then have all of the extras I’d want to give to treat someone as part of the family.

When the MA legislation came out, many of the au pairs had to rematch or go home when host families left the program. Lol. You actually think all the au pairs tried to run to Ma because there were just so many openings?

You and the other families would still spend the same amount (20-40k/yr) but more of it would go your au pair to spend as she wishes vs. to the agency or what you think au pairs should like. Even at the high end, it would still be a fraction of live-in nanny unless you are involved in illegal arrangements. I agree there’s an issue with affordable childcare in the US but it cannot be solved by excluding a cohort of people from labor protections.

So just be clear and own your own racism and sexism that you think only rich white people with women who don’t work should be able to have APs - don’t pretend that you give any effs about women of color, working women, etc, middle class, etc. Own your own extreme privilege - and your own racism/misogyny/classicism...

[Anonymous]

WTF are you talking about? Stop spouting the jargon and explain how $4.35/hr is anti-racist?

[Anonymous]

Def. completely unwarranted attack. Current fees are estimated at $20k/yr minimum (culturalcare.com/pricing/)
Of that, only $10k to the au pair and $9k+ to the agency.

In practice, in MA the agencies returned a portion of the fees to the families, so one could see getting at the same amount with more to the au pairs, better hours, more reasonable cut for the agencies, similar basic envelope for the families.

Regardless of social justice and equity issues or the affordable childcare issues in America, exploiting au pairs is not a right nor the way to address these issues.

[Anonymous]

You sickos should just hire a nanny, properly. The au pair program is so gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Someone earlier up thread made the point that this guts the program except for those very wealthy families who may not need full time childcare and may have a stay at home parent or older school age children who really only need car service. Full stop. If that is your aim, then just be clear you think this is only something that should be accessible to a very small subset of the population. I might spend 35k on my au pair but I’m not spending 60k and creating a weird employee type dynamic. These are 20 year olds hanging out for shopping money not people trying to scrap together a living. It’s not reasonable to expect me to spend 35k at a minimum and then have all of the extras I’d want to give to treat someone as part of the family.

When the MA legislation came out, many of the au pairs had to rematch or go home when host families left the program. Lol. You actually think all the au pairs tried to run to Ma because there were just so many openings?

You and the other families would still spend the same amount (20-40k/yr) but more of it would go your au pair to spend as she wishes vs. to the agency or what you think au pairs should like. Even at the high end, it would still be a fraction of live-in nanny unless you are involved in illegal arrangements. I agree there’s an issue with affordable childcare in the US but it cannot be solved by excluding a cohort of people from labor protections.

So just be clear and own your own racism and sexism that you think only rich white people with women who don’t work should be able to have APs - don’t pretend that you give any effs about women of color, working women, etc, middle class, etc. Own your own extreme privilege - and your own racism/misogyny/classicism...

PP is right. Not a WF either nor SAHM BTW. Please explain how paying $4/hr contributes to social equity, justice and anti-racism? Imma wait. Meanwhile, happy to be called a “classicist” for advocating a minimum wage, duties as described, and upholding the cultural exchange part of the program. So many names I was called. As my au pair (who supports the MA laws and would much prefer that arrangement to a cut-rate gym membership she didn’t choose and whatever other “perks” HF chooses for her to be grateful for), I’m “shook”.

[Anonymous]

What we are saying is we either need to kill the program or actually make it a seasonal worker program. We don’t need to pretend to care about middle class or UMC childcare needs. Their needs are petty and bourgeoisie- these women should be taking caring of their kids not trying to have careers. They are selfish, mostly white women- yuck. Make them pay the APs more and let’s get the APs out of them homes of these selfish people. If the APs want to come here, they can pay for their housing like other seasonal workers. The agencies can charter buses for them, they shouldn’t be driving in this country anyway - HFs should be banned from proving them vehicles. Now, when they are living in dorms - HFs won’t have to pay to feed them and HFs will be banned from taking them on bougie working vacations. What else? We need to turn this into a strictly employer-employer relationship as much as possible. We should also ban APs from speaking any language other than English on the job...

[Anonymous]

No. We are saying it’s a cultural exchange program with an educational dimension which compensates au pairs’ time more fairly at a minimum wage and without arbitrary 40% deductions. It is not comparable to a live in nanny nor a seasonal worker program (which should also be fairly compensated).

If you don’t agree with that, and think it’s fair to compensate at $4.35/hr regardless how nice of a host family you might be, perhaps no type of live in care is acceptable to you. As luck would have it, the bill sponsored by Kamala Harris and other such legislation is still pending in most places, so no immediate legislative enforcement in DMV. But there is a moral imperative to voluntarily internalize the issues and meet the spirit of the program accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. We are saying it’s a cultural exchange program with an educational dimension which compensates au pairs’ time more fairly at a minimum wage and without arbitrary 40% deductions. It is not comparable to a live in nanny nor a seasonal worker program (which should also be fairly compensated).

If you don’t agree with that, and think it’s fair to compensate at $4.35/hr regardless how nice of a host family you might be, perhaps no type of live in care is acceptable to you. As luck would have it, the bill sponsored by Kamala Harris and other such legislation is still pending in most places, so no immediate legislative enforcement in DMV. But there is a moral imperative to voluntarily internalize the issues and meet the spirit of the program accordingly.

You are right, 40% deduction is arbitrary and way too low for DC. It should be more like 60% in DC.

[Anonymous]

Thankfully, Dpt of Labor disagrees with you. Federal minimum wage was last revised in 2009. This is either a terrible display of self-interest at expense of all others or ignorance. Either way it is staggering.

[Anonymous]

Au pairs have typically received a weekly stipend of $195.75, the legal minimum. Now an au pair willing to switch homes can easily secure $500 a week, says Anna Edhegard, a host mother in Alexandria, Virginia. Many parents, she notes, now use social media to attract an au pair by dangling perks like a nice car. Another Alexandria mum, a covid-19 researcher, hopes to secure a “national-interest” exception for her would-be au pair, who is stuck in Colombia. But she frets that if an exception is granted, her au pair may be tempted to “rematch” later with a family offering more money.