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.

I am not sure how much of the dynamic is there to leverage because their choices are rematch or go home.

And actually, we were her rematch for her second year.

She wanted to stay in the US. Her first host family was in CT. Her second year she went to CA but then got upset with the host family. She was with them for like two weeks in CA. We were kind of a last resort for her.

She actually had several friends from the au pair world in the DMV already.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here again. In addition to the pay, we pay for her phone, insurance, and has access to our car. We also have her on the Uber family plan so she can go wherever she wants.

We pay for all her food, and of course cover room and board. She can work up to 45 hours per week as per the program, but has never even worked 40 hours per week with us.

So, the $200/week is play money for her.

You have a 3 yo and an 8 yo home all day, you work full time, and the AP doesn’t even work 40 hours? Who watches the kids during the day? What’s her schedule?

OP here Her schedule is basically 8:45 am - 3:45 pm. I stop working at 3:00 pm and go back to work again after the kids are in bed @ 8:00 pm.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. You mean I can just make up rules as I go along and continue to exploit my au pair as I please? That can’t be right!

I'm not sure who you are, but you are not the OP. I am.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this typical? We pay her the normal weekly stipend. Is there anyone else out there that pays or receives more than is required?

I'm not sure what to do. Feels a little like extortion to me. She's only been with us for three months.

Ha! I was delighted to read that it’s not only typical but is coming for you at $15/hr direct from a federal judge and the Supreme Court who refused to hear the appeal. So in DC, you are looking at $675 if you want 45 hrs per week. And it can only be the approved cultural exchange works. Also unlikely you can deduct 40% or even 0% for room and board. So let’s say it’s the same as in MA, per the court ruling (although some would argue $0 deduction since the au pair must room and board with your family), you can deduct about 13%, so you should be paying $587 per week. Let me know if you still claim you’re in it for a cultural exchange. Really curious.

Curious if we can then charge for room and board. You know - cable, Internet, own room, own bath, groceries, etc.

For a city the price would end up being basically the same once they pay you for room & board and insurance to drive the car.

By David North on October 19, 2020
Earlier this month, we wrote about three governmental entities — the U.S. Supreme Court, the Trump White House, and the U.S. State Department — all taking steps to either curtail the size of the au pair (J-1) program or to ensure that the young alien nannies in it are given a raise.

Last week, according to a Law360 article behind a partial pay wall, "a Massachusetts-based au pair company [Cultural Care, Inc.,] is lying to its host families to drive up its own fees and underpay its workers in New York and California, one of the au pairs said Thursday in a proposed class action complaint."

The article continued: "Her complaint says Cultural Care's 'business model depends on the systemic underpayment of au pairs in violation of California and New York law.'"

The worker advocates are utilizing state — not federal — law in an effort to secure economic justice for the au pairs. What the U.S. Supreme Court did, by refusing to hear an appeal, was to permit the State of Massachusetts to grant the young women a substantial wage hike under that state's minimum wage rules.

The au pairs scheme is one of several foreign-worker programs operated directly by the State Department; State, unlike Labor and DHS, has no stateside field structure to supervise these programs.

Although the au pairs are using state laws, they have brought the case in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts. The plaintiff, Karen Morales Posada, has worked as an au pair in both New York and California. She, and other members of the proposed class, are represented by David Seligman, executive director of the Denver-based, non-profit law firm, Towards Justice.

No, OP, it’s the opposite. You must actually provide a cultural exchange and not exploit your au pair. You must also cough up some more dough. A lot more.

OP here. You mean I can just make up rules as I go along and continue to exploit my au pair as I please? That can’t be right!

The Au Pair Ruling: What Host Families Need to Know

1. Coming soon to wherever you are!
2. Au pairs need to be paid minimum wage ($15/hr in DC)
3. Au pairs need to be paid for all “working time”
During meal, rest, and sleep periods, if the au pair is free to leave the host family’s premises, able to use the time for their sole benefit, and relieved from all work duties during the time then those hours are not considered hours worked.
4. Host families need to purchase workers’ compensation insurance
5. Host families need to follow the state’s domestic workers’ bill of rights; things like: overtime, maternity leave, no retaliation, no duties outside the job role
6. Host families are required to use timesheets

Anonymous wrote:Is this typical? We pay her the normal weekly stipend. Is there anyone else out there that pays or receives more than is required?

I'm not sure what to do. Feels a little like extortion to me. She's only been with us for three months.

That b! I hope she asked for the full $475 you owe her on top of $200 you pay per week. Can I have her number so I can send her a link to this thread? Loads of great information.

Anonymous wrote:Stop filling in the conversation for her. Make her do the heavy lifting:

“You shared that you would like more money. Say more about that. Exactly how much? We’re already exceeding the guidelines of the agency. What’s your reasoning for more?”

Make her do the work of answering.

You can respond with something like “I’m really struggling with this request since I’m not seeing the bare minimum. You rarely play with the kids. There’s no effort to clean up or help out with things like laundry. I’d be happy to revisit this conversation in a month.”

“You shared that you would like more money. Say more about that. Exactly how much? We’re already exceeding the guidelines of the agency. What’s your reasoning for more?”

“I’m really struggling with this request since I’m not seeing the bare minimum. You rarely play with the kids. There’s no effort to clean up or help out with things like laundry. I’d be happy to revisit this conversation in a month.”

Exactly $15/hr and no deduction for room and board. My reasoning is that it is illegal. Haven’t you read the new federal judge judgment that I’m sure DC Attorney General would agree with it? I thought you’d at least google before firing up the dcum!

Well, sorry you are struggling but the agencies have just lost in the Supreme Court. And making me do your laundry is illegal too. So, we can revisit in a month, but please note I will be requiring interest on my back wages. You are paying me $5 extra per week. Well done. So you now owe me only $670 more per week. Wait, that’s too much? You would hire a real cleaner and a real nanny for that? But I thought you said you were excited to give me a cultural experience.

I really enjoyed the cultural experience of watching you play out this super cringey script your dumb friend on dcum advised you to do. I hope you get a lawyer next. A proper one, not a housewife claiming to be one on dcum.

That was some schooling (no pun intended). Well done!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This! And let’s remind ourselves what the OP said: “Au Pair asked for more money”! And then proceeded to list illegal activities to be done for a salary that wouldn’t be acceptable in the poorest countries. No mention of cultural exchange.

You clearly dont understand au pair compensation.

Clearly not. But a federal judge does.

Ha ha ha! Someone should advise the OP’s au pair to considerably up her “extortion” when OP role plays the script provided by the Pop Psychologist. Honestly, things are just better and better ever since that Saturday in November!

Oh wow! I just looked this up. Totally true. Apparently all these cultural exchange just families bitterly complained that into believing that they could obtain up to 45 hours of child care per week in exchange for payment of a stipend of $195.75 per week. Cultural Ambassadors!!!

An au pair agency based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, will offer $4.4 million in refunds to Massachusetts host families as part of a settlement reached on Feb. 7 with state Attorney General Maura T. Healey’s office.
Cultural Care Au Pair will offer the families refunds totaling $150 to $177 per week, from Dec. 2, 2019, to cover some costs of paying minimum wage and overtime to their au pairs, Healey’s office said.
On Dec. 2, 2019, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a suit Cultural Care filed against Healey, which argued that federal law relating to au pairs preempts the state’s wage and hour laws. The court found that Massachusetts wage, overtime and Domestic Workers Bill of Rights laws apply to au pairs.
Cultural Care maintains that the state laws are preempted and plans to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review its case, the settlement said.
Healey, according to the settlement, received “more than one hundred calls from host families after December 2, 2019.” Many of the families “complained that they were misled by their au pair agencies, including Cultural Care, into believing that they could obtain up to 45 hours of child care per week in exchange for payment of a stipend of $195.75 per week.”
Cultural Care agreed to notify future potential host families in Massachusetts of their obligations under the Domestic Worker Bill of Rights and other state laws. The agency is also allowed to disclose its position on the disputed Massachusetts laws and provide updates about any potential developments in the courts.