The above 3 examples are actual case files of au pairs' experiences from the Shortchanged document.

Paola (pseudonym) paid $3,000 to a recruiter at her university in Colombia to participate in the U.S. au pair program. She arrived with hopes of bonding with her host family, improving her English skills towards her goal of becoming a certified English teacher back in Colombia one day, and earning money to support her family back home. Within a month of her arrival, Paola found herself working 60-75 hours per week – during the day – and, moreover, the one solely responsible for waking up 4 to 6 times a night to feed and soothe the colicky infant, six nights per week. For her labor, she was paid less than half of what she was entitled under U.S. minimum wage laws. Paola felt compelled to stay with the host family because of her need to recoup the recruitment fee and to earn some money to send home to her family. She also remained because, as the infant’s primary caregiver, she felt she could not abandon the infant. It was only after Paola was diagnosed by an emergency room doctor with extreme exhaustion while accompanying her host family on their vacation that Paola finally left the family.
Paola reported her mistreatment to the au pair agency, specifically requesting that the family be removed from the program. However, the agency informed Paola that she was as guilty as the host family for violating the au pair regulations (due to excessive work hours), and therefore removing the host family would also require removing Paola from the program. The au pair agency furthermore threatened to immediately terminate Paola’s visa if she were to file a complaint with the State Department. Concerned about possible retaliation by the recruiter in Colombia if Paola were to file a claim with the State Department – and also because the State Department explicitly disclaimed any ability to prevent the au pair agency from terminating Paola's visa in retaliation for the complaint – Paola ultimately decided to forgo filing her complaint. With the help of an anti-trafficking advocate, Paola pursued – and ultimately settled – a civil lawsuit against the host family for the approximately $12,000 the family owed her in unpaid back wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The au pair agency has since permitted Paola’s host family to host two more au pairs from Colombia.

Maria’s local recruiter in Colombia demanded that Maria pay $1,500 in recruitment fees -- the equivalent of three months' salary in Colombia for a recent college graduate. A friend of Maria's in the United States contacted the U.S.-based au pair agency to complain about the local recruiter's fees, after which the agency convinced the local recruiter to reduce the fee to $500. Upon Maria’s arrival, her host family informed Maria that she was expected to work additional 60 hours per week, for which the host family would pay her $6 per hour for the 15 hours above the 45 hour limit. The host family also informed Maria that, in addition to providing over-full-time childcare, Maria would be responsible for cleaning the house. Maria complained that these demands violated the rules of the au pair program, and opted to leave the host family. Maria later met the host family’s replacement au pair, a young woman from China. The Chinese au pair informed Maria that she had been required to pay $5,000 by a local recruiter to participate in the program, and as a result, felt she had no choice but to stay with the host family despite the long hours, in order to recoup the fee.

Wen paid $1,500 to a recruiter in Thailand to participate in the U.S. au pair program. Wen was placed with a host family who also employed another au pair. Wen worked 16 hour days, for a total of 65 to 70 hours per week. In addition to caring for the host family’s two children, Wen was responsible for cleaning the entire house, doing the entire family’s laundry, grocery shopping, and cooking meals for the entire family and their houseguests. During the family’s vacation, Wen was responsible for taking care of the children 24 hours per day. During her time off, Wen was often asked to return to the house to “help” the family clean or care for the kids. The host family prohibited Wen from eating any of the host family’s food, expecting her to use her stipend to purchase her own food. Wen was also prohibited from using the host family’s washing machine for her own clothes. The host family monitored Wen phone calls and checked her voicemails. The other au pair received the same treatment.

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.