For those of you currently using AP's, or considering using them, how risk averse are you? It's not just Massachusetts laws changing.
From Shortchanged: Au pairs are currently challenging this wage calculation in an ongoing class action lawsuit in Colorado, Beltran v. InterExchange, Inc., which alleges that the sponsor organizations are violating not only minimum wage and overtime laws, but also federal antitrust law and state-law fraud protections. The plaintiffs allege that the sponsors’ stipend amount violates federal, state, and local minimum wage rules and deprives them of earned overtime premiums. They also assert that the sponsors colluded to set that wage, which accounts for neither the number of children an au pair cares for nor her geographic location, in violation of the antitrust laws. Finally, the plainti s allege that the sponsors fraudulently misrepresented the au pair program, au pairs’ ability to negotiate their wages, and the wages the au pairs were entitled to receive.

The Federal District Court of Colorado has determined that the au pairs in Beltran have viable claims in each of these areas. In particular, the au pairs are proceeding with minimum wage claims under federal, state, and various local laws, and the Court has explained that FLSA bars the practice of deducting room and board from wages where, as in the case of au pairs, live-in employment is a program requirement for the benefit of the employer. The Court further concluded that the au pairs have a viable claim for overtime, since au pair sponsor agencies are employers who “may not avail themselves of the [domestic worker] overtime exemption, even if the employee is jointly employed by the individual or member of the family or household using the services.”

The Court additionally found that the au pairs have a viable claim against the sponsor agencies for wage fixing and recently certified a class of over 91,000 current and former au pairs to proceed with that claim. The court also certifed classes under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organiza- tions Act (RICO), state minimum wage laws and state fraud rules. The au pairs are also proceeding collectively with federal wage and hour claims under the FLSA’s collective action mechanism.

As a general matter, au pairs report that the program fails to guarantee access to the basic material needs and services promised under the J-1 au pair program. Despite program requirements that host families guarantee transportation to classes, some au pairs interviewed for this report stated that they did not have access to transportation to attend their required classes or to leave the house on their days off.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who thinks au pairs want to be treated more like nannies needs to meet more au pairs.

I’m sure none would object to no scope creep in terms of duties, fewer hours or higher pay, and protection from families who take advantage of the program. As always, if market is warped, legislation needs to step in — even at MA rates, 45 hrs/wk of au pair is half of a live in nanny (or should be) so I don’t buy that the program would stop. I think it would draw better families, more willing to buy into the spirit of cultural exchange. Just because things are the way they are doesn’t mean they are right; look at the food bank queues, maternity or sick leave policy in our country for proof. I don’t think the federal judge, 200+ state senators, domestic workers union or Kamala are off their rockers in thinking the change is needed.

Anyone who thinks au pairs want to be treated more like nannies needs to meet more au pairs.

Anonymous wrote:Takeaway here is a wide variation in how people use and treat au pairs, so legislation would iron that out.

It's equally clear that legislation turning au pairs into nannies guts the intent of the program. New legislation needs to specially address the au pair program and include more safeguards for both au pairs and host families.

Takeaway here is a wide variation in how people use and treat au pairs, so legislation would iron that out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also this makes the person saying their au pair costs them
$30k per year insane. Unless they’re handing out gold bars.

This is only because you don't understand the program and ignore posts by anyone who tries to explain how it works. As I've said previously, posting nonsense prolifically (and then prolifically patting yourself on the back for your nonsense) doesn't make you correct.

Why don’t you explain it? If you’d like to advance an argument, provide some facts instead of repeating yourself and lashing out at other women. Not a good look. Also, maybe explain to the federal judge and a couple senators who reviewed the situation and came to the same conclusions about corrupting of the program.

Live-in nanny here. Maybe you’ll listen to me, since you are ignoring the HP.

$10400 (roughly, rounded to $200 weekly): directly to the AP; $10179 if paying exactly the stipend
$6000-11000: agency fees
$1000: education credits, $500 per semester
$2400-7200: $200-600 food per month for the extra person (BPs are notorious for eating triple what HP expect), but the amount “deducted” is much less
$60-600: $5-50 increase in electricity per month, depending on what the AP does
$60-600: $5-50 increase in water per month, depending on how much water AP uses and what your rate is
$240-$1000 phone for a year
Car insurance rate increase can be several hundred to more than a thousand
Increased gas for the car
Increased maintenance on the car
Extra flight, food, and tickets for vacation
Extra tickets, food and other costs associated with including AP in dinner out, movie night, apple picking, etc.

Most families hit $24000 without trying. Many families go over $30k. I don’t want to count the number of families who switch from nanny to AP thinking they’ll save, then they find they don’t. OTOH, families who get tired of rematching don’t quibble about a nanny’s rate.

None of that is relevant as they decided that they were willing to pay. They don't have to offer a car and insurance but most do to drive the kids around. Same with cell phone. And, you take the AP on vacation for your child care needs, not a vacation for them. I don't think its unreasonable to ask for more with multiple kids for 45 hours a week. They aren't even paying minimum wage. AP is living in their home for their needs.

Many families invite au pairs on vacation because they’re a member of the family, not for them to work on vacation. When we do it, it’s max one night of babysitting. And we’ve also had au pairs bring a friend so she can have a proper trip for herself and make better use of the room we are paying for.

Not all families invite au pairs on vacation but for me it always seemed a little cruel.

They are not family, they are your employee.

They’re an exchange student who babysits. I was an exchange student and I treat my au pairs the way I was treated as one. Including vacation invites.

No, they aren't exchange students. They aren't going to school full time and helping out with babysitting. They are working up to 45 hours a week taking care of your kids. That is an employee masked under a cultural exchange.

Maybe that’s how you use the program. It’s not how I do. And actually I have had au pairs go to school full time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also this makes the person saying their au pair costs them
$30k per year insane. Unless they’re handing out gold bars.

This is only because you don't understand the program and ignore posts by anyone who tries to explain how it works. As I've said previously, posting nonsense prolifically (and then prolifically patting yourself on the back for your nonsense) doesn't make you correct.

Why don’t you explain it? If you’d like to advance an argument, provide some facts instead of repeating yourself and lashing out at other women. Not a good look. Also, maybe explain to the federal judge and a couple senators who reviewed the situation and came to the same conclusions about corrupting of the program.

Live-in nanny here. Maybe you’ll listen to me, since you are ignoring the HP.

$10400 (roughly, rounded to $200 weekly): directly to the AP; $10179 if paying exactly the stipend
$6000-11000: agency fees
$1000: education credits, $500 per semester
$2400-7200: $200-600 food per month for the extra person (BPs are notorious for eating triple what HP expect), but the amount “deducted” is much less
$60-600: $5-50 increase in electricity per month, depending on what the AP does
$60-600: $5-50 increase in water per month, depending on how much water AP uses and what your rate is
$240-$1000 phone for a year
Car insurance rate increase can be several hundred to more than a thousand
Increased gas for the car
Increased maintenance on the car
Extra flight, food, and tickets for vacation
Extra tickets, food and other costs associated with including AP in dinner out, movie night, apple picking, etc.

Most families hit $24000 without trying. Many families go over $30k. I don’t want to count the number of families who switch from nanny to AP thinking they’ll save, then they find they don’t. OTOH, families who get tired of rematching don’t quibble about a nanny’s rate.

None of that is relevant as they decided that they were willing to pay. They don't have to offer a car and insurance but most do to drive the kids around. Same with cell phone. And, you take the AP on vacation for your child care needs, not a vacation for them. I don't think its unreasonable to ask for more with multiple kids for 45 hours a week. They aren't even paying minimum wage. AP is living in their home for their needs.

Many families invite au pairs on vacation because they’re a member of the family, not for them to work on vacation. When we do it, it’s max one night of babysitting. And we’ve also had au pairs bring a friend so she can have a proper trip for herself and make better use of the room we are paying for.

Not all families invite au pairs on vacation but for me it always seemed a little cruel.

They are not family, they are your employee.

They’re an exchange student who babysits. I was an exchange student and I treat my au pairs the way I was treated as one. Including vacation invites.

No, they aren't exchange students. They aren't going to school full time and helping out with babysitting. They are working up to 45 hours a week taking care of your kids. That is an employee masked under a cultural exchange.

The way I read it, it came from one article that was about nannies and not au pairs specifically. Why is this such a concern for you? Of everything you’ve read? No one said molesters, but unwanted attention did get brought up in the complaints. While it might have been misquoted as au pairs and not nannies through the records of this one agent, you’re severely mischaracterizing the discourse coming across honestly a bit unhinged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

"Pages and pages'? But how can you possibly know that only one person made all of those posts? They were all made by 'anonymous.' I think that there are a number of people on opposite 'sides' of the discussion, and a number of others who are somewhere in the middle

It appears the person above repeating this (objectively unfair and inaccurate statement about PPs, easily debunked by reading back) might be genuinely disturbed. They might be the same person threatening posters with calling the DC Bar (?!). These are difficult times for many people trying to cope mentally. Probably best to ignore and not to engage to avoid causing them any harm. Let’s hope people remember to ask for help (mentalhealth.gov)

I read the board, and would unfortunately have to agree that the person misreading the board this badly (molesters etc) when there was nothing close to that really should talk to someone before something worse happens. A lot of people are under a real pressure and fraying mentally.