Let's be Clear

[Anonymous]

Just to be accurate, it's an agreement, not a contract. A contract is legally enforceable; whatever you call it, it's not legally enforceable.

So when you take a job with unreasonable demands, find a new job and leave. No two weeks. Nothing. You don't owe them anything. They owe you. They owe you decent treatment, like a person, not a slave girl. They owe you a living wage. No judge in this great land will let anyone sue a poor hard working nanny, for anything.

You can sue them, and win, if they don't pay you properly. That's the main reason to have an agreement. That's the only part that is legally enforceable. That long list of housecleaning is NOT the job of a nanny. If they wanted a house cleaner, they have to be honest and say so. A nanny is NOT a housekeeper. If they want you to do two jobs, they need to pay you to do two jobs. A nanny takes care of the child, not the toilet scrubbing and floor polishing. Please. Wake up to nanny abuse. It's too much to ignore. Most of us see it happening.

[Anonymous]

Actually, nanny agreements, so long as they state the term of employment and terms of employment, are legally enforceable. Not disagreeing that some people abuse their employees, but people all over these boards say the agreements are not enforceable, when, if written properly, they absolutely are.

[Anonymous]

In which state has anyone won a law suit charging that the nanny refused the scrub the toilet, or provide two weeks notice. Please give us a link for that case. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Is this you?
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/nanny-forum/posts/list/276228.page

we get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, nanny agreements, so long as they state the term of employment and terms of employment, are legally enforceable. Not disagreeing that some people abuse their employees, but people all over these boards say the agreements are not enforceable, when, if written properly, they absolutely are.

Is this you? When and where has any nanny housekeeping chores ever been "enforced" in a US Court of Law?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, nanny agreements, so long as they state the term of employment and terms of employment, are legally enforceable. Not disagreeing that some people abuse their employees, but people all over these boards say the agreements are not enforceable, when, if written properly, they absolutely are.

We do not get you. So, if you don't mind, please provide some evidence to support your claim, "that nanny agreements, properly written, are legally enforceable".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, nanny agreements, so long as they state the term of employment and terms of employment, are legally enforceable. Not disagreeing that some people abuse their employees, but people all over these boards say the agreements are not enforceable, when, if written properly, they absolutely are.

Is this you? When and where has any nanny housekeeping chores ever been "enforced" in a US Court of Law?

The minutia of employment contracts are rarely ever enforced for any job, especially with small employers. But PP is right that nanny agreements are legally enforceable, and are enforced through litigation (of course, generally in state courts, not a "US Court of Law," since there is no reason to think federal jurisdiction would attach). It's true that often people don't litigate, but that is not because the agreement is unenforceable. It is because the dispute is too small to justify the cost of taking someone to court. It's much cheaper to fire your nanny and hire a better one.

It's also just generally silly to assert that an "agreement" is not a "contract." A contract is a bargained for exchange, aka an agreement in which both parties offer something. Sorry to disappoint, but really there is no special magic beyond that. The concept is complicated only by its own simplicity.

[Anonymous]

00:32, here, just to follow up for 22:50, who is clearly not getting it, this is a longer explanation of what a contract is: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/contracts-basics-33367.html

You'll notice that it begins, "a contract is an agreement." Did you agree to do housework? Did you agree to give two weeks notice? If so, you have a contractual obligation to do those things. If not, you do not have a contractual obligation. It is that simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, nanny agreements, so long as they state the term of employment and terms of employment, are legally enforceable. Not disagreeing that some people abuse their employees, but people all over these boards say the agreements are not enforceable, when, if written properly, they absolutely are.

Is this you? When and where has any nanny housekeeping chores ever been "enforced" in a US Court of Law?

The minutia of employment contracts are rarely ever enforced for any job, especially with small employers. But PP is right that nanny agreements are legally enforceable, and are enforced through litigation (of course, generally in state courts, not a "US Court of Law," since there is no reason to think federal jurisdiction would attach). It's true that often people don't litigate, but that is not because the agreement is unenforceable. It is because the dispute is too small to justify the cost of taking someone to court. It's much cheaper to fire your nanny and hire a better one.

It's also just generally silly to assert that an "agreement" is not a "contract." A contract is a bargained for exchange, aka an agreement in which both parties offer something. Sorry to disappoint, but really there is no special magic beyond that. The concept is complicated only by its own simplicity.

+1

Hurrah for reason!

[Anonymous]

So nothing has EVER gone to court, as far as anyone here is aware?

[Anonymous]

Yes, yes, I am the earlier person who has been trying to change the general (and incorrect) thinking that agreements between household employees and employers are enforceable. Thanks to 00:32 for spending more time to explain it than I did. My point isn't to slam any nannies or any Mbs, just to point out that this seems to be a popular misconception on this board. True, probably no one sues, because it is easier to fire a nanny or quit if you are one, and cheaper too. But my point is you could if you wanted to, and that IS a powerful tool for nannies who feel they are being taken advantage of by employers who try to change terms, and not pay for things they previously agreed to pay.

[Anonymous]

But my point is you could if you wanted to, and that IS a powerful tool for nannies who feel they are being taken advantage of by employers who try to change terms, and not pay for things they previously agreed to pay.

If you never want your job tasks to change then you need to prepare to be job hunting every year or should go work in a daycare center where you are with the same age group all the time.

The reality is that the tasks that a nanny does changes as the kids get older. Good nannies and good employers often find a balance of changing responsibilities and are flexible enough to make this work where it is valuable to BOTH parties. This does mean that once the changing diapers and constant holding the baby days are over that more driving kids around and housekeeping tasks come in.

[Anonymous]

11:28 -who do you think you're kidding? Really now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But my point is you could if you wanted to, and that IS a powerful tool for nannies who feel they are being taken advantage of by employers who try to change terms, and not pay for things they previously agreed to pay.

If you never want your job tasks to change then you need to prepare to be job hunting every year or should go work in a daycare center where you are with the same age group all the time.

The reality is that the tasks that a nanny does changes as the kids get older. Good nannies and good employers often find a balance of changing responsibilities and are flexible enough to make this work where it is valuable to BOTH parties. This does mean that once the changing diapers and constant holding the baby days are over that more driving kids around and housekeeping tasks come in.

+1

[Anonymous]

No one is talking about the changing development process of the child, as cited by your "diaper" example. Don't try to derail the issue here. That nonsense doesn't contribute to the discussion.