two NF separate vacations
![[Post New]](/nanny-forum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
I work about 30 hrs for each family.
This week family B is in vacation. They pay me whenever they go out of town. Family A asked if I could work a few hours on the days I would have "off" (family Bs days). So I would be getting paid twice (from family b paying my guaranteed hrs plus my 5/6 hrs from family a). Is it wrong to double up like that?? Side not family A doesn't pay me when they go out of town, so I'm really hoping family B can pick up extra days. Family A is going on a two week vacation in two weeks (they just told me). Also I get a higher pay from family B |
Anonymous
| No. |
Anonymous
| It's not wrong to work for FamilyA if FamilyB is out of town and you 100% will not be needed. However, I also encourage you to get guaranteed hours with FamilyA because you shouldn't take a hit to your paycheck because they decide to go on vacation. |
Anonymous
|
I agree, I always get paid if the family decides to go out of town. Your check should be the same amount weekly unless you work over time, then
it would be more. Suppose they wanted to go out of town every time they turned around. No way |
Anonymous
|
OP is being paid while her employer is away on the assumption that she is reserving her availability for them. She should really check with Family B before accepting any other employment to make sure they don't expect to need her for alternative tasks while they are away and to make sure their plans are firm and not likely to change. If their plans change and they suddenly need her, she would be obligated to cancel on family A because that is the basis for her acceptance of guaranteed pay from Family B.
As for family A not paying while they are on vacation, getting paid when the employer doesn't need your services is a perk that must be negotiated. Your rate with family A was set based on their expectation that they would pay only when they need you. This is very common with part time jobs. Also, if OP approaches family A about getting paid when they vacation, it would be entirely appropriate for them to require that she bank those hours to offset any future overtime, or make up hours on a date night here and there, or come in and do alternative work (such as taking in mail, cooking to stock the freezer, sanitizing and organizing toys, planning educational activities, etc.) while they are out of town. Telling your employer after you've been hired that you want to be paid for not working during their vacations, even if you have already used your paid time off, is not likely to be received well. |
Anonymous
| 23:50. What? We pay DS' nanny guaranteed hours (so includes any vacation we take). It has nothing to do with reserving her availability (what would we need her to do if DS is with us?). We give her guaranteed hours because we know she depends on a steady income to pay for rent, bills, food, etc. And since we value her and want her around for the long haul, paying her a reliable income decreases the chances that she'll go off and find another family if we decide to go away for 2 weeks. |
Anonymous
|
Some families might consider guaranteed hours a form of extra vacation. Others consider vacation separate and guaranteed hours a guarantee that the nanny will be paid, regardless of need for her services. I don't think either approach is inherently right or wrong, but you should definitely communicate with the family paying you to avoid misunderstanding.
Our nanny received the standard two weeks of vacation, plus sick time. She definitely got 4-6 weeks per year off, paid, but we were very explicit about which of our weeks was the second "vacation week." If, on the other weeks, something unexpected were to happen, and our plans changed (never actually happened, but it could) , we would definitely expect our nanny to be available. Other families might ask for small amounts of time while they are gone, to perhaps pick up the mail or water a plant. We never asked our nanny to do those things. But we currently employ a housekeeper who has guaranteed hours, and she's working a half schedule while we are on vacation for the next two weeks. Doing a few deep cleaning projects, picking up the mail, and feeding the fish. (Cleaning, only because she's a housekeeper, so that falls in line with regular duties) Again, neither approach is necessarily right or wrong, but unless you are explicitly on vacation time, it can't hurt to have a conversation before booking those nonrefundable plane tickets or booking another job. |
nannydebsays
Member Offline
Member Offline
It is illegal to "bank" hours for use in the future. If Family A is unwilling to guarantee hours during a contract re-negotiation, then nanny can offer to do small things around their home in exchange for that week's pay. However, any "banking" of hours for use other than in that specific pay period is not legal or acceptable to most nannies who prefer to work the hours they have reserved for their employers, not random extra hours due to an employer chosen vacation 5 months ago. |
Anonymous
This. We budget for childcare annually, not monthly. |
Anonymous
|
Our nanny is full time - 50 hrs a week, guaranteed hours. We pay her for any time we're on vacation - it isn't her fault we chose to go away so she shouldn't be penalized.
If she had a job that allowed her to work during times we were away, so she was essentially being paid twice, I think that would probably bother me a little bit. It doesn't feel entirely ethical. I really don't know how that would translate to the kind of split situation OP is describing though. But it does seem just a little grey to me. |
Anonymous
MB here. Can you explain why it would bother you? I am having a hard time understanding the issue so I'm open to hearing your reasons |
Anonymous
I'm a nanny and I would feel guilty doing this without permission because I negotiate guaranteed hours on the premise of being paid for hours I have reserved. Others say it is about preserving their income. Either way, its double dipping and you're getting paid for hours for which you have already reserved and been paid. |
Anonymous
|
16:49 here. PP summed it up with with the phrase "double dipping".
I feel that if we don't need our nanny to work for any given day or week, we are obligated to pay her anyway - because she shouldn't be penalized financially for something she can't control. If it turns out that she is able to fill in work for that time, then the primary reason we are guaranteeing her hours is no longer an issue. She is not harmed in any way if she can find work elsewhere (assuming the work available would equal her income from us.) So - if she can find other work, for which she is equivalently paid, and also gets paid by us, then it feels like we - the employing family - are paying for something which wasn't necessary. I don't actually think this happens much - I think OP is in an unusual, and lucky, situation - with another family that could perhaps easily use her for some extra time. So I'm not sure my hesitation about it is particularly relevant. It wouldn't bother me - for instance - if our nanny picked up some extra babysitting hours while we were away, because that won't amount to what she would have earned in her regular salary, and is not something she could count on happening. So my reaction is probably only a theoretical concept - pretty unlikely to be relevant in actuality. (Certainly not relevant for our nanny - when we're away she doesn't have other employment options to just make up the income - so we pay her. Also, I put it in her contract so she has that protection.) |
Anonymous
|
It's not wrong at all.
You have two separate agreements. Just sounds like Family B is the better family to work for, that's all. |
Anonymous
| I would not feel obligated to share this information. Of course you bear the risk if anything comes up but its none of their business. |