Proposed DC legislation re: domestic workers

[Anonymous]

Montgomery County also has an au pair carve out in their domestic workers law. Probably worth mentioning alongside the NYC one since they're so close: https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OCP/domestic/index.html

[Anonymous]

I spoke with my Au Pair about the legislation last night-- she told me that there are a lot of APs getting really excited about this prospect, and even though the agencies are encouraging them to remind their host families to write letters, that a number of them are not because they feel like they should be paid more.

It's a shame that this won't accomplish what they are hoping, rather, the program will just cease to exist-- I for one know that as soon as I have to start managing and tracking local taxes again (as we did for our nanny), I will immediately end our participation in the program and use other alternatives.

That said, I get the point of many of my APs friends, which is that many families simply do not treat this program as a cultural exchange, rather, they treat their APs as "the help," and frequently don't respect the hours that they have scheduled, make APs change personal plans late notice and cancel activities with friends, and don't include their APs in travel and other family activities. All of those things I just mentioned contribute to the AP sentiment that if they are only going to be treated as childcare, then they, in turn, should behave like hourly workers (before you jump all over me on this, I totally understand that if we add in cost of living, insurance, etc. that this program is intended to take that all into consideration, but just reinforcing that from the AP perspective, it doesn't feel that way). In particular my AP noted that APs who are in charge of 4 or more children feel particularly taken advantage of, once they get to the U.S. and fully understand/appreciate what the going rate is in the private market for full time help for that many children.

I, for one, will help to lobby to get APs excluded from the bill, however, just want to highlight that it sounds like there certainly is opposition starting to brew.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s completely possible that these things can simultaneously be true:
1. APs need better pay and protections
2. State laws for domestic workers are a clunky and ineffective way to accomplish that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I spoke with my Au Pair about the legislation last night-- she told me that there are a lot of APs getting really excited about this prospect, and even though the agencies are encouraging them to remind their host families to write letters, that a number of them are not because they feel like they should be paid more.

It's a shame that this won't accomplish what they are hoping, rather, the program will just cease to exist-- I for one know that as soon as I have to start managing and tracking local taxes again (as we did for our nanny), I will immediately end our participation in the program and use other alternatives.

That said, I get the point of many of my APs friends, which is that many families simply do not treat this program as a cultural exchange, rather, they treat their APs as "the help," and frequently don't respect the hours that they have scheduled, make APs change personal plans late notice and cancel activities with friends, and don't include their APs in travel and other family activities. All of those things I just mentioned contribute to the AP sentiment that if they are only going to be treated as childcare, then they, in turn, should behave like hourly workers (before you jump all over me on this, I totally understand that if we add in cost of living, insurance, etc. that this program is intended to take that all into consideration, but just reinforcing that from the AP perspective, it doesn't feel that way). In particular my AP noted that APs who are in charge of 4 or more children feel particularly taken advantage of, once they get to the U.S. and fully understand/appreciate what the going rate is in the private market for full time help for that many children.

I, for one, will help to lobby to get APs excluded from the bill, however, just want to highlight that it sounds like there certainly is opposition starting to brew.

I talked to mine before when the Ma legislation originally came out and she had the opposite perspective - they realize it could shut down the program and are saddened that they would lose on opportunity for travel year, and that they didn’t particularly care about the money...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I spoke with my Au Pair about the legislation last night-- she told me that there are a lot of APs getting really excited about this prospect, and even though the agencies are encouraging them to remind their host families to write letters, that a number of them are not because they feel like they should be paid more.

It's a shame that this won't accomplish what they are hoping, rather, the program will just cease to exist-- I for one know that as soon as I have to start managing and tracking local taxes again (as we did for our nanny), I will immediately end our participation in the program and use other alternatives.

That said, I get the point of many of my APs friends, which is that many families simply do not treat this program as a cultural exchange, rather, they treat their APs as "the help," and frequently don't respect the hours that they have scheduled, make APs change personal plans late notice and cancel activities with friends, and don't include their APs in travel and other family activities. All of those things I just mentioned contribute to the AP sentiment that if they are only going to be treated as childcare, then they, in turn, should behave like hourly workers (before you jump all over me on this, I totally understand that if we add in cost of living, insurance, etc. that this program is intended to take that all into consideration, but just reinforcing that from the AP perspective, it doesn't feel that way). In particular my AP noted that APs who are in charge of 4 or more children feel particularly taken advantage of, once they get to the U.S. and fully understand/appreciate what the going rate is in the private market for full time help for that many children.

I, for one, will help to lobby to get APs excluded from the bill, however, just want to highlight that it sounds like there certainly is opposition starting to brew.

I talked to mine before when the Ma legislation originally came out and she had the opposite perspective - they realize it could shut down the program and are saddened that they would lose on opportunity for travel year, and that they didn’t particularly care about the money...

I know this isn't every AP's situation, but somewhere else there was discussion about APs getting into debt to join the program so then feeling forced to stay with bad families, etc. I firmly believe this program should NOT be seen a means to come to the US to make money. That is completely not the purpose of the program. The stipend should be low and seen as pocket/spending/travel money. That said, I recognize that 45 hours is probably too many to justify such a low stipend (even though most APs don't work this much). I think it should be increased or the max hours reduced. I also think there should be better rules in place for scheduling too though that is harder to set up and enforce. There are TOP DOWN issues with the program, but I believe they mostly fall with the regulations and the agencies who really are the ones taking advantage of both HFs and APs. Charging $9k for a year (the same amount the AP will make) while also charging the AP to come here and then charging AGAIN when he/she signs up for another year WITHOUT WARNING. That is the abuse. Cultural Care told my AP out of the blew that it was $400 to stay another year (maybe they had given prior notice, but in her perspective she had no idea)- that is a MONTH'S WAGES and is insane. Of course we paid it for her (AGAIN IT IS NOT JUST THE STIPEND THAT YOU PAY), but she had other AP friends that did not have to pay this and that is systematically unfair. It should be the same no matter what agency you are with if they are go betweens the state dept, APs, and families, they cannot have different rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery County also has an au pair carve out in their domestic workers law. Probably worth mentioning alongside the NYC one since they're so close: https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OCP/domestic/index.html

That's huge- and the fact that it is carved into the law, rather than just a policy (like NY that will likely get challenged). This should be what is cited to in letters to Council people. https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OCP/Resources/Files/domestic/law.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I spoke with my Au Pair about the legislation last night-- she told me that there are a lot of APs getting really excited about this prospect, and even though the agencies are encouraging them to remind their host families to write letters, that a number of them are not because they feel like they should be paid more.

It's a shame that this won't accomplish what they are hoping, rather, the program will just cease to exist-- I for one know that as soon as I have to start managing and tracking local taxes again (as we did for our nanny), I will immediately end our participation in the program and use other alternatives.

That said, I get the point of many of my APs friends, which is that many families simply do not treat this program as a cultural exchange, rather, they treat their APs as "the help," and frequently don't respect the hours that they have scheduled, make APs change personal plans late notice and cancel activities with friends, and don't include their APs in travel and other family activities. All of those things I just mentioned contribute to the AP sentiment that if they are only going to be treated as childcare, then they, in turn, should behave like hourly workers (before you jump all over me on this, I totally understand that if we add in cost of living, insurance, etc. that this program is intended to take that all into consideration, but just reinforcing that from the AP perspective, it doesn't feel that way). In particular my AP noted that APs who are in charge of 4 or more children feel particularly taken advantage of, once they get to the U.S. and fully understand/appreciate what the going rate is in the private market for full time help for that many children.

I, for one, will help to lobby to get APs excluded from the bill, however, just want to highlight that it sounds like there certainly is opposition starting to brew.

I talked to mine before when the Ma legislation originally came out and she had the opposite perspective - they realize it could shut down the program and are saddened that they would lose on opportunity for travel year, and that they didn’t particularly care about the money...

I know this isn't every AP's situation, but somewhere else there was discussion about APs getting into debt to join the program so then feeling forced to stay with bad families, etc. I firmly believe this program should NOT be seen a means to come to the US to make money. That is completely not the purpose of the program. The stipend should be low and seen as pocket/spending/travel money. That said, I recognize that 45 hours is probably too many to justify such a low stipend (even though most APs don't work this much). I think it should be increased or the max hours reduced. I also think there should be better rules in place for scheduling too though that is harder to set up and enforce. There are TOP DOWN issues with the program, but I believe they mostly fall with the regulations and the agencies who really are the ones taking advantage of both HFs and APs. Charging $9k for a year (the same amount the AP will make) while also charging the AP to come here and then charging AGAIN when he/she signs up for another year WITHOUT WARNING. That is the abuse. Cultural Care told my AP out of the blew that it was $400 to stay another year (maybe they had given prior notice, but in her perspective she had no idea)- that is a MONTH'S WAGES and is insane. Of course we paid it for her (AGAIN IT IS NOT JUST THE STIPEND THAT YOU PAY), but she had other AP friends that did not have to pay this and that is systematically unfair. It should be the same no matter what agency you are with if they are go betweens the state dept, APs, and families, they cannot have different rules.

Sounds like AP agency owners dictated how the regulations were written.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I spoke with my Au Pair about the legislation last night-- she told me that there are a lot of APs getting really excited about this prospect, and even though the agencies are encouraging them to remind their host families to write letters, that a number of them are not because they feel like they should be paid more.

It's a shame that this won't accomplish what they are hoping, rather, the program will just cease to exist-- I for one know that as soon as I have to start managing and tracking local taxes again (as we did for our nanny), I will immediately end our participation in the program and use other alternatives.

That said, I get the point of many of my APs friends, which is that many families simply do not treat this program as a cultural exchange, rather, they treat their APs as "the help," and frequently don't respect the hours that they have scheduled, make APs change personal plans late notice and cancel activities with friends, and don't include their APs in travel and other family activities. All of those things I just mentioned contribute to the AP sentiment that if they are only going to be treated as childcare, then they, in turn, should behave like hourly workers (before you jump all over me on this, I totally understand that if we add in cost of living, insurance, etc. that this program is intended to take that all into consideration, but just reinforcing that from the AP perspective, it doesn't feel that way). In particular my AP noted that APs who are in charge of 4 or more children feel particularly taken advantage of, once they get to the U.S. and fully understand/appreciate what the going rate is in the private market for full time help for that many children.

I, for one, will help to lobby to get APs excluded from the bill, however, just want to highlight that it sounds like there certainly is opposition starting to brew.

Those APs who support it probably don't realize that a huge number of them were let go from their jobs as paying minimum wage was untenable for many MA families!

[Anonymous]

The rampant abuse and zero accountability has gone on for far too long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I spoke with my Au Pair about the legislation last night-- she told me that there are a lot of APs getting really excited about this prospect, and even though the agencies are encouraging them to remind their host families to write letters, that a number of them are not because they feel like they should be paid more.

It's a shame that this won't accomplish what they are hoping, rather, the program will just cease to exist-- I for one know that as soon as I have to start managing and tracking local taxes again (as we did for our nanny), I will immediately end our participation in the program and use other alternatives.

That said, I get the point of many of my APs friends, which is that many families simply do not treat this program as a cultural exchange, rather, they treat their APs as "the help," and frequently don't respect the hours that they have scheduled, make APs change personal plans late notice and cancel activities with friends, and don't include their APs in travel and other family activities. All of those things I just mentioned contribute to the AP sentiment that if they are only going to be treated as childcare, then they, in turn, should behave like hourly workers (before you jump all over me on this, I totally understand that if we add in cost of living, insurance, etc. that this program is intended to take that all into consideration, but just reinforcing that from the AP perspective, it doesn't feel that way). In particular my AP noted that APs who are in charge of 4 or more children feel particularly taken advantage of, once they get to the U.S. and fully understand/appreciate what the going rate is in the private market for full time help for that many children.

I, for one, will help to lobby to get APs excluded from the bill, however, just want to highlight that it sounds like there certainly is opposition starting to brew.

I talked to mine before when the Ma legislation originally came out and she had the opposite perspective - they realize it could shut down the program and are saddened that they would lose on opportunity for travel year, and that they didn’t particularly care about the money...

I know this isn't every AP's situation, but somewhere else there was discussion about APs getting into debt to join the program so then feeling forced to stay with bad families, etc. I firmly believe this program should NOT be seen a means to come to the US to make money. That is completely not the purpose of the program. The stipend should be low and seen as pocket/spending/travel money. That said, I recognize that 45 hours is probably too many to justify such a low stipend (even though most APs don't work this much). I think it should be increased or the max hours reduced. I also think there should be better rules in place for scheduling too though that is harder to set up and enforce. There are TOP DOWN issues with the program, but I believe they mostly fall with the regulations and the agencies who really are the ones taking advantage of both HFs and APs. Charging $9k for a year (the same amount the AP will make) while also charging the AP to come here and then charging AGAIN when he/she signs up for another year WITHOUT WARNING. That is the abuse. Cultural Care told my AP out of the blew that it was [b]$400 to stay another year (maybe they had given prior notice, but in her perspective she had no idea)- that is a MONTH'S WAGES and is insane. [b]Of course we paid it for her (AGAIN IT IS NOT JUST THE STIPEND THAT YOU PAY), but she had other AP friends that did not have to pay this and that is systematically unfair. It should be the same no matter what agency you are with if they are go betweens the state dept, APs, and families, they cannot have different rules.

If that's a month for your AP, you're severely underpaying. Minimum x 4 weeks (average in a month) is twice that at $800.

[Anonymous]

I think that au pairs deserve more than 200 dollars per week, since transportation becomes expensive for those who don't have a car. I am an au pair and I do not agree that they want to make families pay so much, since I know that it is the most comfortable way to take care of their children. I think there should be a more equitable distribution between what the agency earns and what it earns there au pair without getting to pay more costs to the family.

[Anonymous]

We pay $11k to the agency, $13k to the AP, $1500 for phone and gym membership, $2000 just for her car insurance, $800 (roughly) for gas, $500 for educational credit, $1200 for ticket home for vacation, and about $10,000 (estimated) for additional food, and tickets/housing when we travel with her on working vacations or vacation vacations, which is about 40k annually. She works 44 hours per week (one toddler), with evenings and weekends off. If this legislation went into effect, We would put DD in daycare a few days a week. AP would work fewer but less predictable hours. We would contribute to a phone plan she buys. We would not pay for the gym. We would not provide a dedicated car and would make her pay for personal gas. We would not fly her home. We would not take her on vacation. We would not buy her separate tickets to things while on working vacations. We would also have to withhold tax from her stipend. In other words, we would treat her like a nanny in a nanny share. She would have less money in her pocket. She would have less cultural exchange. Her schedule would be worse. I agree that reforming the AP industry is necessary because we all know stories where families are abusing the system or have one AP for five kids. But this is not the way to do it.

[Anonymous]

How many families fly the AP home for a vacation? I never even heard of that. Any family who offers that stands out. Or perhaps it’s less expensive than taking her along on their winter holiday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many families fly the AP home for a vacation? I never even heard of that. Any family who offers that stands out. Or perhaps it’s less expensive than taking her along on their winter holiday.

If they extend a second year, we fly her home, and give her an extra weekend of vacation. If you don't let go him and renew their visa they cannot leave the US in the extension year.

[Anonymous]

We are another family who offers to fly her home for the week needed to renew her visa if she agrees to extend. And yes, often this coincides with a family vacation with my parents Its about $700 and well worth it for a happy extension AP!