Nanny Quit to have a baby and now trying to claim Unemployment Benefits??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I doubt we're going to feel sorry for an MD, or other typically highly paid worker without certain benefits.

PP MD here. I didn't ask you to feel sorry for me at all. It was my choice to have children and my decision about whether we could afford my unpaid maternity leave or not. My point was that so many nannies here like to say "well, if all the MBs in their high paying positions get paid maternity leave a nanny should too" but most MBs don't actually get paid maternity leave either. You can't say you want the same benefits as MBs have and then turn it around and say you can't compare MB's job to a nanny job because they are totally different when the first argument doesn't work out for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I doubt we're going to feel sorry for an MD, or other typically highly paid worker without certain benefits.

Almost no one in this country has the benefit of paid maternity leave. Workplaces that provide that are an exception, not the rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I doubt we're going to feel sorry for an MD, or other typically highly paid worker without certain benefits.

But these are the people who can afford to pay your salary, and, as the PP said, continue to pay it even when she's home on maternity leave. You need rich people, or you work at a daycare. I don't understand how you keep getting employed when the resentment you feel toward people who can afford your salary oozes out of every post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt we're going to feel sorry for an MD, or other typically highly paid worker without certain benefits.

But these are the people who can afford to pay your salary, and, as the PP said, continue to pay it even when she's home on maternity leave. You need rich people, or you work at a daycare. I don't understand how you keep getting employed when the resentment you feel toward people who can afford your salary oozes out of every post.

I resent the wealthy employers who nickle and dime the nanny at every opportunity. A nanny told me her employer of three years, formally makes her "justify" her COL raise every year, yet they can't throw the money fast enough at their spoiled rotten kids. I saw it.

I am blessed to have employers who shower me with generosity and thoughtfulness. They respect me and teach their child to do the same.

So you must understand, PP, my world doesn't revolve around me and the fact that I already have everything I need. After all, I see so many other hard-working nannies who can't afford basic necessities which you and I may take for granted.

Don't you see them too? I sincerely hope that your nanny isn't one of them. I hope to God you aren't the nasty parent on this forum screaming about how easily replaceable every nanny is. Because a long term primary caregiver, is in fact, never "replaceable."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt we're going to feel sorry for an MD, or other typically highly paid worker without certain benefits.

But these are the people who can afford to pay your salary, and, as the PP said, continue to pay it even when she's home on maternity leave. You need rich people, or you work at a daycare. I don't understand how you keep getting employed when the resentment you feel toward people who can afford your salary oozes out of every post.

I resent the wealthy employers who nickle and dime the nanny at every opportunity. A nanny told me her employer of three years, formally makes her "justify" her COL raise every year, yet they can't throw the money fast enough at their spoiled rotten kids. I saw it.

I am blessed to have employers who shower me with generosity and thoughtfulness. They respect me and teach their child to do the same.

So you must understand, PP, my world doesn't revolve around me and the fact that I already have everything I need. After all, I see so many other hard-working nannies who can't afford basic necessities which you and I may take for granted.

Don't you see them too? I sincerely hope that your nanny isn't one of them. I hope to God you aren't the nasty parent on this forum screaming about how easily replaceable every nanny is. Because a long term primary caregiver, is in fact, never "replaceable."

I'm not the PP but I am the MB MD who posted earlier. Like you, I also resent wealthy employers who nickle and dime any employee, whether that's the nanny or gardener or whoever else they employ. But I'm not one of those people and what I resent is also nannies who assume I am. I don't really know you but I actually think you are probably a reasonable person in real life who has seen other people mistreated by employers so when you have an inkling that someone else is you fight back.

I didn't say it in my previous post because it wasn't really relevant but since you have made assumptions I am going to correct them. Just because I am an MD doesn't make me "wealthy." I actually make less than we pay the nanny. I work because if I stopped now, I'd never be able to go back when my children are grown. It's a decision I made so I'm not asking for sympathy. We decided to make childcare our priority now but that means we aren't saving any money for the future, for our children's education etc. DH's car is on it's very last leg (and has been for some time) but we are nursing it along because we can't afford a new one. We can't buy a house because we can't save enough money for a down payment. We haven't taken a vacation in years because we are trying to save whatever little bit we can. My point in saying this is that despite all of this we still paid the nanny while I was on maternity leave because it was the right thing to do but it bothers me that people would complain that because I can afford a nanny I should be able to afford to pay her if she went on maternity leave. Or, because I am an MD I am obviously wealthy and should be able to pay both the nannies salary and a backup nanny while she goes on maternity leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt we're going to feel sorry for an MD, or other typically highly paid worker without certain benefits.

But these are the people who can afford to pay your salary, and, as the PP said, continue to pay it even when she's home on maternity leave. You need rich people, or you work at a daycare. I don't understand how you keep getting employed when the resentment you feel toward people who can afford your salary oozes out of every post.

I resent the wealthy employers who nickle and dime the nanny at every opportunity. A nanny told me her employer of three years, formally makes her "justify" her COL raise every year, yet they can't throw the money fast enough at their spoiled rotten kids. I saw it.

I am blessed to have employers who shower me with generosity and thoughtfulness. They respect me and teach their child to do the same.

So you must understand, PP, my world doesn't revolve around me and the fact that I already have everything I need. After all, I see so many other hard-working nannies who can't afford basic necessities which you and I may take for granted.

Don't you see them too? I sincerely hope that your nanny isn't one of them. I hope to God you aren't the nasty parent on this forum screaming about how easily replaceable every nanny is. Because a long term primary caregiver, is in fact, never "replaceable."

I'm not the PP but I am the MB MD who posted earlier. Like you, I also resent wealthy employers who nickle and dime any employee, whether that's the nanny or gardener or whoever else they employ. But I'm not one of those people and what I resent is also nannies who assume I am. I don't really know you but I actually think you are probably a reasonable person in real life who has seen other people mistreated by employers so when you have an inkling that someone else is you fight back.

I didn't say it in my previous post because it wasn't really relevant but since you have made assumptions I am going to correct them. Just because I am an MD doesn't make me "wealthy." I actually make less than we pay the nanny. I work because if I stopped now, I'd never be able to go back when my children are grown. It's a decision I made so I'm not asking for sympathy. We decided to make childcare our priority now but that means we aren't saving any money for the future, for our children's education etc. DH's car is on it's very last leg (and has been for some time) but we are nursing it along because we can't afford a new one. We can't buy a house because we can't save enough money for a down payment. We haven't taken a vacation in years because we are trying to save whatever little bit we can. My point in saying this is that despite all of this we still paid the nanny while I was on maternity leave because it was the right thing to do but it bothers me that people would complain that because I can afford a nanny I should be able to afford to pay her if she went on maternity leave. Or, because I am an MD I am obviously wealthy and should be able to pay both the nannies salary and a backup nanny while she goes on maternity leave.

There is no winning this argument on this board. The response to your explanation here will be, "well, then you really can't afford a nanny, can you?" There is a contingent here who, while arguing that nannies should be treated as independent professionals who direct their own jobs and determine their own use of time each day, and who should not be given much in the way of instruction by micro-managing parents, also argue for essentially the old model of servitude, where a servant was a lifelong household retainer, and would be paid forever, in sickness and in health, and considered a member of the family in perpetuity. This was the model for the "landed gentry" in Europe. But, at much higher wages, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

But it was not full time employment.
If you do not have full time employment you are unemployed.
she paid into the unemployment fund. You are unable to give her full time employment.
Why can she not get it?

Because she had a part time job to begin with. You are eligible for unemployment if your full time job is reduced to part time, but not because you currently have a part time job and want to switch to full time.

This is exactly right!