Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having read thru the Montgomery requirements the primary responsibilities seem to be: pay wages for all hrs worked, pay OT as needed over 40 hours, pay at least minimum wage, comply with minimum housing requirements. Put in place a contract that addresses several elements even if you opt not to provide those elements as benefits/perks. The former issues seem to simply try to she's light on existing obligations. The real new part is to do a Conrad t that covers the relevant items specified. That contract could simy say though "we are not offering Paid sick or vacation time" as opposed to the model contract suggestions of paid PTO for both. I think it is unfortunate that the benefits part of the model contract was written in a way that specifies things not actually required by the law since that to me seems very misleading.

The spirit of the requirement and the model contract was to protect the domestic workers. The model contracts "models" what was decided was a fair working agreement. I don't think its misleading at all. If someone isn't smart enough to figure out what is and is not required of them, they probably should just go with the model. Not offering any PTO is pretty messed up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having read thru the Montgomery requirements the primary responsibilities seem to be: pay wages for all hrs worked, pay OT as needed over 40 hours, pay at least minimum wage, comply with minimum housing requirements. Put in place a contract that addresses several elements even if you opt not to provide those elements as benefits/perks. The former issues seem to simply try to she's light on existing obligations. The real new part is to do a Conrad t that covers the relevant items specified. That contract could simy say though "we are not offering Paid sick or vacation time" as opposed to the model contract suggestions of paid PTO for both. I think it is unfortunate that the benefits part of the model contract was written in a way that specifies things not actually required by the law since that to me seems very misleading.

The spirit of the requirement and the model contract was to protect the domestic workers. The model contracts "models" what was decided was a fair working agreement. I don't think its misleading at all. If someone isn't smart enough to figure out what is and is not required of them, they probably should just go with the model. Not offering any PTO is pretty messed up.

Can someone please share the link to the Montgomery County MD model contract?

Anonymous wrote:She's just trying to get traffic to her site. Here is a link to the official one:

http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/ocptmpl.asp?url=/content/ocp/domestic/contract.asp

Anonymous wrote:Rightly so because these laws are trying to single outs nannies for benefits that other hourly workers do not get. I think that is not right. If you want to mandate sick leave for all FT employees then fine or min wage of a certain amt for all fine. But the domestic worker laws single out nanny employers to impose things on them that no other hourly worker employers have to do. That seems unfair.
FWIW I do give a pretty standard package - rate well above min of course, paid sick and vacation, guaranteed hrs, gas money etc so it is not about trying to do less personally. It is about disliking the singling out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rightly so because these laws are trying to single outs nannies for benefits that other hourly workers do not get. I think that is not right. If you want to mandate sick leave for all FT employees then fine or min wage of a certain amt for all fine. But the domestic worker laws single out nanny employers to impose things on them that no other hourly worker employers have to do. That seems unfair.
FWIW I do give a pretty standard package - rate well above min of course, paid sick and vacation, guaranteed hrs, gas money etc so it is not about trying to do less personally. It is about disliking the singling out.

Do you have sick leave, 6:42?