Reply to Minimum wage rising and nannies wages

Forum Index » General Discussion

Reply to "Minimum wage rising and nannies wages"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]PP once again. The joint employer laws are actually meant to protect employees from their jobs being split between two connected employers and resulting loss of overtime. It also means that both employers are equally responsible to the nanny for her entire paycheck.[/quote]

Except it never happens that way in real life. Something needs to be done about this law in respect to nanny shares. It clearly isn't going to protect us from anything, and will just allow cheap people to pay less than minimum wage. [/quote]

I agree that some employers choose to follow the part of that law that suits them and ignore the other part. The same goes for those employers who pay under the table. That doesn't mean there is something wrong with the law though, just how well it's enforced. It's up to both nannies and employers to make sure they are following the law. If an employer isn't, then quit or report them or whatever you want to do but you can't argue that the law should change so that a nanny share should be treated as 2 separate jobs for minimum wage purposes but not OT etc. As several people have pointed out, the point of the law is to protect the nanny in a share. So make sure you have employers who follow the law. [/quote]

I understand what you're saying, and appreciate you not being a jerk like the above poster. It just seems wrong and illogical to me that a nanny share is treated as two jobs in all other respects except for this oh so convenient expection. [/quote]

That makes sense but in what other ways is it really treated as 2 completely separate jobs. My understanding of the law is that it basically links them together so while there are still 2 employers everything is tied together. Isn't that pretty much how it works in all aspects of a share? I'm genuinely asking, not trying to be snarky. [/quote]

I think that is the big issue, and I suppose it can differ from share to share. In my experience, aside from splitting the hourly rate and sharing the same general space, my share families have little to do with each other on a daily basis. I filled out two seperate w4s, and recieve two seperate w2s for tax purposes, in which I have to file as someone that has 2 jobs, each at an hourly rate of $10.00. I recieve two paychecks (and wouldn't dream of holding the other family responsible for a missed or late check), set the schedule with each family (which are not always identical), discuss any issues, changing needs of their family and child, plan and shop for meals, etc. all independently of the other family. I also recieve two separate evaluations, and 2 annual bonuses, which have not always been the same. I also perform different duties for each family, depending on who is hosting (one family pays me extra to cook dinner during their host week). The only thing my employers do jointly was to hire me, and approve my vacation time (which is entirely mine to use as I please).

It truly is like having two jobs simultaneously, each with their own expectations, tasks, hours, and pay. Its more work for me, trying to juggle everyone's needs and desires, different schedules, and tasks, but I really do my best to give them as close to a normal nanny experience as they would if they weren't sharing. As far as I can see, in experience and by law, a share is otherwise two jobs. I maintain that it is illogical that it would suddenly be treated as one for the purpose of minimum wage. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics