Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you want her to commit those hours to you? This seems like both common sense and common curtesy. I'm sure she needs a reliable paycheck. Do the right thing and budget out your child are expense for the year and do not not pick over a couple hours here and there.
This is the type of job someone takes for a little extra spending money.
You don't know that. And if you need someone reliable, not someone who views the job as dispensable, you need to be reliable as well. If they can't count on you and that money, be prepared to not be able to count on them and their availability. Its hard to find someone for those hours, and it'd be silly to advise OP to try to save what $20 per holiday only to lose her employee. Stupid and shortsighted.
I disagree. People need to be reliable because they make commitments, not because they get benefits. I think OP should look for the type of person who takes a work commitment seriously because they have a solid work ethic. For so few hours a week, she should NOT pay vacation or holidays.
In an ideal world, yes people would be realizable because they made commitments. In reality, that's not the way it works. OP is not offering a significant enough job that she will attract candidates who will make a firm commitment to her if the job itself is flaky. You said yourself, this job is only spare money to the person OP hires/hired. If OP wants to retain this individual she should make it attractive. It won't cost much, and it will save her the headache of finding a replacement every other month when her employee flakes on the job.
Also will someone please explain the logic behind not offering benefits to part time employees. I honestly don't understand why you wouldn't for retention purposes, and would venture to guess that this standard comes more from a place of "that's just how its done" than any form of logic or reason.