Anonymous wrote:OP - your friend needs a clear concise letter stating the grounds for termination (Nanny is being terminated as a result of having left child screaming and unattended on August 17, 18 and 19 - or whatever the grounds).

As per the contract, termination with cause means that severance pay is inapplicable.

Your last day of employment with us is today, but in light of your tenure with the family however, we will pay you through Sept 6.

That payment will be made through our normal payroll method and is subject to you returning all household keys, and any other items.

Signing of this letter means you agree to accept this termination, the two weeks of additional pay, and release Mr. and Mrs. Doe from any further obligations.

Of course nannies should not sign anything until it's been reviewed by a lawyer. Legal aid will do it for free.

OP - your friend needs a clear concise letter stating the grounds for termination (Nanny is being terminated as a result of having left child screaming and unattended on August 17, 18 and 19 - or whatever the grounds).

As per the contract, termination with cause means that severance pay is inapplicable.

Your last day of employment with us is today, but in light of your tenure with the family however, we will pay you through Sept 6.

That payment will be made through our normal payroll method and is subject to you returning all household keys, and any other items.

Signing of this letter means you agree to accept this termination, the two weeks of additional pay, and release Mr. and Mrs. Doe from any further obligations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP - firing for cause happens immediately after an incident or prior to the next working day. You don't get to say "well, the nanny left Jimmy by the pool unattended last week and now we've decided to fire her for cause" when she's continued working for you in the meantime. If your friend has had her nanny working since the incident/"cause" she should pay the full severance.

I fired for cause - my nanny was consistently late. I reminded her of work hours and expectations. She continued to be late. I got my ducks in a row with temporary care and fired her. It does not need to happen on the next working day. (But since she was consistently late - it would not have been tough for it to be)

That is a situation in which a non immediate termination makes sense, as she did not endanger the safety of your children. However if the situation for cause is truly similar to that of the earlier pp, it doesn't make sense that you would still allow her to watch your children. Either it happened or it didn't, either it was serious enough to warrant termination or not, either she can no longer be trusted or not. The fact that she wasn't fired immediately brings into question if the situation happened as the parent claims it did, and if they are embellishing or fabricating the incident to get out of severance/unemployment. If there is a dispute down the road, the burden of proof that she was fired for cause will fall on the employer and her case would be questionable at best.

OP the employer can simply give the employee a termination letter stating that she is being fired for cause and listing the reason.

I would not recommend giving two weeks notice or severance for cause. Its not right.

If the employer really wants to do this then she can right " As you are being terminated for cause, you are not eligible for severance per our contract. We are extending you two weeks pay to ease your personal situation. "

Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP - firing for cause happens immediately after an incident or prior to the next working day. You don't get to say "well, the nanny left Jimmy by the pool unattended last week and now we've decided to fire her for cause" when she's continued working for you in the meantime. If your friend has had her nanny working since the incident/"cause" she should pay the full severance.

I fired for cause - my nanny was consistently late. I reminded her of work hours and expectations. She continued to be late. I got my ducks in a row with temporary care and fired her. It does not need to happen on the next working day. (But since she was consistently late - it would not have been tough for it to be)

Anonymous wrote:What's the cause, OP? Or you are a troll.

Troll.

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but you people insisting on knowing the cause are just rubber-necking. What difference does it make?

Not a pp who asked...but there is a big difference between "nanny ate food from pantry even though contract states that food is off limits" and "nanny left baby in house alone with no monitor"

Not OP but you people insisting on knowing the cause are just rubber-necking. What difference does it make?

What's the cause, OP? Or you are a troll.

Why must the firing happen immediately? I can think of many issues where an MB might be torn about firing the nanny if she has been a long term one and MB is struggling to decide if it was a terrible but isolated judgement lapse vs a reason the nanny can no longer be trusted.

Not a lawyer so no advice for OP but just wanted to say that if I had to fire our long term nanny for cause I would be hard pressed to shell out am extra month to her but I would imagine also wanting to not leave her entirely up a creek with zero notice or severance.

Agree with PP - firing for cause happens immediately after an incident or prior to the next working day. You don't get to say "well, the nanny left Jimmy by the pool unattended last week and now we've decided to fire her for cause" when she's continued working for you in the meantime. If your friend has had her nanny working since the incident/"cause" she should pay the full severance.

Has the nanny worked any hours for your friend since the incident that created cause? If so, I think it would be hard to make a case that the firing is for cause and her severance/notice is forfeit or should be reduced from the four weeks in their contract.

Another issue to consider is the nanny's potential to collect unemployment. I'm a nanny, not a lawyer (kids are at camp) but my understanding is that being fired for cause (and forfeiting all severance would signify this) would put the nanny in an even higher and drier situation, which is sounds like your friend wants to avoid. If your friend is opposed to her soon-to-be former nanny receiving unemployment, I would not call the two weeks' pay severance.

If you're for real, giving any kind of severance would indicate that nanny was let go not fired for cause, which I would think would open your "friend" up to a dispute for the contracted severance. I hope the nanny refuses to sign.

I agree with 11:30's original post. I also don't understand the whole situation. You said the situation is similar to PP's story? That is pretty neglectful behavior and seems pretty crystal clear that firing would be for cause. Your whole post makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the tactic of going halfway. If the nanny did something deeply problematic, then let her go with cause and don't pay severance. If she did something more mild, and it just "feels" like severance is reasonable, then pay the severance in the contract.

2 weeks severance feels like you are saying she was fired withgood cause, but are being cheap. Seems to put the MB on iffy ground.

*without good cause