Anonymous wrote:It is obvious to me that you aren't trying to cheat your nanny, and I think the arrangement would actually benefit her. Having a consistent paycheck and earning several extra thousand through your arrangement would make this a very good situation!

It does seem though, that it might be better if you just pay the hours as they are worked, as if the appointment ends early it could be a mess and also you don't want to get in an illegal situation. What you might do, if you want to make the situation a little more appealing for some reason, is promise that extra $3000+ as a bonus after the initial year of the appointment. That would help if you are concerned that she will leave at the end of the summer for a job that allowed her to continue to be full time, leaving you looking for a new nanny.

That's not going to work. Nannies fall into a few categories: part time, full time, and those that work multiple part time jobs. It would be very difficult to find a nanny willing to work 32 hours during the school year, who doesn't have another commitment be it another job, school whatever, who would then also be available for 46 hours during sick days, holidays, and breaks. OP needs to guarantee full time pay (40 hours) so her nanny doesn't need a second job and will stay available, and simply pay the OT during the summer. Its really not that hard.

It is obvious to me that you aren't trying to cheat your nanny, and I think the arrangement would actually benefit her. Having a consistent paycheck and earning several extra thousand through your arrangement would make this a very good situation!

It does seem though, that it might be better if you just pay the hours as they are worked, as if the appointment ends early it could be a mess and also you don't want to get in an illegal situation. What you might do, if you want to make the situation a little more appealing for some reason, is promise that extra $3000+ as a bonus after the initial year of the appointment. That would help if you are concerned that she will leave at the end of the summer for a job that allowed her to continue to be full time, leaving you looking for a new nanny.

Anonymous wrote:Go for it OP. Plenty of people have told you its illegal but yet you continue to ask, so go for it. I hope she quits right before summer starts and screws you.

If it's not legal, I won't do it.

I kept posting to correct people who were claiming I was trying to screw someone out of overtime, since the math clearly is in the nanny's favor. I also was surprised that people didn't think it would be nice to have a reduced work week during part of the year. But given the visceral reactions, clearly, even if this were to be legal (which everyone is saying it isn't), it does not appear to be of interest to people, so I won't propose it to our nanny.

Our nanny is amazing, and I wouldn't want to insult her, offend her in any way, which is why I thought I'd mention it here. I was trying to come up with a plan that I thought she might find attractive.

Not all employers are out to screw their nannies. Gesh.

Go for it OP. Plenty of people have told you its illegal but yet you continue to ask, so go for it. I hope she quits right before summer starts and screws you.

My numbers were wrong, but here it is:

32 hours x $22= 704
$704x 37 WEEKS (not hours) = 26048
PLUS
40 hours x 22 = 880+ 198= 1078
$1078x15 weeks= 16170
Total based on actual hours: $42218

40 hours year-round pay is $22x40x52= $45760

So my plan is paying the person an extra $3500.

So please don't claim that I am being cheap.

What aren't you getting about ITS ILLEGAL. You are allowed to overpay (guaranteeing more hours than you used) but you are not allowed to under pay (paying for less hours than she worked because you over paid during the year). Depending on when you hire her, if she leaves early or is let go, one of you comes up short and I hope it you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How complicated just to avoid paying OT smh.

Um, no, you've missed the point completely. I don't need full-time work during the school year, but I don't think that it's realistic to expect someone to make less 35 weeks of the year and more the remaining 17 weeks, so I'm trying to come up with a solution. If you read my earlier post, you'll notice that it averages out to the employee working 35 hours/week but being paid for 40 hours year-round, so it more than compensates for overtime.

I'm not sure you really understand over time here. Taking 5 hours away during the school year and then adding them on to summer doesn't equal things out. That extra 5 hours each week in the summer would not be her usual hourly rate of say $15/hr. You would be paying time and a half for those hours. So (using $15/hr rate) 35 hours week school year = $525 or the 40 you mention would be = $600. Just because you over pay the $75 each week during the school year, doesn't mean that summers she would normally earn just that $75 extra. It would actually be $15 x 40hrs = $600 then $22.50 x 5hrs = $112.50 (for a total of $712.50 a week). So you are stealing $37.50/wk OT from her by doing that 40 hrs/wk year round. It is not an "even trade".

The whole payment thing is illegal (non hourly rate, no actual OT payments) and you want to screw her out of money that she will have earned. You sound like a bad employer.

You didn't read the hours correctly. It is at least 8 hours a week less during the school year, which I've counted to be 32-34 weeks, and 5 hours more during the summer, for 17 weeks. So the nanny makes more under my 40-hour year round rate than she would for overtime. What I said was that the average throughout the entire year is 35 hours.

Here is how it breaks down. Let's assume (for benefit of the doubt) that there are 37 school weeks (I think there are closer to 40, but let's assume 37). 37X$22= $704/week. On the school weeks, it would be ((40x$22) + (6x$33))= 1078/week. So 37 weeks at 704 =26048 + 18326= 44374. a 40-hour work week is $45,760. So my solution gives an extra $1350 or so. (And it's actually better than that, because I was generous in counting non-school weeks). And the hours overall are less.

So, now that we all now that I am not cheating anyone out of overtie pay...let's get back to my question. If you were a nanny would you be interested in this schedule?

OP, don't listen to the posters trying to make you out to be some cheap, scheming witch. I know plenty of nannies who would be perfectly fine with this arrangement and would not balk on the whopping 6 hours of overtime a week in exchange for having drastically shorter days for most of the year. Call it guaranteed hours and pay a set amount each week, just make sure whoever you hire is on board with the logistics. FWIW, many of the people I know who go into this field do so for the flexibility that it can provide (closer employer/employee relationships make negotiating non standard situations more likely, as in your case). You will have no problem finding a candidate who will be fine with your schedule and he/she won't feel like they are being taken advantage of, because they aren't.

Anonymous wrote:If I pay a salary as opposed to hourly, I'm not sure that I understand how this is illegal. I'd be greatly appreciative if anyone could point me to the rules that explain how this works. I'm not trying to be snarky, I simply don't understand what the parameters are and I want to be 100% in the law.

Federal labor and state laws mandate that nannies, all domestic employers, are HOURLY employees. If she works over 40 hours per week, you pay OT. Why is this so difficult to understand? This law is to keep employers like you from cheating nannies.

You could just guarantee 40 hours like a normal person during the school year, that way you are offering full time job not part time, then actually pay her for her OT during the summer as you are legally obligated to do. But I'm coming to understand that your goal is not to follow the law or be fair, its to come out ahead and save a buck. You know damn well OT do not equal regular hours and you can't just exchange them here and there and pay for them at the lower rate.

Sorry, you said 46 hours each week in the summer. So that screws her over even more. Good job! *facepalm*

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How complicated just to avoid paying OT smh.

Um, no, you've missed the point completely. I don't need full-time work during the school year, but I don't think that it's realistic to expect someone to make less 35 weeks of the year and more the remaining 17 weeks, so I'm trying to come up with a solution. If you read my earlier post, you'll notice that it averages out to the employee working 35 hours/week but being paid for 40 hours year-round, so it more than compensates for overtime.

I'm not sure you really understand over time here. Taking 5 hours away during the school year and then adding them on to summer doesn't equal things out. That extra 5 hours each week in the summer would not be her usual hourly rate of say $15/hr. You would be paying time and a half for those hours. So (using $15/hr rate) 35 hours week school year = $525 or the 40 you mention would be = $600. Just because you over pay the $75 each week during the school year, doesn't mean that summers she would normally earn just that $75 extra. It would actually be $15 x 40hrs = $600 then $22.50 x 5hrs = $112.50 (for a total of $712.50 a week). So you are stealing $37.50/wk OT from her by doing that 40 hrs/wk year round. It is not an "even trade".

The whole payment thing is illegal (non hourly rate, no actual OT payments) and you want to screw her out of money that she will have earned. You sound like a bad employer.

Anonymous wrote:If I pay a salary as opposed to hourly, I'm not sure that I understand how this is illegal. I'd be greatly appreciative if anyone could point me to the rules that explain how this works. I'm not trying to be snarky, I simply don't understand what the parameters are and I want to be 100% in the law.

The fact that paying a salary for a domestic worker is illegal should let you know that anything else regarding OT that you are not following will be illegal too. Nannies have to be paid hourly rates.

Anonymous wrote:How complicated just to avoid paying OT smh.

Um, no, you've missed the point completely. I don't need full-time work during the school year, but I don't think that it's realistic to expect someone to make less 35 weeks of the year and more the remaining 17 weeks, so I'm trying to come up with a solution. If you read my earlier post, you'll notice that it averages out to the employee working 35 hours/week but being paid for 40 hours year-round, so it more than compensates for overtime.

How complicated just to avoid paying OT smh.