Our summer nanny was guaranteed 40 hours per week, and she often worked a couple more hours than that, but it varied a lot. When there was public holiday, we only paid her OT that week if her hours worked the other days went over 40, which didn't happen. She was fine with that, I think because her pay was very fair and she had not in the past been given PTO / guaranteed hours so would have earned less on those weeks with previous employers. It probably depends to some extent on the situation and what you have agreed in advance.

Our nanny works 9.5 hours most days on a set schedule. In our work agreement we noted that while FLSA differentiates between hours actually worked and PTO/holiday, we will not, except in the case of unpaid leave.

We treat each full day as 8 hours for the sake of accruals and use.

We promised guaranteed hours and try to give her the same benefits and treatment as if she were a salary employee. The overtime calculation is really just a nuance, we agreed to pay her a certain amount per week for a certain number of hours. Nickel and diming her on holidays and PTO because of the way the law is written is not only a pain the butt to track, but not a substantial saving given the potential confusion and hurt feelings."

+1

Our nanny works 9.5 hours most days on a set schedule. In our work agreement we noted that while FLSA differentiates between hours actually worked and PTO/holiday, we will not, except in the case of unpaid leave.

We treat each full day as 8 hours for the sake of accruals and use.

We promised guaranteed hours and try to give her the same benefits and treatment as if she were a salary employee. The overtime calculation is really just a nuance, we agreed to pay her a certain amount per week for a certain number of hours. Nickel and diming her on holidays and PTO because of the way the law is written is not only a pain the butt to track, but not a substantial saving given the potential confusion and hurt feelings.

Anonymous wrote:Our nanny usually works 9 hour days, so we credit her with 9 paid hours for each PTO day. That way, she won't earn less than her usual guaranteed pay in a week where she uses PTO. However, if her total hours credited for a week exceed the usual 45 that we guarantee, she won't get paid at the usual time and a half rate for hours 46, 47, 48 etc. unless she has actually worked more than 40 hours that week. One could argue that using her PTO costs her money because she gets paid for hours above the guaranteed 45 at her straight time rate rather than her OT rate. However, there is no legitimate basis for offering time and a half here because she hasn't endured the hardship of an unusually long work week.

Your situation sounds fine to me. Its if you're talking about a nanny who works the same amount of hours each week, that are otherwise guaranteed, but on weeks where she takes PTO you pay her less, that would bother me as a nanny. If I usually work 45 hours, and nothing was different except I took Friday off, I would expect my normal pay. If I usually work 45 hours, took 9 hours off on Monday, but worked an extra 3 hours Friday night, I would not expect OT for those 3 hours.

Why would someone pay overtime when you actually didn't work it? For the nanny who said she'd be on to the next, go ahead - if you get a job in the corporate world it works the same way. Overtime is paid when you work overtime (over 40 hours/week). When holidays fall into the mix, you get paid for the time you work, plus a bonus of holiday pay. If you're getting paid for a holiday that you didn't work, you're actually benefiting!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you docked my usual pay because I/you used PTO, I'm sorry I don't care if its legal, I'd be on to the next job. PTO is supposed to be a benefit to me, it shouldn't cost me money to use it.

Wanted to add, is what you're saving by doing the calculation this way worth the bad blood it will cause? You'd save what, $30-$40 dollars?

glad you are not my nanny

Glad I'm not your nanny too I don't know what I said that was so awful. I don't want a position in which using PTO costs me money. Shoot me.

Sorry, nanny, but you really don't sound very bright. Using your PTO does not "cost you money." In fact, your PTO gives you "free" money for doing nothing. This scenario just means that you don't get to take advantage of a benefit--time and one half pay--that is available only to people who actually work more than 40 hours per week.

Yeah I'm not very bright. You can stop trying to use the title nanny to insult me, or demonstrate your superiority. Im not insulted, and you're no one.

If I normally work 50 hours per week making a certain amount of money, but on weeks where I use PTO I am not paid for my usual OT, I would be paid less than my normal weekly pay. So it does "cost" me to use PTO, if I'll make less than usual when I use it. Something that costs me money, as in affects my bottom line at the end of the month, is, to me, not a benefit, and it would make your job unattractive compared to the vast majority of nanny jobs that don't split hairs like this. I'm sure your pompous attitude does the job of scaring good nannies off before you even get there though!

Our nanny usually works 9 hour days, so we credit her with 9 paid hours for each PTO day. That way, she won't earn less than her usual guaranteed pay in a week where she uses PTO. However, if her total hours credited for a week exceed the usual 45 that we guarantee, she won't get paid at the usual time and a half rate for hours 46, 47, 48 etc. unless she has actually worked more than 40 hours that week. One could argue that using her PTO costs her money because she gets paid for hours above the guaranteed 45 at her straight time rate rather than her OT rate. However, there is no legitimate basis for offering time and a half here because she hasn't endured the hardship of an unusually long work week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you docked my usual pay because I/you used PTO, I'm sorry I don't care if its legal, I'd be on to the next job. PTO is supposed to be a benefit to me, it shouldn't cost me money to use it.

Wanted to add, is what you're saving by doing the calculation this way worth the bad blood it will cause? You'd save what, $30-$40 dollars?

glad you are not my nanny

Glad I'm not your nanny too I don't know what I said that was so awful. I don't want a position in which using PTO costs me money. Shoot me.

Sorry, nanny, but you really don't sound very bright. Using your PTO does not "cost you money." In fact, your PTO gives you "free" money for doing nothing. This scenario just means that you don't get to take advantage of a benefit--time and one half pay--that is available only to people who actually work more than 40 hours per week.

Anonymous wrote:When I was interviewing nannies I wrote in contract that PTO days would be considered 8 hour days vs the typical 9.5 hours that I was guaranteeing for work days. Every nanny I interviewed complained about that when reviewing contract and I ended up taking that out.

I'm glad you did.