Anonymous wrote:

Also, threatening people is usually a poor negotiation tactic.

Especially since you might need a recommendation from them one day.

You can only hope. Sorry.

Also, threatening people is usually a poor negotiation tactic.

Especially since you might need a recommendation from them one day.

Such hostility. Sheesh.

One – I actually do provide the benefit under discussion to my nanny. So, I’m on your side.

Two – My comments are aimed solely at why it is to your advantage to negoatiate, be explicit and upfront, etc. about your expectations. This is a point meant to be helpful.

Three – If my solicitations for opinions/concerns from my nanny were met with this kind of vitriol, I’d rethink the relationship. Maybe the employer is a nutter, or maybe they don’t realize the issue is this important to you. Or whatever. If you don’t engage in a professional discussion, you won’t know. And if you leave in an unprofessional manner, getting that next job could be harder for you.

Do what you want, but your suggested tactics tell me your thinking emotionally and not strategically.

Anonymous wrote:Also, threatening people is usually a poor negotiation tactic.

Doing the right thing, isn't a "threat". Please don't pretend to be so stupid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Word to the wise:
"What goes around, comes around."

Do you get now?

When the employer plays dirty with her child's nanny,
Beware.

Yes, but.. this is all moot if you have not defined/refuse to discuss what your expectations are. Reach an agreement. Go elsewhere if you don't want to work for your employer. What is the issue here?

This thread isn't for you, pp.

Also, threatening people is usually a poor negotiation tactic.

Anonymous wrote:
Word to the wise:
"What goes around, comes around."

Do you get now?

When the employer plays dirty with her child's nanny,
Beware.

Yes, but.. this is all moot if you have not defined/refuse to discuss what your expectations are. Reach an agreement. Go elsewhere if you don't want to work for your employer. What is the issue here?

Word to the wise:
"What goes around, comes around."

Do you get now?

When the employer plays dirty with her child's nanny,
Beware.

I should note, btw, that I am talking not talking about a situation in which the employer promises pay over a vacation and then fails to deliver. In that case, the employee ought to leave, unless other perks are so good so as to keep them in the position.

I am talking about how a young professional exists a job after trying to negotiate acceptable pay/benefits, and does not have their requirements met.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This might be a satisfying fantasy, but it’s unprofessional conduct.

What you should actually do, if terms were not negotiated up front: Use the impending vacation as an opportunity to discuss the issue. Mention that you might find it difficult to sustain the job long term if you cannot count on your weekly salary in most circumstances.

If you do not reach an understanding, apply to other jobs. If you get a comparable one with this benefit, then quit and give 2 weeks notice. If you like, stress that you really enjoy the family but that you simply need to leave for the better offer.

Message sent, no pettiness, no lack of professionalism.

Do you "enjoy" jobs where you've been unfairly taken advantage of? I doubt it.

No, these employers don't deserve any notice. Nanny should depart when it suits her best.

I don’t understand how most of what you wrote relates to what I wrote. First, “enjoyment” of the job, while not an insignificant topic, is besides the point of my post. It relates not at all to whether one conducts one’s self in a professional manner. And it is almost always in a young professional’s best interest to act like a professional. I’ve worked many semi-terrible jobs, and I have never screwed over an employer in a stunt meant to show how clever I am. There is no point. It can come back to hurt you in ways you might not expect. It is not wise!

Second, how exactly are do you propose one to have been “screwed over” by an “unscrupulous employer” in the non-pay during vacation circumstance? Theoretically, the employer’s impending vacation is a situation all parties know about many weeks in advance. (As would vacations taken by the employee, I would hope.) Thus, if terms were not negotiated at time of hire, there is ample time to discuss the vacation arrangements well ahead of time and reach an understanding. If that understanding is not reached, and the issue is a deal-breaker for you (a legitimate point of view to take!), then you should find a job with the terms you want. You do not wait until the last possible moment, then walk off the job, and leave the employer wondering what to do when they get back into town. It’s petty and unnecessary. How would you feel if you left on vacation and came back a 2 weeks later to find that your employer had replaced you already and hadn’t even bothered to give notice?

Don’t scuttle a ship that doesn’t need scuttling.

Anonymous wrote:This might be a satisfying fantasy, but it’s unprofessional conduct.

What you should actually do, if terms were not negotiated up front: Use the impending vacation as an opportunity to discuss the issue. Mention that you might find it difficult to sustain the job long term if you cannot count on your weekly salary in most circumstances.

If you do not reach an understanding, apply to other jobs. If you get a comparable one with this benefit, then quit and give 2 weeks notice. If you like, stress that you really enjoy the family but that you simply need to leave for the better offer.

Message sent, no pettiness, no lack of professionalism.

Do you "enjoy" jobs where you've been unfairly taken advantage of? I doubt it.

No, these employers don't deserve any notice. Nanny should depart when it suits her best.