Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah my AP is way cheaper than the nanny options I had. And we pay her phone, take her on trips, out to dinner, but the nannies we tried first were a mess, trying to get random days off, complaining about how late we got off, a lot of the same whiny drama you see on this forum, and we were paying $20/hour.

You weren't hiring professionals.

Most people suck when you're hiring for any job. But APs are working out way way better and after following the absolutely revolting attitudes "professionals" on these boards have, I will never attempt to hire a "professional" nanny again.

Your $20/hr doesn't get you a professional nanny. You simply can't afford one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah my AP is way cheaper than the nanny options I had. And we pay her phone, take her on trips, out to dinner, but the nannies we tried first were a mess, trying to get random days off, complaining about how late we got off, a lot of the same whiny drama you see on this forum, and we were paying $20/hour.

You weren't hiring professionals.

Most people suck when you're hiring for any job. But APs are working out way way better and after following the absolutely revolting attitudes "professionals" on these boards have, I will never attempt to hire a "professional" nanny again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a live-in nanny who works six days a week, 8 am to 6.30 pm. In practice, her Saturdays are much shorter than this. We started her at $400/week when we had a 1-year old, and raised to $500/week when his sister was born two years later.

It should be illegal to have slave labor and you should be arrested. Where is she from?

The word "slave" doesn't mean what you think it means. I'll give you a little hint: when one is free to leave, one isn't a slave.

Precisely. If she has no where to go, she isn't free to get away from your abuse.

My little darling, she could buy her own apartment with all the money she's saved over the years if she wanted to. She could certainly rent one tomorrow if she wished. I guess she doesn't care that what a random internet bozo thinks of her situation. If she wanted to leave, she could have done so a hundred times by now.

What a royal ass you are. Shame on you.

She has a point. A smart live-in can save a lot of money. There have been a number of nannies on DCUM who have posted about it.

How smart do you think someone who's earning $5.70/hr. might be, Einstein? Even mentally challenged people earn minimum wage in the United States. I'm afraid this poor thing is an illegal who has no place else to sleep, and doesn't want to be swept up by Obama for deportation. Her "payment" is obviously off the books.

$5.70 an hour plus free rent sounds better than $8.00 an hour, minus 30% in tax and minus another 40% in rent. Even Einstein can figure that one out!

How it sounds is irrelevant. Under the FLSA nannies are entitled to earn at least minimum wage. A LI Nanny working 63 hours a week is legally entitled to earn $456.75. More if she lives where live ins get paid OT or where minimum wage is higher.

And as far as all the money she is "saving", $20,800 - 26,000 gross minus 20% in taxes minus health/car/renters insurance ($2000/year or more), cell phone (400), car payment (250), credit card (150), clothes (500), toiletries and personal care like hair cuts (500), food and entertainment (1000), etc. - let's say that she spends $200/week. That leaves her with anywhere from $6240 - $10,400 saved. 3276 hours worked means she saves $1.90 - $3.17 per hour worked.

If she is saving to buy a 150K house, it'll take 3 - 5 years to get her 20% down payment. That sounds insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i used to sue people like you PP who don't pay minimum wage to live ins and I won a lot of cases....

Aw...you mean you went to law school when it became clear you are no good with the calculator?

And I guess they didn't tell you that room and board is part of the compensation for the live-in nanny? Please send us a link to your won case, I'd love to read that!

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/nanny-forum/posts/list/15/310454.page#3137493

Page 2, 21.11. The wording for the law is clear. Nannies must be paid minimum wage. Nannies may only have room and board deducted if it is to the nanny's benefit to live-in (ie. the nanny asked or the employer offered but did not require). If the employer's work involves travel, on call or other reasons to need a live-in nanny, room and board may NOT be deducted.

That thing in parenthesis - you made that up. That's not actually FROM the language of the law. Not having a housing or grocery bill is a benefit to the nanny - how could it be otherwise?

How could it be otherwise?
1. No privacy. The employer can walk into the nanny's area of the house at any time, for any reason. Most won't unless there is a reason, and most either allow the nanny to accompany them or let the nanny know ahead of time, but they don't have to.
2. Sound carries. No matter how much a live-in nanny may want to sleep in on her day, if rarely (never, for me) happens. Kids get up and start making noise. Most families either house the nanny in a bedroom on the same floor as the kids, or the nanny is the basement... right next to the playroom.
3. Most families don't want to provide food that the nanny can and will eat, they instead expect the nanny to eat what is already in the house. In some cases that might mean that it's all boxed or cans, in other cases it might mean that the nanny only has vegetarian or vegan choices. Live-in nannies almost always end up buying food for themselves, and frequently they need to purchase a refrigerator for their room.
4. Kitchen use is always dicey. Most families want their children to eat what is served, not ask for something else. When the family ate 30 minutes prior and the nanny comes out to make herself food on her day off, the kids get upset.
5. Boundaries are very hard to maintain. What may start as getting a drink for a 2 year old or catching a toddler who is about to go up the stairs without help can easily turn into more. Very young children don't understand why the nanny doesn't want to play with them. Older children are likely to try to get a different answer from the nanny when the parent tells them something they don't want to hear.
6. Nannies frequently streamline mornings and afternoons. It can be very upsetting to a parent to realize that the nanny can accomplish things with less hassle in a shorter time period. It's a delicate balancing act to make sure that the parents know how the nanny does morning prep and afternoon pick up without making the parents feel inadequate or jealous.
7. Live-in nannies see more of a child's firsts than even a live-out nanny. Then, the live-in nanny has to decide whether to show the parent a video (if the nanny had time to grab something to record the first), pretend that it didn't happen so that the parent will have the first, or try to get the child to do it asap for the parent. Parents want to be there for their children's firsts, but the reality is that the nanny will be there because the parents are working.
8. When out with the parent, the nanny is almost always introduced dismissively. "Oh? Oh, that's just my nanny."
9. When out with the parent and child, the nanny is always expected to immediately correct anyone who may be assuming that the nanny is the parent. "No, that's the mother, I'm just the nanny."
10. The nanny is very infrequently allowed to take any credit for anything that she does with or for her charges. It's just expectations, even when she goes above and beyond.
11. Live-in nannies don't get overtime (unless they are in CA, NY or MD), and they are living in the same house. So, it's very easy for parents to text the nanny and tell her that they need her to watch the kids while they go on a date, do errands, etc.

As you obviously didn't read 21.18 clearly, I'm copying it over, and will decipher:

Q. How will this effect live-in care givers who receive room and board as part of their compensation?
A. The FLSA allows an employer to count as part of wages the reasonable cost or fair value of furnishing an employee with board, lodging, or other facilities under certain circumstances. Specifically, employers may only count the reasonable cost or fair value of lodging as part of their minimum wage obligation to live-in domestic service employees if:

1) Employees voluntarily accept the lodging; Employee chooses to live-in, it's not a requirement for the position.
2) Lodging is furnished in compliance with any applicable federal, state, or local law;
3) Lodging is primarily for the benefit of the employee; Employee does not have other means of housing herself.
4) Employers maintain accurate records of costs incurred in furnishing the lodging; and
5) The credit claimed does not exceed the reasonable cost or fair value of the lodging furnished. Nanny can't be charged more than the employer could rent for the space.
http://www.dol.gov/whd/homecare/qa.htm#livein3

Is that clearer? It must be for the employee's benefit, and most (if not all) live-in nannies could find other housing rather than have wages docked to below minimum wage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a live-in nanny who works six days a week, 8 am to 6.30 pm. In practice, her Saturdays are much shorter than this. We started her at $400/week when we had a 1-year old, and raised to $500/week when his sister was born two years later.

So in other words, you think your nanny has no other options, so you don't feel it's necessary to pay for her time. Lovely.
I ran the numbers:
5.5 days at 10.5 hours: 57.75 hours
$400/57.75=$6.93/hour
$500/57.75=$8.66/hour

You can't even be bothered to pay minimum wage. Please be aware that your nanny can go back and sue you for the difference between what you paid and minimum wage. I certainly hope you aren't in MD, if you are and she does, you'll owe overtime too.

This. People should learn the law.

The law says you can make room and board part of the compensation.

Where?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a live-in nanny who works six days a week, 8 am to 6.30 pm. In practice, her Saturdays are much shorter than this. We started her at $400/week when we had a 1-year old, and raised to $500/week when his sister was born two years later.

So in other words, you think your nanny has no other options, so you don't feel it's necessary to pay for her time. Lovely.
I ran the numbers:
5.5 days at 10.5 hours: 57.75 hours
$400/57.75=$6.93/hour
$500/57.75=$8.66/hour

You can't even be bothered to pay minimum wage. Please be aware that your nanny can go back and sue you for the difference between what you paid and minimum wage. I certainly hope you aren't in MD, if you are and she does, you'll owe overtime too.

This. People should learn the law.

The law says you can make room and board part of the compensation.

Actually, the law says that you can only deduct if the employee is still being paid minimum wage. Would you like a link to the government page that shows this? It's talking about uniforms, but the idea remains the same.

Anonymous wrote:Nah my AP is way cheaper than the nanny options I had. And we pay her phone, take her on trips, out to dinner, but the nannies we tried first were a mess, trying to get random days off, complaining about how late we got off, a lot of the same whiny drama you see on this forum, and we were paying $20/hour.

You weren't hiring professionals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a live-in nanny who works six days a week, 8 am to 6.30 pm. In practice, her Saturdays are much shorter than this. We started her at $400/week when we had a 1-year old, and raised to $500/week when his sister was born two years later.

So in other words, you think your nanny has no other options, so you don't feel it's necessary to pay for her time. Lovely.
I ran the numbers:
5.5 days at 10.5 hours: 57.75 hours
$400/57.75=$6.93/hour
$500/57.75=$8.66/hour

You can't even be bothered to pay minimum wage. Please be aware that your nanny can go back and sue you for the difference between what you paid and minimum wage. I certainly hope you aren't in MD, if you are and she does, you'll owe overtime too.

This. People should learn the law.

The law says you can make room and board part of the compensation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i used to sue people like you PP who don't pay minimum wage to live ins and I won a lot of cases....

Aw...you mean you went to law school when it became clear you are no good with the calculator?

And I guess they didn't tell you that room and board is part of the compensation for the live-in nanny? Please send us a link to your won case, I'd love to read that!

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/nanny-forum/posts/list/15/310454.page#3137493

Page 2, 21.11. The wording for the law is clear. Nannies must be paid minimum wage. Nannies may only have room and board deducted if it is to the nanny's benefit to live-in (ie. the nanny asked or the employer offered but did not require). If the employer's work involves travel, on call or other reasons to need a live-in nanny, room and board may NOT be deducted.

That thing in parenthesis - you made that up. That's not actually FROM the language of the law. Not having a housing or grocery bill is a benefit to the nanny - how could it be otherwise?

NP but I'd bring it to trial pro bono for funsies. We'll let a fact finder decide whose benefit it was for. Hope you don't have a curfew or comment if she sleeps out.

Kind of hard to do without a complaint. I note that we still have no links for all these allegedly won cases. Typical - all talk, no trousers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a live-in nanny who works six days a week, 8 am to 6.30 pm. In practice, her Saturdays are much shorter than this. We started her at $400/week when we had a 1-year old, and raised to $500/week when his sister was born two years later.

So in other words, you think your nanny has no other options, so you don't feel it's necessary to pay for her time. Lovely.
I ran the numbers:
5.5 days at 10.5 hours: 57.75 hours
$400/57.75=$6.93/hour
$500/57.75=$8.66/hour

You can't even be bothered to pay minimum wage. Please be aware that your nanny can go back and sue you for the difference between what you paid and minimum wage. I certainly hope you aren't in MD, if you are and she does, you'll owe overtime too.

This. People should learn the law.

Anonymous wrote:Live in nannies must be paid minimum wage. You can not deduct anything from that.

Agree.

Nah my AP is way cheaper than the nanny options I had. And we pay her phone, take her on trips, out to dinner, but the nannies we tried first were a mess, trying to get random days off, complaining about how late we got off, a lot of the same whiny drama you see on this forum, and we were paying $20/hour.

Live in nannies must be paid minimum wage. You can not deduct anything from that.

Anonymous wrote:Thank God for au pairs.

Au pairs are a good answer for some families, but just like the list of pros and cons when comparing live-in nannies to live-out, there's a list of pros and cons when comparing au pairs to live-in nannies.

Au pairs can't work more than 10 hours per day. Many nannies, especially live-in nannies, work 10-12 hour days. Nannies can work 24 hour shifts when parents travel; APs can't.
Au pairs can't work more than 45 hours per week. Most full time nannies, especially live-in nannies, work 45+ hours per week. Many live-in nannies work 60+ hours per week.
Au pairs must have 1.5 consecutive days off per week. Nannies can be scheduled in any way that they will agree. I've had people contact me wanting me to work 14 days on, 14 days off. Au pairs can't do that, but nannies can.
Au pairs must have one full weekend off per month. Nannies can be scheduled to work every weekend.
Au pairs are contracted for one year, with the possibility of a second extension year. A nanny can work with the same family for as long as everyone agrees, which may be shorter or longer.
Au pairs go through agencies to find host families, and if there is an issue, the family must do remediation with the LCC, try to work it out for 2 weeks, and then house the AP for another 2 weeks while the AP tries to find another family. That all adds up to an extra month with someone the family wants to leave, someone they may not trust to be alone with their children. Nannies can be fired for cause and asked to pack and leave immediately.
Au pairs make $200 stipend per week, which sounds great to a lot of families. But the family is supposed to treat the AP as part of the family, which means including the AP for vacations, dinner out and other fun (often pricey) things. Nannies make more than APs, but it's up to the family about how much the nanny will be invited to join the family, and if the nanny isn't working, she can be asked to pay her own way.
Au pair agencies cost about $8k, last I knew. If a family decides to hire a nanny through an agency, they might pay a fraction of the nanny's salary for the year to the agency, but it doesn't usually come close to $8k.
Au pairs are young men and women who may have exaggerated the amount and type of childcare experience they have, and the family can't verify the references due to location. Nanny references are either verifiable or not.
Au pairs may want to bring friends over or be out to all hours. Professional live-in nannies make sure that their private lives do not impact their employers.
Au pairs may require micromanagement to care for children adequately. Nannies do not want or need micromanagement.
Au pairs may act more like an older sibling or friend with their charges than a caregiver. A nanny is more likely to substitute in a parental role than act as a sibling or friend.
Au pairs may have very little knowledge about different issues, and so are unlikely to offer unwanted advice. A nanny has experience with many issues, and can offer advice, but may not wait to be asked.
Au pairs can only work with children under 2 if they are infant qualified (verifiable experience with infants/toddlers), but the experience is usually in a group setting which doesn't always translate well to being one-on-one with an infant. Nannies can work with children as soon as they come home from the hospital, and understand that parents may not want young infants to leave the house, especially in the winter.
Au pairs usually need the HP to find activities and set up the schedule. Nannies can find activities and set up the schedule, with or without parental permission required for each activity.
Au pairs are supposed to speak some English in order to come to US as an AP, but ability varies, as does interest in improving. While many nannies speak English as a second or third language, many nannies are native English speakers, and a family can select for that. Both APs and nannies are unlikely to be able to teach children a second language while simultaneously making sure that the child is learning English; of course there are exceptions, like former teachers.
Au pairs are usually either provided a car or given a pass for public transit. Live-in nannies who transport their charges use their employer's vehicle, which may or may not be available for their free time.
Au pairs are usually provided a cell phone. Nannies usually provide their own phones, unless the employer wants to have the nanny carry a phone during work hours which only calls them.

If you take a look at the AP portion of the forum, you'll notice that there are many HPs venting about APs, just like there are many employers who vent about nannies. There are also threads that compare various forms of childcare, and most HP agreed that while live-in nannies are paid somewhat more than APs, but it's much closer than people think until they start hosting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i used to sue people like you PP who don't pay minimum wage to live ins and I won a lot of cases....

Aw...you mean you went to law school when it became clear you are no good with the calculator?

And I guess they didn't tell you that room and board is part of the compensation for the live-in nanny? Please send us a link to your won case, I'd love to read that!

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/nanny-forum/posts/list/15/310454.page#3137493

Page 2, 21.11. The wording for the law is clear. Nannies must be paid minimum wage. Nannies may only have room and board deducted if it is to the nanny's benefit to live-in (ie. the nanny asked or the employer offered but did not require). If the employer's work involves travel, on call or other reasons to need a live-in nanny, room and board may NOT be deducted.

That thing in parenthesis - you made that up. That's not actually FROM the language of the law. Not having a housing or grocery bill is a benefit to the nanny - how could it be otherwise?

NP but I'd bring it to trial pro bono for funsies. We'll let a fact finder decide whose benefit it was for. Hope you don't have a curfew or comment if she sleeps out.