My family and I live quite a spontaneous life. Due to mine and DH's work we're currently based in two countries.
We have a cleaner, a nanny and a personal trainer in each country part-funded by the companies we work for. The companies understand that as part of the spontaneous nature of our work, plans change at the last minute and are out of our control.
Out of respect for the occupations of the people whose services we use when we are in each country, we fix hours per week in advance which they are supposed to work at a (very good) rate. (For e.g. we pay our nannies £20 per hour net.)
Often we can tell them about 24 hours in advance that we won't be there. Regardless of whether we actually make the appointments on the days that we have booked them, we always pay them the full amount that we have booked them for.
Despite this, some of them complain a lot that they don't want to be "sitting around." I am trying to understand this. No-one is forcing them to sit around. If we have given them sufficient warning, then they can find something else to do that they enjoy (while still being paid!) or they can take other work if it's available. Either way is not a lose situation.
I understand that people genuinely enjoy their jobs and want to actually be doing them - of course they do. But if they are unhappy in their job, they have a choice to leave.
Is there something I am not seeing here?