To ask if you realise au-pairs are seriously under threat after Brexit?

[Dontblameitontheboogie]

On another thread discussing a potential au-pair who would be starting this summer, I was struck that not a single poster pointed out that it’s far from certain au-pairs will be able to arrive or even stay after 29 March!?!

I thought this deserved its own thread, and in AIBU rather than the “Brexit” echo chamber. People may not even realise they could be affected.

Even in a “Deal” scenario, au-pair status isn’t guaranteed, as far as I know. They won’t qualify for pre-settled status, as they’re here temporarily and won’t be able to provide proof of ordinary residence. So technically they could be here illegally from 29 March. Access to health care would be a worry, as would re-entering the UK after trips home - or getting here in the first place.

The current au pair scheme is an EU-wide arrangement, that allows young EU nationals to temporarily live in another EU country without exercising Treaty rights. Some countries, like France or Germany extend the scheme to au-pairs from outside the EU too, but the U.K. doesn’t.

In case of a no deal Brexit, the Immigration Bill that was passed last Monday means that EU citizens wishing to come here must have a job offer worth at least £30,000k. Some exceptions I believe, such as nurses and doctors, but I haven’t seen any mention of au pairs anywhere.

Check out www.saveaupairs.uk for more info.

How is 'having affordable childcare' a luxury? Without affordable childcare, many of us couldn't work. Not working is the luxury, surely?

I do not consider it luxurious to have live in childcare, it is essential with my shifts. If I don't work my shifts I can't feed my children or have anywhere to live. This thread is pretty scary

I don't understand some of the posts on here. An au pair for me was not a luxury. I didn't have a spare room. The DC had to go in together so the au pair had a room.

My choices were be entirely reliant on benefits or go to work and have an au pair, because that was the cheapest form of childcare.

I don't see any luxury there, but no doubt someone will be along to tell me that because I didn't live in a coal scuttle, it were proper luxury!

isn't it just? Bitter and nasty as well, the chippiness of some posters is radiant.

Not scraping by on the absolute minimum does not equal luxury.

margo there is a middle ground between being 'entirely reliant on benefits' and having a job where you'd need to have live-in childcare. Perhaps a job where you work sociable hours and use the childcare available, be that a childminder or nursery.
When DC were little, I was a single parent, with no family nearby. If I wanted to work, I'd have to look at changing career entirely because an au pair was out of the question (2 DC, 2 bed house and wages wouldn't even begin to cover the cost). So I did, I took a job where I only ever had to work days, no weekends and between nursery and childminder (which I only ever paid 25% of the costs for, thanks tax credits) I managed. It's not as black and white as 'au pair or don't work'.

Myusernameismud - do you not think I went through all the options? I did change career and I did work as part-time as I could when the DC were tiny. Like you say it isn't black and white. I did the best I could in difficult circumstances & so did you. Your choices were different, which is fine and I wouldn't dream of judging you for it. However, all said and done I wasn't in a luxury situation!

No you weren't, and I said up thread that the luxury statement doesn't apply to everyone on this post. But I think you are in the minority.

Maybe I was in the minority, maybe I wasn't. We don't know - that's just speculation or opinion.

The parents I know in the luxury bracket employed nannies or used nurseries and were not using au-pairs. But that's just my experience and is purely anecdotal - not factual or based on anything other than my observations.

You couldn't condemn me for having an au pair because I don't have one katherina, nor any plans to do so. Actually I don't need childcare at all because we do it all within the family, and that really IS a luxury.

But it is quite interesting that you've not engaged with the nub of my question, which is whether a CM counts as less of a luxury than an au pair when an au pair would be the cheaper option.

It might help to have some housing context too. We own our home but the area was all built by the council and most homes still SH. There are very few 2 bed properties that were actually built, it's nearly all 3 beds, to the extent that there are families with 1 or 2 kids locally effectively forced into houses with a spare room that they can't actually afford because of the bedroom tax (there's not really a shortage of SH generally where I am, just certain types of home). The small number of 2 beds that were built mean they don't come on the market much and when they do, they aren't actually any cheaper than the 3 beds, I think maybe because the square footage is about the same? So we literally didn't pay any more for our box room than a 2 bed would have been.

Now I don't think there'd be much chance of getting an au pair to come and live in my area, not least because the box room doesn't fit a proper bed. But it would cost less than a CM, and for no extra housing costs either.

And really, we don't all live in the south east and it's worth interrogating generalisations about housing. That kind of thinking is what got the bedroom tax applied nationally for something that simply wasn't an issue in many places, and has seen councils and HAs engage in policies like knocking bedrooms together in order to actually be able to let their SH in others. I can see that a spare room would be a significant luxury in the south east, or other expensive areas. It simply does not follow that this is the case everywhere.

Threads like this just confirm that I can't fucking wait for Brexit

What are some of the things you’re looking forward to most?

When I was a child in the 1950s long before we joined the EU my parents employed au pairs to look after me as they both worked full time. They came here on short term visas if I recall so presumably this is what will happen after Brexit.

This should be the least of anyone's concerns re Brexit, which is an absolute shitstorm in the making

Yeah they probably will be under threat.

It's a shame we don't have 100's of 1000's of people in the UK who are unemployed.

Or would that mean actually paying REAL wages?!

When I was a child in the 1950s long before we joined the EU my parents employed au pairs to look after me as they both worked full time. They came here on short term visas if I recall so presumably this is what will happen after Brexit.

I think the point OP is making is that actually there's no basis to assume this will happen, we don't know. There is no 'presumably'. So if anyone has a strong view either way then it would be wise to make your voice heard, rather than just figure things will be as they were before 1973. It seems like exactly the sort of thing that could end up being overlooked otherwise, since as you point out, it's not going to be at the top of the to do list.

Yeah I guess people from outside the UK CAN still work here, but GOD forbid we employ people from WITHIN the UK eh?!

As I said, that would mean paying proper wages!

I see alot of au pairs at my kids school, often not treated nicely by either the kids or the parents. I feel sorry for them, in a foreign country and too young and isolated to stand up for themselves.

Yes, yes, I think its a great idea that people who worked in the car industries or financial services should become au pairs - oh wait, maybe there will be less people needing au pairs when people lose their jobs.

Well done, Brexitteers. Brilliant move.

But it is quite interesting that you've not engaged with the nub of my question, which is whether a CM counts as less of a luxury than an au pair when an au pair would be the cheaper option.

I think I have, but OK, let me try again. It might be helpful if I introduce the term "poverty premium" - the phenomenon whereby things are often cheaper if you have more wealth. So an au pair is cheaper than a childminder if you have a larger house (and I understand what you're saying about all houses being large in your area). If you don't have the space, it doesn't matter how cheap an au pair is - you can't host one.

As you say, the bedroom tax was applied precisely because it is a luxury to have a spare room - but what was ignored was the distress caused to people whose circumstances had changed and were now forced to leave their home. It was a wrongheaded policy.

I don't really have a view on au pairs at all, so long as they're treated well. What interests me about this thread is the number of people who don't recognize their own privilege.

newnameforthis7 - it isn't simple though is it. In an ideal world, we'd all earn decent wages, we'd all have access to proper affordable childcare BUT the country we live in is far from ideal! There are wider questions to address, but they probably deserve a separate thread.

Katherina that's exactly it, people struggle to recognise their privilege. Unless you have ever truly lived without luxury of any kind, it's difficult to see things you're used to having as luxury.
I work with a lot of families who have very little and because there was a time in my life when I had very little, I am good at my job. That experience makes me appreciate my Friday night wine, or the new book I've just bought, or the mascara I picked up with the weekly shopping.

The problem with the argument you make katherina is that it rests on the assumption that people who have a room in which they could host an au pair would have cheaper accommodation available to them, if they didn't have a spare room. Which isnt necessarily correct. Where I live, having a three bed doesn't mean you have more wealth than someone in a two bed (or even space really, it's just a question of how many walls you have in that space). In fact, many of the three bed residents, despite having space for a theoretical au pair, actually have fewer resources than they would in a two bed: the spare room literally makes them poorer. Those of us privileged enough to purchase merely have no greater resources or wealth if we buy a three bed than if we buy a two.

And I certainly didn't say a spare room was a luxury even pre bedroom tax: that assumption is the exact opposite of the reality and the point I'm making.

The thing is, if you have nothing, then anything is luxury. I also work with people who are incredibly deprived - literally all their belongings in a plastic bag. To them, having a change of clothes is a luxury.

However, surely we can recognise that most people in the UK do not live at those levels of deprivation. Not quite yet anyway.

Most people have some kind of choice to make about working / not working and if they have children - how they pay for childcare and is it worth going back to work.

I fully accept that for people who don't have a room that an au pair can sleep in, then that option is removed for them and from their perspective their do have choice poverty. So, perhaps we could say that for those people with a room that they can utilise for another adult in the house, then having an au pair is often a very economical / affordable option and that is often the reason people choose an au pair.

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on whether a spare room is a luxury or not, March (I think it is).

I do understand what you're saying about three beds being the norm in your area and how properties are constructed with dividing walls or not to create extra rooms. I know many areas have limited types of property.

So, perhaps we could say that for those people with a room that they can utilise for another adult in the house, then having an au pair is often a very economical / affordable option and that is often the reason people choose an au pair.

I think we can all agree on that.

“we'd all have access to proper affordable childcare BUT the country we live in is far from ideal!“

Yes, but it’s nobody’s right to pay well below minimum wage for childcare so they can continue to work.

So either;

When all is taken is into consideration, au-pairing is financially competitive compared to the equivalent of doing other low-paid childcare plus the additional costs of renting and bills- so therefore they’ll be no problem in continuing to attract au-pairs from Aus/Korea/Canada after Brexit, or even allowing Brits to provide two hours childcare a day in exchange for a room in the city.

Or;

Brexit will close the loophole around exploiting au-pairs, and will mean that parents therefore have to pay NMW to qualified/registered childcare providers in the same way that all the other millions of working parents in the U.K. do as standard.

All I’m seeing from this thread from those who use au-pairs is a group of people moaning that they might actually have to pay a proper wage and provide employment rights to their “staff”.

And apparently this makes me the one who wants to race to the bottom (!)

SaucyJack I didn't need a qualified childcarer, I just need another adult who was as competent as I was. I don't have any childcare qualifications but I was a parent!

So, I had 7 young women come and live in my home for a year at a time. They had no qualifications in childcare, they wanted to learn English. They helped me, I helped them and they received full board and lodging, I paid for their English courses and gave them pocket money.

There is nothing exploitative about that and I wasn't denying a fully qualified British worker anything!

Brexit will close the loophole around exploiting au-pairs, and will mean that parents therefore have to pay NMW to qualified/registered childcare providers in the same way that all the other millions of working parents in the U.K. do as standard.

Where I live there aren't many childminders and those that exist don't tend to work later than 6 and certainly aren't available in the middle of the night. Some of the people who work those hours do the most essential jobs e.g. doctors so what do you expect them to do in order to work?