Nanny leaving

[Countessofgranthamm]

Nanny leaving who has been with us 3 and a half years. Is it unreasonable to just give gift and a card or is it customary to give money too? We are moving overseas for DP work so I suppose we are technically the ones leaving! She is the first nanny we have had to unsure of the customs?

Does she Nanny for other people too? If not, and you are her only contract, you have been breaking the law. HMRC don’t like it when Employers wriggle out of their duties by making their staff be ‘self employed’. IR35. Look it up.

So you’re happy with rich people breaking employment law to get out of paying pensions, redundancies etc? Says a lot about you.

This.

If you want the average family to be able.to afford all the said things as above please lobby your local.mp to make being able to pay these things possible. The average family even with a nanny can't always afford the long list of holiday and sick pay you mention especially now, businesses can't afford it what makes you think families can? The thread was about a gift!!! If the nanny has been put in a bad position (which you don't even know is the case ) then the nanny can take that up with the family if they wish.

So it’s OK for someone to exploit someone else, because they are a family ? It’s OK to break the law because you are a family?

Weird.

If people that use nannies are expected to act as an employer with NI contributions etc, are there compensating business-like benefits that employers of nannies can take advantage of? I’m thinking that real businesses pay employees out of pre-tax income & those payments reduce their tax liability on that income. Similarly for other expenses related to the job being performed. But families who employee nannies have to pay out of post-tax income?

It’s not. I employed a nanny many years ago and phoned HMRC to check exactly this.

You are making her redundant, you should pay her redundancy money. Whether or not you are legally obliged to under your agreement with her is not the point, it is the morally right thing to do. The nanny I employed did two days a week for a single summer holiday, so it was clear before she started when she would finish, I still gave her some extra money at the end. I can’t abide stinginess.

Wow. She’s an employee and youve been dodging tax for 3.5 years : have you been paying into her pension and paying employer NI? You need to pay her redundancy. As per the many posters above (and FWIW I’m a solicitor so you can count this as a legal opinion too!).

I employed a nanny for 20 hours a week for 2 years and paid all the above when my kids got older and we didn’t need her support any more. She worked for 2 other families too when she wasn’t with us but we were very much her employer and paid redundancy.

can’t abide tax dodgers.

Lobby MPs so people can afford to comply with the law when they hire a Nanny?

It’s not the place of operation for a nanny but the way you pay them. So not sure the word for neither a nanny for childminder then….

You have to pay her redundancy money.

Don’t be an arse about it, just do it properly.

Thank you! This was exactly my point! We like you paid our nanny and all of the tax, pension contributions etc. We used a service to help us and produce payslips etc.

So again you wouldn’t have to do this for a childminder so either the OP has dodged tax or the person was a childminder. If a nanny that poor woman without pension etc.

Wrong thread

Yes.

OP - what country are you in? In my country (not UK) you’re required to pay one month’s salary for every year worked up to a maximum of 12 years. So in your case I would pay her 3 months salary, and as a token of thanks give her a gift that you know would be appreciated (we wouldn’t give our nanny wine or flowers, probably a gift card for a supermarket), plus a strong written recommendation letter. As Nannies rely heavily on referrals I would also make every effort to share her contacts in expat groups, or recommend her to friends I know were looking. As PP have said you’re effectively making her redundant - how would you want your company to treat you if you were being made redundant? Use that as a guide.

Whilst they usually have to provide a personal service, it is unlikely that a person doing infrequent work that they can reject would have to be treated as an employee.

If you can’t afford a nanny then it’s very simple. You don’t have one. A nanny is luxury childcare, they are expensive.

I can’t help but feel this is a bizarre take. There are lots of things that most of us cannot afford. The “average family” is not expected to have a Nanny.

The answer is not to enter into an exploitative working situation and avoid paying tax.

If you cannot afford it then you cannot have it and must consider alternatives. You cannot just break the law.

The main victim is the worker but then you’re also mugging the taxpayer and the families that go to pains to make sure that they do this legally and pay accordingly.

Others have beaten me to it, but back in the mid 90s I worked for a very big telecoms company that took on lots of contractors. Around this time the law changed because long term contract work was seen as disguised emplyment. (People set up a limited company and paid themselves partly in dividends as you paid only tax not NI on it if I remember correctly). This led to IR35.

Yeahhhhhhh, you are so in the shit with HMRC that you can't see daylight. It is vanishingly rare that a nanny qualifies as self-employed. You should have been paying tax and employer's NI plus paying into her pension and you should now pay her redundancy.

I was a nanny employer for almost a decade. We had the appropriate liability insurance, we provided payslips, we paid into our nanny's pension, we provided holiday pay and sick pay and when our youngest DC started school and we no longer needed FT hours, we first offered the new PT position to our nanny and then made her formally redundant with a payment. We have just finished paying our last nanny's maternity (for which we were reimbursed by the government). Our nannies were members of our family. If you can't afford all the above and can't commit to your responsibilities as an employer, you can't afford a nanny and need to use another kind of childcare.

The law is there to protect exploitation of vulnerable employees and manipulation by employers wanting to avoid paying tax, NI and redundancy. Which obviously pay for pensions, benefits as needed and healthcare etc etc etc. To do so seriously disadvantages another person and is morally wrong and illegal.

The average family even with a nanny can't always afford the long list of holiday and sick pay you mention especially now, businesses can't afford it what makes you think families can?

Then they can't afford to have a nanny. Like the vast majority of families.

I agree that it is a travesty that working parents can't offsrt nanny costs against their tax but the fact that they can't has no effect on a nanny's status as an employee.

The reason you can't tax deduct is that they aren't (usually) employed by a business, but by the individuals concerned.

No, because there’s no contract of employment in any sense.

The person who wants a babysitter isn’t obliged to offer work, and the babysitter isn’t obliged to accept the work. It’s two people reaching a mutually-suitable arrangement, which may or may not be repeated.

Completely different to the nanny who is expected to work on specific days at specific times to engage in specific work.

You have no idea they've done this. You're off in mumsnet make believe land again. Lots of ppl.pay their staff as self employed. Get a grip . Like I said if there has been wrong doing the nanny can take that up not you here in your make believe land. Self employed nannies are allowed.