Nanny pay & contract Problems - Help

[DawnNAPM]

Hi, we have had a Nanny for more than 5 years. In that time she has had one child and returned to work bringing her daughter with her.

We went down the normal route of maternity leave and pay etc and by the time she returned to work, all of my children were at full time school. At this point we agreed to reduce her hours so that she only came in before school each day and after school each day. i.e nothing in between. Her original contract with us stated that her employment was only until all 3 of my children were at fulltime school so rather than let her go completely we agreed to reduce her hours. She also got 4 weeks paid holiday (2 of our choosing) and 2 of hers and at least 2 additional weeks off on top of this as well as all hers and her childs meals whilst at my house, petrol money, and at least one afternoon or morning off a week.

We also verbally agreed that this new arrangement would only be for the 1st year that my youngest was at school and then we would not need a nanny any more. After my youngest child had completed his first year, we agreed with the Nanny that she would stay on a bit longer just to make sure my son was happy but that we would review the situation regularly as we really did not need a nanny any more. She was happy with this situation as I believe she knew she was onto a good thing with us in terms of what we actually expected of her (no cleaning or ironing) and what she was being paid. In fact I got feedback from other local mums and friends etc. who repeated that the nanny had been overheard saying she would never leave us as she was on a cushy number!

My husband and I decided, during half term 2007 that we would review the nanny situation as we were paying a lot for very little (apart from continuity of care) and we agreed that when the nanny came back from the holiday that she had chosen to take during half term !! that we would give her notice and ask her to finish at Christmas. This was effectively giving her 2 months notice.

When the nanny returned from her holiday the first thing she did was to announce that she was pregnant with her 2nd child. This was a bit of a shock as we knew the nanny was in a fairly unstable relationship, with significant money problems etc so we were a little surprised.

However, as a direct result of her announcement we felt it would be unreasonable of us to give her notice as she would never find another job bearing in mind she already had a toddler that she bought to work with her. So we kept quiet and left things as they were until after Christmas. In the new year some 5 months before her baby was due I spoke to her and also confirmed in writing that that we would not want her back once her Mat leave had finished as we were going to get a childminder or find someone for after school care only. I also explained that we were actually going to let her go the previous October but due to her PG we kept her on.

All was going well, mat pay was all sorted and paid to her up front as a lump sum again with written confirmation that she would not be needed back after her mat leave ended.

I though that was the end of it we found a local childminder and all my children were happy. When the Nanny actually left I said we may be able to use her for come casual work when she was ready to return but not in a Nanny capacity but maybe for occasional after school days etc. Also on the basis that I could not and would not want her to bring both of her children with her. At the time she had no one available to look after them so it was a bit of a non starter.

Now the bombshell... (thanks for hanging in there if you are still reading!)

She has now written to me saying her and her partner are hard up and she wants her job back, also that she wants redundancy pay, holiday pay for her mat period and notice pay. To say I feel that I have been HAD is the understatement of the year. Why oh why didn't I let her go when I had originally planned to rather than keep her on to help her out! I have copies of the letters I have sent her which she now claims to have not ever received and she wants me to do the right thing and pay her off....her words not mine. I have provided her with her P45, when her mat leave pay period ended, admittedly a little late as I had forgotten but I really do not see why I should pay her any more money.

It is not my fault she is hard up, I heave treated her fairly for more than 5 years, my oldest child is now 15 and I made it quite clear to her at the start that this would not be a Job for Life etc etc.

I know this post may provoke some debate but I do not think I have been unreasonable and in fact have always paid her for any extra hours, babysitting, generous gifts at Birthday and Christmas and on both births etc. No I need to decide what to do. My husband is adamant that we tell her to go away and to top it all she has been making snide comments to my new childminder that she has "stolen her job" etc etc.

I am gutted and cannot see our family ever maintaining a relationship with her but am in a quandary as to what to do about the pay situation. I have spoken to the redundancy helpline who were useless and also to ACAS who have said that they think I have a case and that if she took me to tribunal I would be treated fairly no one seems to specialise in situations like this regarding nannies as it is unusual.

At the end of the day I did not treat the nanny unreasonably, the fact that she was pregnant did complicate matters but with my children the ages they were I really did not need her anymore and she knew this was the case. I was actually going to give her more than the contracted amount of notice. She could have started looking for another job when I originally wrote to her about it or as soon as she went on Mat leave etc. But now her money has run out she wants some of mine.

Any comments/advice or help would be much appreciated.

Dawn

They are live in.

Well, I am glad I've never had to pay redundancy. It is a pain to have to go through hiring every year or two, but there are upsides and couple grand is certainly incentive to me. I guess if 2k is pocket change to you then it doesn't matter.

Thank you , Einstein. I think we are having two different conversations. I thought I had quite clearly differentiated between what is and my opinion of what should be.

But Shiny some 'clever' people want to do pick and mix. Have only the good bits. Be employer when suits them. And if they cant do pick and mix with British nannies then they look for ..... different cultures and languages (who apart from 'interesting' are also more...cost effectively)

Athene, I can understand you don't want the taxes and responsibility (no one wants the taxes!) but what else do you suggest? Nannies just have fewer rights?

I'm afraid my view is, if you want to employ a nanny then you have to take on the responsibility of being an employer. If you can't use a nursery or childminder, then get a new job.

Thinking about it, why aren't there 'simplified' Employment Law and Taxation for Domestic Employment?
We have Simplified PAYE, but the threshold for that I don't think has changed that much over the years (anyone know when it was last changed) so hasn't kept up with nanny salaries, especially in London.

simplified law? are you sure those two words can go together nannynick ?

when I spoke to HMRC, they seemed amazed that nanny pay may not qualify for that simplified scheme because that's exactly one of the reasons it was designed but I can't believe many Nannies in the south east qualify for that scheme (or probably many nannies at all!).

Was the 'Einstein' comment directed at me AN?

If so, thank you- I pride myself on using my intelligence when it comes to matters such as this

Some nannies already have fewer rights... Live-in Staff don't have the same rights as Live-Out Staff. For example National Minimum Wage does not apply for live-in staff.

I have said anything about fewer rights for nannies. I had a moan about the taxes and suggested Gordon Brown use some of the tax money he has already collected from the employer and the nanny to pay out her redundancy hence making it more affordable for the employer and not affecting nanny's bottom line.

I resent your comment about foreigners. I think it is perfectly reasonable to hire someone from "other" cultures, unless of course you are campaigning for the BNP.

yes, ShinyPink, it was.

Foxinsocks - simplified law is probably wishful thinking on my part but the Simplified PAYE scheme should in my view be changed so that it covers more people. Perhaps having a £2000 per month threshold would be sufficient to mean that most nannies would fall under that scheme, rather than full PAYE. I feel a letter to my MP is due!

erm no i am not campaining for the BNP and dont try to be 'smart' now. Quite the opposite as it is very clear

where did i say it is not reasonable to employ people from other countries. I said it is not reasonable to try and take advantage of any emploee/

So, why the opposition to non-Btritish nannies?

actually, that's a very good idea nanny nick. I will also draw one up because it was (I believe) exactly why the scheme was started. I also think a pack should be provided to employers when they register with just a 'simple' guide to employment law (because it isn't that hard to set out the main issues up front).

As an employer at work (for a company), I get provided with newsletters and information packs that I don't receive as an employer of one person in my own individual right iyswim. I think it would be of some benefit to people to receive that sort of assistance (and to keep them up to date with changing laws).

Read my above post

I don't think you know much about me LaQuitar. The "pick and mix" comment was pretty rude, and so was the implication that I don't treat me nanny well enough to attract a British one. I don't really understand this whole British superiority attitude that some people have about nannies. I don't avoid the British, but I also don't see what makes them inherently better nannies.

oh no no dont twist my words.

I NEVER talked about British superiority. And i am not British myself.

I was talking about people who take advantage of live - in nannies from abroad. Lets face it it is easier to take advantage with someone who is new in the country, doesnt speak good english and doesnt know about the british law. Also if she is live in it is more difficult for her to leave if you piss her off because she ll be homeless.

I am not saying that all employers of those girls take advantage, there are some very nice. But some of them do. In my nannying years i ve met some of these girls and heard their stories.

Yes you are right i dont kno everything about you. I comment about your post re nannies and tax. Many of us thought that your attitude stinks.

Now DO NOT accuse me of talking about 'british superiority'because your trick is very moronic. Cant you tell from my english that i am not even British ffs?

No, LaQ, I cannot tell from your typing what country you are from, just as you probably haven't picked up which one I am from.

I dont care Athene where you are from. At all.
Nite

Oh dear how nasty this got.

The OP should certainly have understood her responsibilities better but the lack of professionalism can go both ways in my experience of recruiting people. But it's crazy as a parent not to remember that you are the one who will be found legally accountable when it goes wrong. It's also true that plenty of places where a parent might go and expect to get sensible advice (agencies, payroll legal services, etc) cock up from time to time so, yes it is very hard for an individual family to be an employer and be treated the same as, say Unilever, in the eyes of the law.

The trouble is that if many people under report their nanny's earnings HMRC can't get an accurate grip on how heavy the tax burden on the parents is under current legislation. SO, reforming simplyfied PAYE which nick et al were talking about earlier is unlikely to happen if they think that nannies salaries are well under the threashold.

Dawn, legally you're obliged to pay this woman off, but I do see where you're coming from. Having no contact with somebody for so long and then they contact you out of the blue demanding money must be a pain, but the law prevails. I hope you sort this out without too much hassle!

And Athene, when I'm older and have kids of my own I would probably do the same as you are doing in keeping nannies for a year or two. The children I look after have had au pairs for no more than two years at a time and have had brilliant experiences and have learnt about different cultures and have such open minds and attitudes, it's fantastic.
When I have kids I want them to learn at least one other language, though probably more. I will teach any child of mine English, Farsi and BSL, and probably get French speaking nannies/au pairs to teach them French from a young age (and teach me too!) as I'm very keen on languages and culture, I think it's really important for children to be able to communicate well and have a better understanding of the world.

goodness, this thread has gone a bit downhill?

as a nanny (a british one at that) I have to say I wasn't at all offended by AN comments.

I think that there should be some sort of tax break/help/something(!!) for employers of nannies... the reality is, some parents need nannies, and nannies cost a lot, it seems insane that some parents basically work to fund their nanny, but such is life.
I cannot imagine how the OP is feeling, as although yes, in the eyes of the law, she may have extra money to pay etc - but the nanny/nanny employer relationship is such a personal one that it must feel like a real kick in the teeth when she turns round and acts this way.

although, as harriet said, the OP could have understood her responsibilities better, it seems a shame that her ex nanny accepted all the perks on a personal level whilst employed, but now she has worked out she is owed money, she wants to keep it strictly business

Oh blimey I missed all the fun.

I agree that the OP has been very niave but I sympathise to an extent in that employing someone is a minefield and its so easy to give on trust and get it wrong.

There should be some tax releif for employing a nanny just the same as there is for all businesses when employing staff. Its grossly unfair but its not the nannies fault.

The lesson here is never accept something that is not properly documented , understood by both parties and legal.

Employing a nanny is a legal process not doing someone a favour. Keep it on a professional level and all should be well.

That is an interesting point, Hariet, about how much nannies are actually paid and how much is reported. It would be interesting to run a comparison of the average nanny wages according to nannytax vs the average nanny wage according to the IR. I bet they would be vastly different. And of then there will be people who might change the nanny's job title to make her tax deductable. (including MPs!)

I have had several nannies who have told me that most of their nanny friends get at least some element of their pay in cash. So, I have always thought there must be a fair few few MNers lying about their dedication to the tax/legal system.