Dodgy nanny employment practices

[butadream]

We've just advertised for a nanny and TBH [naive emoticon] I'm shocked at how many seem to be exploited at the moment.

We've seen quite a few CVs from Romanians, Bulgarians and Turkish people who are "self-employed" nannies - but a nanny is always an employee under UK law so if they are "self-employed" then the family employing them at the moment is carrying out tax avoidance. I'm also pretty sure it's against immigration rules (well, it is for Romania and Bulgaria as I know they are "A2" European countries, I don't know quite what the position is for Turkey) unless they have a visa that doesn't just relate to their nationality.

We've also seen quite a few Phillippine applicants with and without British passports who are working as "nanny housekeepers" with apparently huge workloads and I'll bet not much pay.

From the applicants we've seen it seems quite common practice to be a dodgy employer even though you'd imagine most nanny employers have responsible jobs.

Must be tough for real nannies to find a decent employer if the black market in childcare is so huge.

If I were HMRC I think I'd do an advertising sting with the police (if that's legal) and fine all these "employers" to the hilt.

I found that here too. I am one of the few legit nannies I know. Although I also am having issues with getting my employers to pay full taxes etc... they and their friends all think I am grossly overpaid etc as they could get a Filippina for less. Makes me so cross as these same friends then come to ME saying "what do we do in this situation?" and expect free advice!!! To be honest as a "professional" nanny I am so sick of the majority of employers evading taxes, wanting to pay peanuts, wanting full housekeeping done, etc etc etc that I am hoping to break out of nannying into more of a consulting role as parents ironicaly will pay an "expert" loads of money but having that same "expert" as their fulltime nanny would warrant a 50% paycut.

LOL yes can imagine people pay for a "supernanny"

I'm also sick of people thinking they can evade paying what should be part of a nanny's salary! It's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other though. Plenty of people don't want to pay tax because they think they'll cream off more as a net salary. They don't seem to realise they're shooting themselves in the foot. Likewise those who declare min wage and have another £100 eveery week under the table. It's silly....

Likewise self-employed 'nannies' get on my nerves. There are situations where a nanny can be self-employed, they are very very rare and 90% of nannies don't meet them! Incidentally Romanians and Bulgarians can be self-employed, Turkish nationals are on tricky territoy as they would need the correct visa to still be here and working. The UK stopped admitting Turkish au pairs when all the visa rules changed.

We have a Bulgarian cleaner, she is genuinely self-employed, we pay market rate and the agency has employer's insurance so I am pretty sure that is all on the level.

Presumably these illegal nannies are working without employer's insurance - doesn't that cause a problem both ways?

Can't believe people are so blasé, I am recruiting for sole charge of my children who are beyond precious to me so why would I or anyone go through the back door for this?

It can be tough as a nanny to find an employer who'll pay you 100% legit - I'm sure most nannies would rather be paid properly but if that's not an option it's better to be working than not. I've had interviews where they've insisted I'd have to be self-employed, and when I've pointed out why that's not possible - no job offer. My last job they only paid tax on half my salary, but that's better than nothing.

Seriously, HMRC have to find tons of money for the Treasury nowadays, I would expect PAYE audits to be extended to this kind of employer sooner rather than later ....

Most romanians are forced by circumstances to register as Self-Employed so they can receive the Registration Certificate(Blue card).It can be tough to find a nanny-employer that will agree to declare every penny and to pay the tax that they should pay.
I believe the fault is on both sides, nannies because they take jobs like that and employers because they dont want to do the things by the law.But at the end of the day , as Missus84 was saying is better to have a job like that,than not to have any.

"forced by circumstances" - yes, the circumstances are that they are only legally allowed to work in the UK as self-employed people, not as employees. So not as nannies.

Presumably employer's liability insurance is invalid if you have an illegal employee.

There must be some other implications too. I would lose my job if I did dodgy things.

What would happen in an emergency - I would worry an illegal nanny might wait before calling an ambulance or the police in case questions were asked?

This one sends me. I have had more interviews with parents (often fantastically rich) wanting an 'under the table' arrangement.
In my last job I was the only legit member of staff and my boss resented every penny.
In my experience the Filipino nanny-housekeeper unless the children are at full time school is modern day language for slavery, which supposedly has been outlawed in this country.
Most employers don't look on it as exploitation and will tell themselves the most fantastic lies to make themselves believe it.
Welcome to the dark side.
Nannying is an ugly industry dressed up in a pretty dress with a frilly umbrella. Oh and a spoonful of sugar of course.

To get of the cynical high horse it's really nice to hear an EMPLOYER bemoaning the situation. Hope you find your Mary Poppins and I'm sure you will be a fab employer to work for

Agree completely Tavvy. If not exactly slavery then exploitation at an extreme level, utterly disgusting IMO.

I've heard of a lot of employer tax evasion and general shenanigans through nannies I've met at playgroups, without fail it's always the richest families pulling these stunts, it sickens me. Two that immediately spring to mind were the nanny of a Barrister and the nanny of a Banker.

In the case of exploiting foreign nannies, I just can't understand valuing your children so little that you pay a pittance to the person who is caring for them the majority of the time. You're basically teaching your kids that some people (foreign people) aren't worth as much as other people, it's pure racism.

Unfortunately it puts me off hiring a legitimate (e.g. married to a British person visa) Filipina or Bulgarian or whatever as I think my friends and neighbours would put me in that "modern-day slaver" bracket - that's another sort of racist discrimination on my part though isn't it?

I used to work in Sloane Square and the police would sometimes do stings at the tube exit and check peoples visa's. I've found alot of employers resent the large salary because if you're a live in nanny you have a big disposable income and no bills. My boss used to comment that i had more money than her!

Our nanny is quite likely to have more disposable income than us. But she is also likely not going to have a nice house like us and won't be able to afford to invest in career as we have done pre-children and won't be able to have as nice holidays as we will once our children are old enough not to need a nanny any more. So that kind of comment is out of order.

No wonder so many nanny-employer relationships appear to be difficult ("you just can't get the staff these days, dahling") if they are built on such substandard foundations. WTF should a nanny be the most pure and honest and delightful person in the world when the employers are taking the piss from day 1?

Another nanny employer here (formerly) who has been shocked by under-the -table arrangements I've heard nannies talk about. My DH works in finance, and I'm surprised to hear about bankers/lawyers because DH would lose his job and find it impossible to get another if he were fined by the inland revenue for not paying tax for an employee or whatever. We know it would only take falling out with the employee and them reporting it, or them falling out with their boyfriend and him reporting it, or whatever, to land in a lot of trouble. For the sake of a few hundred a month how can such employers live with themselves?

While we were recruiting though, we found a lot of nannies who only wanted to be "self employed". We had to explain time and time again that WE would be in trouble if we agreed to this, not them.

I wish the IR would crack down on this. It exploits the vulnerable.

I think another problem is a lot of employers do not see their nanny as a human being but a commodity like their children, or worse an accessory.
The fact the nanny may have a life, commitments etc is of no interest to them so paying their tax and national insurance is hardly top of their priority list.
I've had that comment about live in nannies many times and my response is simple. If they resent the salary that much then they can get rid of me and do the work themselves (I've always worked for SAHM's)
That usually stops them in their tracks when they realise (shock shock, horror horror,) they might have to spend an hour alone with the little Darlings.
So glad I'm out of there for the time being.
There are so many double standards and substandard foundations.

Presumably all that abuse can sour a nanny too, so that even when they are with a legit employer they might not be inclined to trust the employer completely for a while.

I think you guys talking about 2 different issues here.

Nannies who are self employed do! pay their tax, ni contributions etc. regardless their country of origin. Turkish or Bulgarian or wherever they are from. If they dont they wont be able to renew their visa!
Home office give them visa to work as self employed. And when they apply for visa they have to tell them(HO) what they will be doing and also have to show them their business plan and supporting documents(this could be courses, first aid etc.) So not everyone can get a visa just like that. And after a year they have to show how much tax they paid and all the other stuff to HO.

Turkey has an agreement with Europe and as long as they contribute to the country they live in and work, they can stay legally. And for them to do so they have to show IR all their earnings! Otherwise, HO wont renew their visa.

And regarding employers who are taking advantage of nannies and other domestic stuff. There will be always this kind of employers anyway. And it has nothing to do with their wealth! I know very wealthy employers who doesn't pay tax for their stuff. And those stuff cant complain to IR as they know they will loose their job. And getting another job might be difficult for them. And I don't think IR can do anything unless! someone report the employer.

BlueGreen, the test for whether someone is employed is not what the person is registered as, it is a question of the role they do. This is the HMRC questionnaire on the matter although actually it's a matter of employment law and then the tax treatment follows on accordingly. This is the HMRC page on employing domestic workers.

Nannies are normally employees because as the employer:

• You can tell them what work to do, as well as how, where and when to do it.
• They have to do their work themselves.
• You can move the worker from task to task.
• They?re contracted to work a set number of hours.
• They get a regular wage or salary, even if there is no work available.
• They have benefits such as paid leave or a pension as part of their contract.
• You pay them overtime pay or bonus payments.
• They manage anyone else who works for you.

The responsibility for getting the tax right is with the employer not the employee. The employer can be fined for not paying employer's NIC, not operating PAYE etc.

So except maybe for those one-off specialist "sleep training" or "bottle-taking" nannies, families need to treat nannies as employees.

Given that nannies are employees they need a visa that allows them to be employees. Under the Blue Card registration system A2 nationals can be self-employed but not employees unless the employer gets a work permit for them. Nannytax has some useful information on this.

Actually browsing the Nannytax site there is quite a lot of useful information on the whole employment law / tax / immigration situation.

Butadream, As far as i know Turkish citizens doesnt need or dont have that Blue Card registration system.

I think part of the problem is that in this country, childcare costs are not tax deductible. In any business situation where you have an employee, you can offset the gross cost of employment against the business profits. But you can't with childcare. If I am self-employed and use my car for work, have an office, a phone etc all these things can be offset against my earnings - but not the cost of someone to care for my child so I CAN work!!

It is quite mad and has always infuriated me.

And I have observed that the very rich are often the absolute tightest around, so this sort of behaviour doesn't surprise me. And it is so commonplace that no-one really considers it wrong anymore, everyone knows someone doing it.

I do think this might be less of an issue if people would stop agreeing net pay arrangements, or even talking about pay in net terms.

I don't see why a nanny would be happy to work without getting her tax/NI paid, nor why an employer would risk not making proper deductions, but I also don't see why paying net is still the norm when deductions are required. To me it smacks of the days when domestic staff lived below stairs and one paid them with one's pocket change rather than a modern employment relationship.

No, Turkey isn't an A2 country. From the UK Border Agency website it seems that Turkish nationals can establish businesses here - not come for employment though - or if they are already here legally then I think they can take employment here under [[xwww.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/workingintheuk/turkish/workers/ these rules] but as an employer I don't find it very clear and I wouldn't know quite what to look for in a Turkish person's visa to be able to employ them.

penona - that seems to be how people get rich in the 1st place

mrshappy - agree!