Comments on: Why the Proposed New York Nanny Law is a Bad Idea. http://nylawblog.com/2010/06/why-the-proposed-new-york-nanny-law-is-a-bad-idea/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=why-the-proposed-new-york-nanny-law-is-a-bad-idea Law Office of Frederic R. Abramson |160 Broadway, Ste. 500 | New York, NY 10038 | (212) 233-0666 | fabramson@abramsonlegal.com Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:11:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: kristamacdonald http://nylawblog.com/2010/06/why-the-proposed-new-york-nanny-law-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-294 kristamacdonald Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:52:16 +0000 http://nylawblog.com/?p=955#comment-294 First of all you should put your post through grammar check. There are far too many errors in there for a lawyer. <br>Second your content- <br> skyrocket to $35,000 a year?? In what world is it okay to expect someone to raise your children for less then this? <br>Always women?? What sexist world do you live in?<br>If working parents can not afford a nanny then they should not have one. If they can not afford to pay a nanny a livable wage and treat them with respect and dignity and include them as a part of the family- then again- don't have one. That is what day care is for. After the first 5 years you shouldn't need one anyway- they enter the school system and most have after school programs. <br>It is insulting to suggest that families would lose their house because their nanny would get sick days or over time pay. It goes back to the idea that if you can not afford to have a nanny then don't have one. It is a human who comes into your home and lovingly cares for what should be the most precious thing in your life. If you don't want to pay them what they should be paid then you won't get a decent nanny. <br>$500 a week for one on one care for your children is not that bad. Lets keep in mind that these nannies (not all women) are people. With lives outside of the home they work in. With needs and the ability to get sick, have emergencies and hell they have bills to pay too! <br><br>Sure many are paid off the books. But heads of companies all over, or senators or other rich people who sit on millions of dollars- take things for free that should be taxed. And that is usually more then $500 or sometimes $35,000 a year! <br><br>With that said- I think it is a bad idea. I feel that it will place un-needed strain on BOTH parents and nannies. Parents will worry about the money factor- paying out more hourly to make the nanny want to stay. Getting caught if they are off the books. And for nannies- the concern that they may lose their job as their employers try to find someone they can pay less in order for the cash to balance. It will drive down wages of nannies not force them up. <br><br>Also- it seems to me that this is another way for insure more tax flow to the government and to try and draw out illegal workers. Just leave nannies and the generations they are raising alone! First of all you should put your post through grammar check. There are far too many errors in there for a lawyer.
Second your content-
skyrocket to $35,000 a year?? In what world is it okay to expect someone to raise your children for less then this?
Always women?? What sexist world do you live in?
If working parents can not afford a nanny then they should not have one. If they can not afford to pay a nanny a livable wage and treat them with respect and dignity and include them as a part of the family- then again- don't have one. That is what day care is for. After the first 5 years you shouldn't need one anyway- they enter the school system and most have after school programs.
It is insulting to suggest that families would lose their house because their nanny would get sick days or over time pay. It goes back to the idea that if you can not afford to have a nanny then don't have one. It is a human who comes into your home and lovingly cares for what should be the most precious thing in your life. If you don't want to pay them what they should be paid then you won't get a decent nanny.
$500 a week for one on one care for your children is not that bad. Lets keep in mind that these nannies (not all women) are people. With lives outside of the home they work in. With needs and the ability to get sick, have emergencies and hell they have bills to pay too!

Sure many are paid off the books. But heads of companies all over, or senators or other rich people who sit on millions of dollars- take things for free that should be taxed. And that is usually more then $500 or sometimes $35,000 a year!

With that said- I think it is a bad idea. I feel that it will place un-needed strain on BOTH parents and nannies. Parents will worry about the money factor- paying out more hourly to make the nanny want to stay. Getting caught if they are off the books. And for nannies- the concern that they may lose their job as their employers try to find someone they can pay less in order for the cash to balance. It will drive down wages of nannies not force them up.

Also- it seems to me that this is another way for insure more tax flow to the government and to try and draw out illegal workers. Just leave nannies and the generations they are raising alone!

]]> By: ApostrophiesRUs http://nylawblog.com/2010/06/why-the-proposed-new-york-nanny-law-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-274 ApostrophiesRUs Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:19:19 +0000 http://nylawblog.com/?p=955#comment-274 The plural of Nanny is Nannies, not Nanny's. Nanny's is the possessive form. The plural of Nanny is Nannies, not Nanny's. Nanny's is the possessive form.

]]>