I will never need to hire a I will never need to hire a babysitter but I feel for you parents out there who need that service if this bill goes through.
SK in CV
September 3, 2011 @
3:40 PM
Take a look at what the bill Take a look at what the bill really says and compare it to what happens without the bill as it pertains to babysitters.
Requires workers comp. I’m pretty sure that most homeowners policies would cover this. My recollection is that most actually have a section about workers comp, with an exclusion for licensed contractors. So if you’re a homeowner, you’re probably good. If you’re a renter, should probably get a renters policy. The specific wording of the bill might require some changes to HO policies, but I’m guessing their minimal.
Payment of minimum wage. What is that in CA now? Like $8.00 per hour? My recollection is that most babysitters want more than that. So we’re already good.
Paid vacation time. Ooops, removed from the bill, nevermind.
Pay stub or voucher. Ok, this is some extra work. You have to provide the babysitter with a piece of paper that says “You worked 4 hours, I paid you $40 in cash”.
Doesn’t apply to minors. Most of the rest of the bill is blah blah blah, and nothing to do with babysitters.
Sounds kinda ominous. In reality, I dont think it is.
UCGal
September 3, 2011 @
3:29 PM
We use family members or swap We use family members or swap with other parents. In the past we’ve hired local high school students… all of these scenarios are excluded in this law.
The breaks only happen if its a 5 hour shift or longer… so the night out probably wouldn’t trigger that.
A lot of it has to do with making employers keep records… which seems reasonable… you’d need that for the 1099s
I guess I have mixed feelings about this… I think if you hire a nanny for 20 hours a week, let’s say, you should provide records and be willing to cover workers comp claims. But for the college student who comes in once a month, so the parents can have a kid free meal… it’s over kill to require workers comp.
I have friends who worked as nannies during college… some of the provisions would have been good… like requiring an 8 hour sleep break for 24 hours of continuous service… like it or not there are bad employers out there.
UCGal
September 3, 2011 @
3:29 PM
Dup Dup
EconProf
September 3, 2011 @
3:46 PM
The CA legislature is again The CA legislature is again proving it is blissfully ignorant of reality. With the nation’s second-highest unemployment rate among all states, they burden us with regulations and rules that drive businesses and middle-class taxpayers to friendlier climes.
For many teens, babysitting is their first paying job, their first chance to learn responsibility, follow an employer’s rules, and take pride in having earned money for providing a service. This proposed law would virtually outlaw this opportunity as it is practiced today. A babysitting gig is basically a contract, freely entered into without government-imposed rules and regulations. The “employee” is free to take or leave the proposed gig–keep big brother government out of such personal choices.
earlyretirement
September 3, 2011 @
7:46 PM
I agree this is totally I agree this is totally obscene. I can understand if you have a full-time or nearly full time nanny or housekeeper but for the average parent that uses someone occasionally it’s a headache.
I will say though that I don’t know of anyone that isn’t charging at least minimum wage. Since moving here we used a babysitter two times. One time an agency and another time an independent recent college grad we found on sittercity.com Both times it was $15 an hour.
I totally agree with you EconProf…..totally ignorant of reality….
CA renter
September 4, 2011 @
4:30 AM
earlyretirement wrote:I agree [quote=earlyretirement]I agree this is totally obscene. I can understand if you have a full-time or nearly full time nanny or housekeeper but for the average parent that uses someone occasionally it’s a headache.
I will say though that I don’t know of anyone that isn’t charging at least minimum wage. Since moving here we used a babysitter two times. One time an agency and another time an independent recent college grad we found on sittercity.com Both times it was $15 an hour.
I totally agree with you EconProf…..totally ignorant of reality….[/quote]
September 3, 2011 @ 2:50 PM
Linky:
Linky: http://www.theunion.com/ARTICLE/20110830/BREAKINGNEWS/110839991/-1/RSS
September 3, 2011 @ 2:58 PM
I will never need to hire a
I will never need to hire a babysitter but I feel for you parents out there who need that service if this bill goes through.
September 3, 2011 @ 3:40 PM
Take a look at what the bill
Take a look at what the bill really says and compare it to what happens without the bill as it pertains to babysitters.
Requires workers comp. I’m pretty sure that most homeowners policies would cover this. My recollection is that most actually have a section about workers comp, with an exclusion for licensed contractors. So if you’re a homeowner, you’re probably good. If you’re a renter, should probably get a renters policy. The specific wording of the bill might require some changes to HO policies, but I’m guessing their minimal.
Payment of minimum wage. What is that in CA now? Like $8.00 per hour? My recollection is that most babysitters want more than that. So we’re already good.
Paid vacation time. Ooops, removed from the bill, nevermind.
Pay stub or voucher. Ok, this is some extra work. You have to provide the babysitter with a piece of paper that says “You worked 4 hours, I paid you $40 in cash”.
Doesn’t apply to minors. Most of the rest of the bill is blah blah blah, and nothing to do with babysitters.
Sounds kinda ominous. In reality, I dont think it is.
September 3, 2011 @ 3:29 PM
We use family members or swap
We use family members or swap with other parents. In the past we’ve hired local high school students… all of these scenarios are excluded in this law.
The breaks only happen if its a 5 hour shift or longer… so the night out probably wouldn’t trigger that.
A lot of it has to do with making employers keep records… which seems reasonable… you’d need that for the 1099s
I guess I have mixed feelings about this… I think if you hire a nanny for 20 hours a week, let’s say, you should provide records and be willing to cover workers comp claims. But for the college student who comes in once a month, so the parents can have a kid free meal… it’s over kill to require workers comp.
I have friends who worked as nannies during college… some of the provisions would have been good… like requiring an 8 hour sleep break for 24 hours of continuous service… like it or not there are bad employers out there.
September 3, 2011 @ 3:29 PM
Dup
Dup
September 3, 2011 @ 3:46 PM
The CA legislature is again
The CA legislature is again proving it is blissfully ignorant of reality. With the nation’s second-highest unemployment rate among all states, they burden us with regulations and rules that drive businesses and middle-class taxpayers to friendlier climes.
For many teens, babysitting is their first paying job, their first chance to learn responsibility, follow an employer’s rules, and take pride in having earned money for providing a service. This proposed law would virtually outlaw this opportunity as it is practiced today. A babysitting gig is basically a contract, freely entered into without government-imposed rules and regulations. The “employee” is free to take or leave the proposed gig–keep big brother government out of such personal choices.
September 3, 2011 @ 7:46 PM
I agree this is totally
I agree this is totally obscene. I can understand if you have a full-time or nearly full time nanny or housekeeper but for the average parent that uses someone occasionally it’s a headache.
I will say though that I don’t know of anyone that isn’t charging at least minimum wage. Since moving here we used a babysitter two times. One time an agency and another time an independent recent college grad we found on sittercity.com Both times it was $15 an hour.
I totally agree with you EconProf…..totally ignorant of reality….
September 4, 2011 @ 4:30 AM
earlyretirement wrote:I agree
[quote=earlyretirement]I agree this is totally obscene. I can understand if you have a full-time or nearly full time nanny or housekeeper but for the average parent that uses someone occasionally it’s a headache.
I will say though that I don’t know of anyone that isn’t charging at least minimum wage. Since moving here we used a babysitter two times. One time an agency and another time an independent recent college grad we found on sittercity.com Both times it was $15 an hour.
I totally agree with you EconProf…..totally ignorant of reality….[/quote]
Definitely agree.