Bernardine and Thomas McCormack ordered to pay au pair over €5k

voz es

A reported 54 hours a at an effective hourly rate of €2.78 then when the Brazilian au pair quits, they demanded €540.00 from them because they didn't give enough notice.

I think it is a disgusting way to treat another, glad they had to pay up.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0201/937665-labour-court-au-pair/

Annasopra

Good.

She was employed by them and should have been getting entitlements as an employee. Cant believe they made her pay to leave.

Its about Ireland cracked down on this au pair stuff. Girls doing sometimes almost 100 hours a week and getting paid about 2 euro an hour is exploitation.

A friend did resrarch on it. She told me about nightmares; 1 girl paying every time she had a hot shower, 1 girl not allowed cook her own food, 1 girl had the Dad sleazing on her and walking in all the time while she was in the bathroom. There is also the "live out" au pair - feckin childminder.

baylah17

Totally disgusting behavior but alas not uncommon.
The fact that they fought the case to the bitter end says a lot about them and their sense of entitlement!

voz es

I am sure the good experiences have out weighed that bad 20 fold but, there is a real need for legislation specifically to target those who take advantage of a person in a vulnerable position like that.

granturismo

I hope the au-pair got costs awarded to her as well, there's no mention of costs in the RTE report. It would be another blow if she had to pay her legal costs from her just award.

valoren

Solicitor Richard Grogan who represented the McCormacks said he had no comment.

Says it all if you'll pardon the pun, if your solicitor can't even bring himself to say anything on your behalf it speaks volumes for the scumbaggery on display.

vicwatson

She should have been awarded more, did Mr McCormack not know the minimum wage, these idiots sicken me, it’s slave labour, end of.

hobie21

That couple are vile bottom feeding scumbags. This would be a good entry for the "stingiest people ever" thread on boards. Taking all her money when she wanted to leave...unbelievable.

suicide_circus

Dickheads

Hitman3000

Hopefully it will put the frighteners on other chancers.

Wanderer78

Hitman3000 wrote:

Hopefully it will put the frighteners on other chancers.

Probably not, they might just hide it better

DavidLyons_

What a pair of fcuking cnuts.

s15r330

Are we not going to talk about the name Bernardine, absolute state of that

granturismo

The language school is obviously a scam. The au-pair had a 92% attendance record yet worked from '7am to 5pm every day - plus four additional hours babysitting'.

lawred2

This carry on is not unique..

suicide_circus

granturismo wrote: »

The language school is obviously a scam. The au-pair had a 92% attendance record yet worked from '7am to 5pm every day - plus four additional hours babysitting'.

All language schools in ireland exist for the sole purpose of signing off on student attendance so they can work while generating massive profits for the school owners. It's going on for years. I taught in one in dublin for a few weeks around 2009.

vicwatson

Should have said in the first place that fair play to Dayana Jonson Goncalves Generoso for having the guts to take the case against these freeloaders

diomed

valoren wrote: »

Solicitor Richard Grogan who represented the McCormacks said he had no comment.

Says it all if you'll pardon the pun.

Richard Grogan

Gama reaction: Turkish workers treated like ‘slaves’,
The workers say they are owed a cumulative sum of €40.3 million as part of a dispute going back over a decade.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/gama-reaction-turkish-workers-treated-like-slaves-says-solicitor-1.2303900

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-gama-blow-as-accountants-break-ties-over-staff-treatment-25987137.html
The revelations proved embarrassing to senior PWC staff who attended meetings in the Royal Marine Hotel, Dun Laoghaire, where Gama executives and Mr Grogan assured union officials that it was fully compliant with Irish labour legislation and was paying the industry-agreed wages to all workers.

Gama "imports" workers from Turkey and paid them around €2-€3 per hour in breach of the minimum wage law.

BillyBobBS

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Good.

She was employed by them and should have been getting entitlements as an employee. Cant believe they made her pay to leave.

Its about Ireland cracked down on this au pair stuff. Girls doing sometimes almost 100 hours a week and getting paid about 2 euro an hour is exploitation.

A friend did resrarch on it. She told me about nightmares; 1 girl paying every time she had a hot shower, 1 girl not allowed cook her own food, 1 girl had the Dad sleazing on her and walking in all the time while she was in the bathroom. There is also the "live out" au pair - feckin childminder.

Ireland won't be cracking down on this sort of stuff reason being plenty of the well to do's use slave au pair labour.

MissShihTzu

Got the idea of four weeks notice from when he worked in Dunnes Stores.
Didn't have a clue about Employment Law.
Charged the girl €510 to leave.

Clueless my foot! More like the McCormacks were trying to keep up with the Joneses and striped the poor girl thinking she wouldn't dare complain. Cheap as chips.

Glad they had to pay up. Scum.

ohnonotgmail

MissShihTzu wrote: »

Got the idea of four weeks notice from when he worked in Dunnes Stores.
Didn't have a clue about Employment Law.
Charged the girl €510 to leave.

Clueless my foot! More like the McCormacks were trying to keep up with the Joneses and striped the poor girl thinking she wouldn't dare complain. Cheap as chips.

Glad they had to pay up. Scum.

well they actually charged her 540 to leave. They only took 510 because that is all the cash she had.

Wanderer78

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well they actually charged her 540 to leave. They only took 510 because that is all the cash she had.

ffs

suicide_circus

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well they actually charged her 540 to leave. They only took 510 because that is all the cash she had.

Sounds like Dunnes Stores in fairness

Podge_irl

At last month's hearing, Thomas McCormack told the Labour Court that he "hadn't a clue" that he was entering into an employer-employee relationship with Ms Generoso, or that a person working in his home had the same rights as other workers.

Mr McCormack told the Labour Court he got the idea that she would have to give four weeks' notice from when he worked in Dunnes Stores, where he would have had to give four weeks notice.

So he figured she had no rights as she wasn't an employee, yet was somehow mysteriously obliged to give 4 weeks notice as if she was an employee.

Also, the solicitor genuinely tried to make an argument that she had no rights as she was working an illegal number of hours? The brazen stupidity of that is disturbing.

Neyite

An au-pair arrangement when it's done properly, can be a mutually beneficial arrangement but all too often it's exploitative and underpaid.

They are supposed to be treated as part of the family, rather than formal childcare. They are supposed to get time to study/attend classes, live in the home and enough money for personal weekly expenses outside of accommodation and food costs.

This greedy couple wanted a slave. I'm glad that she got awarded the full amount she should have been paid.

lawred2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well they actually charged her 540 to leave. They only took 510 because that is all the cash she had.

wow

imagine being that much of an uncaring miserly scumbag

but then I suppose that goes with the territory of subcontracting out parenting to someone you're keeping in penury

suicide_circus

I'm no fan of compo culture but in this case I think additional damages would have been fully justified for this girl

theteal

€150 a week??? They pulled some stroke there.

Our nursery is £70 a day!

Mardy Bum

Vile individuals.

diomed

The photo of the three people leaving the court
Birds of a feather fly together.

Jimbob1977

It's the kind of behaviour you'd expect in Saudi Arabia or the UAE.

Bring over a Filipino housekeeper, steal her passport and treat her like a slave.

Unfortunately, in situations where both parents work in Ireland, many want to have the lifestyle to which they are accustomed.

But their pesky kids get in the way. Hiring a low cost au pair will save them a fortune. It's an embarrassment for our country.

As for the solicitor.... he is just a product of the legal profession. Amoral and unfeeling.

seamus

The fact that he thought 4 weeks notice was required because "That's what I had to give when I left Dunnes", says it all really.

Clueless people without the slightest shred of common sense or decency. You don't have to know that an au pair is an employee to know that someone doing 54 hour weeks in your house for very little pay is being exploited. There's no excuse for it.

The problem is rooting this stuff out. The kind of stupid or malicious people who will do this are the kind that won't go through an agency. And someone arriving in the country off their own bat isn't going to know the law.

Maybe the LRC should be going into language schools and explaining their rights and how to get help, encouraging immigrant communities to talk to new arrivals about it, and so forth.

I generally understand a solicitors' obligations in regards to protecting their client's interests, but this couple's solicitor tried to argue that the au pair didn't have the protection of the law, because the hours they made her work meant that she was in breach of her contract.

How can anyone stand up in court and make that argument without running home to scrub themselves in bleach afterwards?

Fann Linn

voz es wrote: »

A reported 54 hours a at an effective hourly rate of €2.78 then when the Brazilian au pair quits, they demanded €540.00 from them because they didn't give enough notice.

I think it is a disgusting way to treat another, glad they had to pay up.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0201/937665-labour-court-au-pair/

Entrepreneurs no doubt.

mariaalice

They wanted cheap child care there is no such thing, they live in Milltown so perhaps not badly off or more likely have a large mortgage to live there. Childcare for three children some of whom were of school age could be around 300 euro a week if not more.

awec

theteal wrote: »

€150 a week??? They pulled some stroke there.

Our nursery is £70 a day!

I think if Au Pair is done correctly you're supposed to house them and feed them for free, basically treat them like they're part of the family.

As far as I remember the lodging can be offset against what they should be paid, which is why they can appear to be paid poorly in money terms.

Ineedaname

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'm no fan of compo culture but in this case I think additional damages would have been fully justified for this girl

Realistically she’ll probably never see a penny. I’ve dealt with people like them before and they don’t believe in handing over money.

You can get all the court orders you want. If someone doesn’t want to pay you they’re not going to.

awec

mariaalice wrote: »

They wanted cheap child care there is no such thing, they live in Milltown so perhaps not badly off or more likely have a large mortgage to live there. Childcare for three children some of whom were of school age could be around 300 euro a week if not more.

The whole point of an Au Pair is that it's cheap child care.

If you're willing to have someone move in and live with you, and you're willing to give up your spare bedroom and feed them etc then it'll cost a lot less than traditional child care.

jmayo

I think the world needs to know what cheap bast**ds that walk on other people look like.



The guy in the middle is their solicitor.

FTA69

Disgusting f*cking animals, and probably masquerading as pillars of the community at the same time.

Unfortunately this carry-on is the tip of the iceberg. One of the first things I did with my trade union over here was work as a volunteer English tutor with our Domestic Workers Branch and the stories they had were bloody harrowing. Mostly Filipina and Moroccan women working for wealthy Arab families in London; contacting the branch's private helpline before jumping out of windows and running off into the night with nothing but the clothes on their back. I've heard stories of women being beaten with frying pans, passports destroyed and the whole lot. One poor woman was molested by the husband and when the wife began to suspect viciously beat her in a jealous rage. Some of the women literally had to sleep on a mattress under the stairs. And while we're predominantly discussing Emirati Arabs, there were more than a few wealthy Brits up to this craic as well.

Here's an article by the branch secretary, Marissa Begonia on what she deals with.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/11/domestic-workers-visas-employer

mariaalice

awec wrote: »

I think if Au Pair is done correctly you're supposed to house them and feed them for free, basically treat them like they're part of the family.

As far as I remember the lodging can be offset against what they should be paid, which is why they can appear to be paid poorly in money terms.

They can not be employed to provide full time child care that is the nub of the matter.

My nice works as a nanny and is paid more than a primary school teacher and has very good conditions.

ChikiChiki

An ex of mine who has now made a successful career in accounting here had the same problems when she first arrived to Ireland as an English student back in 2011. She worked 9/10 hour days for €120 a week and the wench she worked for threw tantrums and abused her if she didn't have the 3 storey house cleaned top to bottom each day.

There certainly was lots of this going on a couple of years back.

eviltwin

People like them make me sick. It really does take an absolute scumbag to exploit someone like this for a prolonged period of time.

On another note I can't understand solicitors who defend people like this in court. How can you work towards helping people like this knowing what they did.

mariaalice

awec wrote: »

The whole point of an Au Pair is that it's cheap child care.

If you're willing to have someone move in and live with you, and you're willing to give up your spare bedroom and feed them etc then it'll cost a lot less than traditional child care.

But its not full time child care and should not be seen as such if someone has an au pair because they work part time or all the children are in school ( what do they do on school holidays ) or if it is sublimating other forms of child care that is different. Also they are not a housekeeper they are expected to do some light housekeeping that is all.

AlanG

This couple were obviously pretty nasty charging the woman when she left and they seemed to have a very bad attitude towards her. This is not representative of the vast majority of people who use Au Pairs.
There is a real problem with the lack of legislation around Au pairs. Lots of Irish go abroad to work as Au Pairs, learn a language and get to know a society. It can be a great experience if both parties approach it correctly. With poor legislation around both language schools and Au Pairs combined with prohibitive child care costs it leaves many people with no choice but to take a risk. The alternative is a return to one partner having to give up work to raise kids, and this may result in the family loosing their home so is not really an option.
The allowance for accommodation is only 54.13 per week which means that the value of providing food and board in Dublin can not be taken into account against the minimum wage requirements. This leaves many families in a near impossible situation due to government inaction.

Many people seem to have no problem using gig economy apps such as uber and deliveroo to exploit vulnerable workers but then get very preachy and judgemental when it comes to childcare.

ChikiChiki

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well they actually charged her 540 to leave. They only took 510 because that is all the cash she had.

Thats the worst bit. Absolute uncaring miserable scumbags is all I can say. Hope karma gets them good relatively speaking.

jmayo

seamus wrote: »

The fact that he thought 4 weeks notice was required because "That's what I had to give when I left Dunnes", says it all really.

Clueless people without the slightest shred of common sense or decency. You don't have to know that an au pair is an employee to know that someone doing 54 hour weeks in your house for very little pay is being exploited. There's no excuse for it.

There are anything, but clueless.
They never make a mistake that costs them money.

The guy claims that he thought that she would have to give 4 weeks notice like a Dunnes employee and yet somewhere else he claimed he didn't think she was an employee.

At last month's hearing, Thomas McCormack told the Labour Court that he "hadn't a clue" that he was entering into an employer-employee relationship with Ms Generoso, or that a person working in his home had the same rights as other workers.

Dirtbag.

seamus wrote: »

The problem is rooting this stuff out. The kind of stupid or malicious people who will do this are the kind that won't go through an agency. And someone arriving in the country off their own bat isn't going to know the law.

Maybe the LRC should be going into language schools and explaining their rights and how to get help, encouraging immigrant communities to talk to new arrivals about it, and so forth.

I generally understand a solicitors' obligations in regards to protecting their client's interests, but this couple's solicitor tried to argue that the au pair didn't have the protection of the law, because the hours they made her work meant that she was in breach of her contract.

How can anyone stand up in court and make that argument without running home to scrub themselves in bleach afterwards?

Ehhh he is a solicitor.
Solicitors have represented the likes of Klaus Barbie, Jeffrey Dahmer, Fred West.

A lot of them put prostitutes to shame and are willing to take anyone's money.

Really Interested

granturismo wrote: »

I hope the au-pair got costs awarded to her as well, there's no mention of costs in the RTE report. It would be another blow if she had to pay her legal costs from her just award.

Well for the past number of decades the labour court etc have no power to award costs “to keep it a lawyer free zone” the funny thing is the employer usually pays for a lawyer which mean the employee has to make a choice do the legal stuff or pay a lawyer and hope the award is enough to pay the lawyer and the bit left over is enough.

Many lawyers take such cases knowing they will never get true value for the work.

mariaalice

The bottom line is they tried to get a nanny for the wages of a au pair but it the rest of it asking her for money when she left really make him nasty.

Halloween Jack

If you disregard the obvious nastiness of this particular case, the absolute state of our system of providing childcare here incentivises the whole au pair thing to be fair, especially when our giant Ponzi scheme of a housing market all but requires two income families.

dub_skav

mariaalice wrote: »

The bottom line is they tried to get a nanny for the wages of a au pair but it the rest of it asking her for money when she left really make him nasty.

And asking for the money is probably what pushed her to bring this to court.
If they had just treated her badly like so many others, she may have thought it best to just leave it and move on.

Very glad it went this far and their behaviour was brought to light

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

mariaalice wrote: »

awec wrote: »

I think if Au Pair is done correctly you're supposed to house them and feed them for free, basically treat them like they're part of the family.

As far as I remember the lodging can be offset against what they should be paid, which is why they can appear to be paid poorly in money terms.

They can not be employed to provide full time child care that is the nub of the matter.

My nice works as a nanny and is paid more than a primary school teacher and has very good conditions.

True, but there's a difference between a nanny and an au pair: a nanny will work more, be better paid and usually have recognised qualifications.

An Au Pair is not a job, it's more of a cultural exchange and there's a limit to the number if hours they can work per week.

What this couple wanted (and should have hired) was a nanny.