Don't Kill the Au Pair Program
Biden has proposed further regulating the federal au pair program, which will disproportionately burden highly skilled working mothers.

President Joe Biden's administration is currently considering new regulations that will deny middle-class and upper-middle-class Americans crucial child care services, specifically hampering their ability to welcome au pairs into their families. Biden has proposed further regulating the federal au pair program, which will disproportionately burden highly skilled working mothers, maybe even to the point of driving more of them out of the workforce.
For me, this issue is personal. Like millions of families in the summer of 2020, my family faced a childcare crisis due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The daycare our two young boys attended, aged one and three at the time, closed its doors, and our temporary nanny found another job. Fortunately, my wife and I were both healthy and able to work from home. But caring for two young children while working proved challenging.
We tried to find a solution and re-enrolled our boys in daycare, but it closed down for days at a time due to COVID cases. As a result, my wife and I had to take turns working and taking care of the children. I'd work during the morning and early afternoon, she'd work in the late afternoon and night. It was unsustainable.
Desperate, we finally considered hiring an au pair, a step we had never seriously considered before. The idea of having a stranger live with us seemed off-putting. We were not used to having help at home. We associated such arrangements with the super-rich who could afford butlers, maids, and private jets. But the pandemic left us no choice and convinced us to take the plunge.
We are so glad we did.
We contacted an au pair agency and began interviewing au pairs within days. Due to COVID-related border closures enacted by the Trump administration, new au pairs weren't coming to the United States, but those already here could switch families. After multiple interviews and in-person meetings, we decided we wanted to hire Neevoliah, who was originally from South Africa and had been with another family in San Francisco. She joined our family in early fall 2020.
I stayed home with the kids while my wife went to the airport to pick up Neevoliah. Out of nervousness, I paced back and forth before they got home. What if we didn't get along? What if she was messy? What if she was terrible with children or, God forbid, irresponsible? What if the kids hated her or my wife and I couldn't stand her? What if it was just too weird to have a stranger live in our home? I had visions of conflict: passive-aggressive fights over the washing machine, yelling about the dishes, and having to fire her.
But none of those things happened. Neevoliah was nice, pleasant, and responsible. It took about 20 minutes for us to get used to her living in our house. She joined our family, shared meals with us every day, and hung out with us on the weekends. We baked together, went to the store as a family, and shared our cultures. During the day, she watched the kids and took them all over the neighborhood to play. My wife and I could work, and the kids were safe and entertained.
My kids love her, called her "Nee," and had both a friend in her and another adult figure to set an example, discipline them, and guide them.
Having an au pair was not like having an employee living in our house, it was like having a cousin or a niece living with us. Neither my wife nor I expected to feel that bond with our au pair and our kids found somebody else who loved and cared for them.
Hiring an au pair was the second-best decision we've made regarding our children (the best was having them). But the Biden administration's proposed regulatory changes could end this program for us and thousands of other middle-class families. According to a new rule just released, the administration is proposing that wages be broadly determined by state minimum wage laws and calibrated upward based on an arbitrary tier system instead of the federal minimum wage, reducing the number of work hours, creating more complicated reporting schemes for hours worked and other requirements, and increasing the amount families must spend on education for au pairs. In short, every rule the Biden administration proposes will make it more expensive for families to hire au pairs and result in many fewer of them coming to the United States.
These changes would make it financially difficult for us and impossible for thousands of other Americans to continue hosting au pairs. In Virginia, where my family and I live, this regulation would increase the weekly wage we pay by 78.5 percent. Instead of hiring an au pair for another year, we may have to stop using the program. The fallout from a recent court ruling in Massachusetts bears this out.
In December 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled that Massachusetts' high minimum wage applied to au pairs—a previously excluded category of workers. Beginning on January 1, 2020, the weekly wage for au pairs increased by 170 percent including a minor deduction for supplying free room and board. Predictably, the number of new au pairs moving to Massachusetts collapsed as middle-class families were priced out.
The number of new au pairs arriving in Massachusetts in 2022 was 68.1 percent below 2019—the year before the state's minimum wage applied to au pairs. At the same time, the number of new au pairs arriving in states unaffected by the court's ruling rose 4.4 percent. It was as if Massachusetts' minimum wage created a permanent semi-closed border around Massachusetts that locked out au pairs.
Now, the Biden administration is considering regulations that will do the same thing nationwide—denying middle-class American families, au pairs, and, particularly, my family the ability to utilize au pair services. If the U.S. sees any effect similar to what happened in Massachusetts, it could be catastrophic for working mothers—especially in blue states with higher minimum wages.
The government started the au pair program to advance public diplomacy by increasing understanding and cultural exchange between Americans and foreigners. Indeed, one of the justifications for the new regulation is to maintain "position cultural immersion experiences." But the downside of insisting on higher state and local minimum wages adjusted upward by a federal tier is that many fewer au pairs will be employed in the United States. That undermines the stated purpose of the program.
When Neevoliah was still with us, we welcomed our third child to our family—a beautiful baby girl. Neevoliah loved our daughter immediately and their bond was tight—she took the best photos of her. Neevoliah had to leave a year after she joined our family. Since, we've had a few other au pairs and even managed to replicate that first experience again. We still talk with Nee even though she's back in South Africa. Our kids FaceTime with her and, when they're not talking with her, they talk about her like a member of the family because she is one.
Regulating the au pair program out of existence would materially and financially harm families like mine. Our childcare situation would worsen, our youngest kids would have to go to daycare part of the day, and my wife (who works from home) would be burdened with even more responsibilities when I'm at the office. But the worst loss is the bond and emotional connection that we'd be prevented from forming with new au pairs—and the sadness that tens of thousands of other American families wouldn't be able to discover it for themselves.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
There is no aspect of our lives the government won't regulate. Limited government, indeed.
First.World.Problem.
This truly was an absolutely incredibly self-indulgent article. It simply reeks of yuppie smuggery.
Like... "We want to hire a foreign nanny, but it should be cheap!"
In December 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled that Massachusetts' high minimum wage applied to au pairs
How can we pay people less when they are (checks notes) Workers?!
"But they're foreign so they should be exempt from the laws that make it difficult for actual Americans to find jobs!"
Like, oh I don’t know , 3/5ths?
Eternally a terrible example. It was the bad guys who wanted their slaves to count as 5/5ths for Congressional apportionment purposes. The most correct answer there (from a libertarian perspective) was actually 0/5ths because counting people who have no autonomy for the purposes of democracy is a farce.
It's been completely misunderstood for a very long time.
Had a black friend that was pissed at this point. Asked him if he knew he was arguing for more power for slave owners. Did not get a coherent reply.
It was meant as a reference to slavery, which is precisely the way some people treat their au pairs.
Fair enough. Sorry. Sore point.
Would one of you peasants fetch my monocle?
It's definitely not something I think most people can relate to. The writer already has enough disposable income to hire a nanny and is complaining that government makes it difficult for him to get a live-in nanny.
Most parents facing the situation he described would probably go to a single income because they aren't privileged enough to afford and house someone to raise their kids
Horny husbands hardest hit.
How much do you hate your kids if you do this while working from home?
Kids are just another accessory for their exciting lifestyle.
I mean, if they actually need to concentrate on something, I get how constant interruptions from kids could be an issue. Still, I don't see why they needed to hire someone from overseas. It's not like we're short on illegals "seeking asylum".
I've worked from home with kids. One age 6. He understands when I'm in the middle of something. And I make sure to talk to him when I get a break. It isnt hard to deal with if you act like a parent. Make sure they have things to do. Make sure they know when they can come bug you.
Well, you do better than me, then. I had difficulty concentrating on software development when my ex-wife would interrupt while I was working at home.
On the flip side, I no longer work at home. (Or have a wife. And never had kids.)
Enh.
Wives are way harder to deal with when working from home than kids. They think work from home is paid chore time. Agree with you there.
No, she at least wasn't like that, she was a professional herself. But she just didn't grasp that when I was at work, I was trying to concentrate on work so I could later be not-at-work, and would just pop in to tell me stuff, or whatever, and wreck my admittedly not-super-coherent, ADD train of thought.
Ah well. Hopefully she's happier wherever and withever whom she is now.
The author of the article's children were one and three. I don't care how much of a super parent you are, you can't leave a three-year-old unattended all day and a one-year-old is right out.
It isnt all day. No work day us filled to the brim with tasks. It isnt hard to take 5 to 10 minutes every hour or so.
Tell me you've never been a sysadmin... 😉
If only there was some explanation. Some word that explained why they are not able to freely spend time with their kids.
Perhaps the word... "working".
Have bigger families.
No really, that's the problem. We insist on importing our replacements instead of having them.
Help solve the homelessness problem already present here in the US. Pick one up off the street, and give them a place to stay, and give your kids a fantastic educational experience.
Where is your compassion?!
Don't worry, those hardest hit will still vote Democrat. Nothing will shake their resolve, as long as mean tweets aren't emanating from the White House.
With millions of people right here looking for work it's insane to hire someone from another country.
why hire someone local for *checks my own link* $20 an hour when you can hire a Guatemalan Au Pair for cheaper!
And why do we have so many unemployed?
We contacted an au pair agency and began interviewing au pairs within days. Due to COVID-related border closures enacted by the Trump administration, new au pairs weren't coming to the United States, but those already here could switch families. After multiple interviews and in-person meetings, we decided we wanted to hire Neevoliah, who was originally from South Africa and had been with another family in San Francisco. She joined our family in early fall 2020.
I'm sitting here, reading this, and trying to figure out a response. So an upper middle class laptop class family makes note that they can't simply find good help from Guatemala because Trump closed the borders *checks Reason prior article notes*[after his drunk college buddy in the back seat told him to] then I read this:
Which makes me wonder aloud: Why aren't more Americans becoming au-pairs? Is it because the increase in the supply of foreign labor keeps the prices down? Why is it that we worry about minimum wage laws when it affects a remote niche of the economy, instead of asking about minimum wage laws everywhere, all the time? Or is that another thing we agreed to disagree on: $18 an hour minimum wage that no one told the left "no no, that's too far, don't reject the good for the perfect"... they said, "full fucking steam ahead and don't stop at $15, $15 an hour is for fags!"
Seems like an argument for indentured servitude. Decrease wages on threat of deportation.
You'd be going into direct competition with the Mexican crime lords. Could be dangerous.
Joe Biden must first approve any Au Pairs by sniffing their hair and shoving his hand up their skirts
Or, here's a thought - meet your neighbors, regularly go to church, build strong community bonds, and when they tween girl down the street wants to make some pocket change, pay her $20/evening to watch the kids. Even better if we start teaching Home Ec in the schools again, so she can do a load of towels or wash the dishes at the same time.
That model worked just fine for decades. No government necessary.
Can I hire an Au Pair to meet the neighbors?
Nope. The local teens want 15 dollars an hour to watch your kids. I was unable to afford a teenager to babysit and the expense of a date night so we just waited until the kids were old enough to stay home by themselves. I imagine the teenagers are not getting a lot of business for this reason but for the occasional job, and would probably make more money lowering the price and doing a volume business but alas the kids are entitled and their parents are not that smart either
Biden looking to pare back the au…dammit.
Alex, tell those douchebag editors here that voted for Biden (D) what you think of this, reluctantly.
I find it odd that Biden is pushing this.
He did divorce his wife so he could marry the babysitter.
Dr. Jill Biden did a fine job raising Hunter.
Could you please just call her a nanny and not be so pretentious about it?
We baked together, went to the store as a family
I thought the whole point was that you didn't have time for that kind of thing.
Rich kid from a Hollywood dad whose entire libertarian focus seems to be open borders. Basically a long march through the institutions type of person.
The march was completed years ago, now they're just trying to find a cheap Guatemalan nanny to take care of the kids.
Why so opposed to paying her a living wage? She's like part of the family, after all.
Do you pay your family to hang out with you?
Some of them seem to want that, not having accounted for their own retirements.
Our au pair was named Alice, and we had to go to the store shopping with her, to keep her from hitting on the butcher.
Did you all travel in a bunch?
Could you please just call her a nanny and not be so pretentious about it?
They mean something different. Nannies are paid professionals subject to US labor laws. Au pairs are foreign labor that's paid next to nothing.
Sounds to me like they're paid in trade. Room/board, as well as immersion in American society.
Which is far more valuable than any minimum wage could ever be.
Whatever happened to taking care of your own kids? Or, not having kids if your career is more important to you?
Or, and I'm just spit-balling here, you could hire an American nanny.
Is this supposed to be the sound of crickets? I'm cicada suspense of guessing!
🙂
😉
Wow. I was today year's old when I found out that "au pairing" was a federal program... not just a thing people hired someone to do. This is astonishing.
I find this all pretty baffling. So for some reason there is a federal au paire program that is apparently only available to foreigners. And apparently one of these individuals made a claim in federal court that she was underpaid. And apparently the case made it to the appellate court and the court decided to write a lot of rules and regulations to make this person whole. I have to assume that the defendent was a family that hired this woman. As far as I know young women have been taking care of other people's kids for like forever. Are there no native born women able to do this work and would they be subject to the same rules that are required in the federal program? I get that this guy is frustrated that the government is changing the rules here but if there is a market for au pairs the value of their labor should be determined by that market. I suspect that this guy has been getting off cheap because of all of the cultural enrichment bullshit.
Yeah, somehow we're supposed to have an issue with this cockslime being forced to pay market rate for foreign help raising his own damned kids.
For whatever reason I find myself lacking there.
If the minimum wage were the market rate there would be no need for a minimum wage.
It's not 'market rate' if you need to use the law to force people to pay it.
The government is funding her visa and the requirements around that. There is a reason they can be paid less.
Around the turn of the century, a friend of mine from grad school and his wife hired an au pair. But then they divorced and although my friend didn't get custody of the children, he replaced the au pair with another from Poland. Eventually they married, and soon divorced. So being an au pair is mainly a transaction by which an American bestows on a foreigner the privilege of residency.
This is just fucking weird. The practice lives off the value of admission to the USA, so it would be useless to hire an au pair who was already a citizen or permanent resident. It makes me wonder whether there could be other near-fungible benefits of being an American that would allow us to defray other costs we might otherwise incur. Like, could we sell our voting rights? Or something else we need to be Americans to do legally?
Or, is there something else we could do for non-foreign employees that would make up for their not earning residency because they already have that? Like the equivalent of a get-out-of-jail-free card? You know, like if you work for me you get all your traffic tickets paid?
A live in au pair gets room and board plus whatever conveniences the upper middle class and above family have at the residence. Non-au pair Balkie is likely sharing a place with other dirty foreigners, eating ramen, and riding public transportation.
Again, I think this dude should have just adopted a bum and had him look after the kids. Buy Local! Help With Homelessness!
Alex probably thinks he's the good guy too.
Biden has proposed further regulating the federal au pair program
Well, let's just abolish it altogether. Let Au Pairs go through the usual visa processes as everybody else.
which will disproportionately burden highly skilled working mothers.
And I should care about the first world problems of wealthy entitled "working mothers"... why?
Why should I care about the "problems" of borderwankers?
Because we have political power and are likely to get our way politically on borders and related issues. If you don't want that to happen, you better make some convincing arguments for your preferences.
Any other questions?
A quick internet search tells me that the difference between a nanny and an au pair (which I hadn't heard of before now) is that a nanny gets a proper salary while an au pair gets room, board, and usually a bit of pocket money. I do not think that I have a high opinion of couples claiming that they need access to cheap foreigners so that they can both work.
Also, I'm not sure if I'm surprised by this or not. On the one hand this had been subsidizing couples' decisions to both work outside the home, which I thought is something the current government wants more of. On the other hand, it was subsidizing couples' decisions to keep their children at home rather than sending them to a care center, which is something I've heard the current government wants less of.
Well, they did mention it was a COVID era choice at first. But yes, once the creches opened back up, they should have surrendered their children back to the state like good citizens.
"which will disproportionately burden highly skilled working mothers"
Alex, you lose any claim to libertarian status when you play the oppressed special race/ethnicity/gender/class group card.
The New Libertarian: "We need to open the borders because Marie Antoinette is oppressed!"
"The government started the au pair program . . . "
I think I have the root cause of the problem - - - - - - - - - -
Here's a scary thought:
Raise your own damn kids.
Just learn to live on the wages of the higher paid parent and enjoy the pleasures of parenthood.
Sure, you only have one car, with a few miles on it, and you fix meals at home, with the kids helping when old enough, and you live in a smaller home you can actually afford (or you rent), but you have each other and the kids.
It's a better way.
"as middle-class families were priced out."
Well yeah, that's the whole idea