We have the best caregiver ever. She laughs, teases and engages my husband every day M - F for 3 hours. The company that brought us together in December has not been honest or reliable. She finally gave her 2 wk notice and went with a new agency that assured us that she could keep us as a client so we terminated as well from the first company ( I had interviewed with them prior to meeting the caregiver as I was at my wits end with the company as well). I was well aware that my contract with the first compant prohibited me from hiring one of their employees privately. However, I did not realize there was a clause that said I could not employ her from another company for one year! Their lawyer has given me two choices: either terminate her from caring for my husband OR submit $15,000 to the company by Feb. 17th. This was in an e contract that I did not even have a copy of until I requested it from the lawyer. This has caused me so much added stress and grief as I think about what this means for my husband. He has flourished with her. It is not like the company invested any time or effort in training the caregiver she is a CNA. They have lost several caregivers due to the dysfunctional office.... Any suggestions???
I also don't believe you can be prohibited from using another company that "just happens" to have this woman available.
I would consult your own elder law attorney for an hour of their time if this woman is this good and you want to hire her.
If an attorney does tell you that it isn't worth your hassle and possibly ending up in court, then, to be honest, it isn't. For myself, I kind of like to scrap, so I might tell them they are going to be famous if they choose to sue me in court.
And YOU cannot terminate her from care. Your contract is with her COMPANY, not her.
Lawyer letters are a dime a dozen. They are bluffing. But having said that it isn't something I would gamble on if I wasn't willing to make them famous.
What it looks like is the aide quit and to get around the clause thought by going to another agency you could hire her through them. You could be considered involved in aides decision to go to the other agency. IMO, you will need to terminate her.
I tell you what: if it is a legally binding, enforceable contract I'd go onto forums and Nextdoor.com and warn anyone who will listen to be aware of working with that company. We're in a labor shortage -- it's ridiculous to expect potential employees to sign away their livelihoods like that for a year.
FYI this is a cautionary tale to employees to *never* sign something unless you actually read it first, question it and fully understand it's implications for you. In court, ignorance is not a defense.
That would be my stance and I wouldn't budge.
Once you’ve done the list, it might help to get a lawyer to write the snotty letter. Perhaps write it yourself first, and follow it up with a lawyer’s version if yours doesn’t do the trick.
It is ridiculous to have this clause for someone who makes not much more than $15.
Hire this wonderful caregiver and pay her with an envelope of cash every week until the one-year contract period is up. This woman takes good care of your husband and you like her as well. Offer her this and she'll take you up on it.
I can't tell you how many cash side jobs I took from clients and their families in the days when I was agency employed. Everyone was always happy with these arrangements.
Why should your wonderful caregiver or you have any loyalty whatsoever to the crappy, unprofessional agency that formerly employed her? Believe me when I say, these places have ZERO loyalty to their caregivers and they offer us nothing. No training (we come pre-trained or don't get hired), no support, and no benefits of any kind.
Before I went private cases only, I screwed the agency every chance I got. Why not? They made a fortune off of my service while I made just above minimum. When I could wet my beak a little bit extra, I always did.
Hire your good caregiver privately and pay her in cash for a year. You won't regret it.
Tell atty who sent you the letter that she is not private employee for you. You went with a more reliable agency where she happens to work now. Their employee, not yours. If he tries to bluff you, just call your own atty and ask them to write a letter on your behalf.
See how they react to negative comments on their Twitter feed. Yes, it’s trolling them, but if it’s not slander or you add a caveat “in my opinion,” they don’t have recourse (except to block you?). You might see other tweets and chime in “we had same problem.”
Hugs 🤗
Anytime you sign an employment contract, this clause is probably in it. But, we are a competitive country and as such we should be able to work anywhere we want to and hire anyone we want to.
What would be all that bad with hiring the wonderful caregiver and paying her in cash every week until the contract with the care agency she used to work for is up?
It's not dishonest or wrong. Nothing bad is going to happen to anybody. I've taken side work and some cash work for 25 years. Never had a problem.
What is really dishonest and wrong is how a care agency screws their employees over and the people who use their services.
If for some far-fetched reason the OP and the caregiver have a falling out and the caregiver wants to get her in trouble, impossible to do because there's no proof of her being employed with them because she's paid in cash. Same thing if the OP wants her gone for some reason. For all intents and purposes, in such events as these the caregiver is merely "visiting" and helps the family out (without pay) once in a while. No one gets in trouble.
He asked if my lawyer was also representing the caregiver. My lawyer directed me to get back to him. I called from the car and was told that I can get on the list to speak with him on Wed. @10:30! The extension is until Thursday. My lawyer had the above information 3 hrs after contacting the other lawyer last Thursday. My lawyer sent me the information today, Monday @9:30. It is not looking good for keeping the care giver unless I am willing to add $15,000 for original company plus the $675 to the lawyer. Ugh!!!