Comments on: Heather Mills’ former nanny sues over naked spray tans

By: Atlanta Debt Services

Atlanta Debt Services — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:39:36 +0000

my God, i thought you were going to chip in with some decisive insight about debt at the end there, not leave it floating.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Whitey Fisk

Whitey Fisk — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 17:15:23 +0000

I gotta say I see Ohforf’s point. When I first read this, I was struck by the use of the word “forced” as well. Seems like that word should be reserved for situations in which direct physical harm is threatened, or at least implied. Perhaps it was…but my guess is that her job description was more “personal assistant” than nanny. If her job description was strictly limited to childcare and she was fired after refusing to hose that psycho down with bronzer, now THAT’S a lawsuit. Obviously legal action is within this woman’s means. The timing of the suit is interesting, almost as though the nanny was waiting for the divorce to be resolved so she’d know how much Madame McCrazypants was good for. Plus she’s now suing Mills herself and Sir Paul is totally removed from it…her odds of winning are much better.

It sounds to me like the nanny is a bit of a whore herself. I’ll bet she sells her “story” next. All that aside, I hope she takes Mills for every last dime.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: dovesgate

dovesgate — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 08:53:55 +0000

voodoobetty: Nope. I thought about that as soon as I looked at the title.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: CH

CH — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 01:35:06 +0000

Ohforf; you are totally right; this “nanny” has jumped straight on the Mills/McCartney gravy train & is just hoping for a pay off & 15 minutes of fame. I’ll wait for next weeks Sunday newpapers with the “nanny/wants to be a model photos”

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: drm

drm — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:58:54 +0000

@ journey: well said I couldn’t ‘walk away’ from my current job, I have kids and mortgage and responsibilities. And in the current economic climate job replacement isn’t that easy. Ohforf needs a reality check.

In New Zealand employers have a LEGAL responsibility, upheld by legislation, to act “in good faith” with an employee. If they don’t and in this case, if true, I would argue that Mills behaviour is NOT in good faith, then the employee can take a personal grievance and seek mediation. If mediation fails it can go throught the Employment Relations Authority who make a decision and in some cases award monetary damages. NOT anything like American damages though, not even a 10th of what the nanny will be seeking.

I hope she wins…it sounds completely plausible given Mills past behaviour.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Ohforf

Ohforf — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:58:33 +0000

Journey: What makes you think this woman is so unskilled and destitute that she had to work for Mills slavishly? You don’t get a job taking care of someone like Heather Mills kid if you’re some impoverished uneducated peasant with no marketable skills. She had the ability to impress Mills enough to get the job, and I doubt she’d have many issues with finding new employment, particularly with this job on her resume. I don’t think she should cash in on leaving a bad job, just because the employer is a nutjob and happens to be rich and famous. If she left the job because unreasonable things were being asked of her, why should she feel entitled to a payday? She left the job, and that should be the end of it. People leave jobs with unreasonable expectations daily, but only rich and famous people get sued by their former pissed off employees, because everyone just wants a payday. I think it’s lame.

Baholicious: I’ve lived on my own since I was 17 and never had to go back. I’ve earned every cent I ever made by working for it. If you think being disgusted by people obviously just looking for an easy payday means I live at home then I don’t really see the connection. You might think it’s appropriate to sue people you stop working for, just because they have money, but I don’t.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Baholicious

Baholicious — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:05:18 +0000

Ohforf still lives chez parents I suspect.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: video_slacker

video_slacker — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:38:28 +0000

ohforf & Kink: you seem to have missed the portion of the article that mentions the nanny resigned because she was required to do things that weren’t a part of her job description. It would be like you being hired as an office executive and a year later being told by your employer that you were required to babysit their kids. It’s not what you signed on for & a ridiculous requirement. Finding new employment because you had to walking away from a job you love because of unreasonable requirements is harder than it sounds.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Codzilla

Codzilla — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:43:32 +0000

journey: Well said, and you’re exactly right.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: journey

journey — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:10:01 +0000

ohforf: don’t know quite how to break it to you, but there are people in this world who bust their ass working and can barely meet the essential needs for their families. They’re not out partying their money away, they’re just trying to pay their rent, groceries, utilities, childcare, transportation and other essentials. It’s especially difficult for many single mothers, i’ve had two women bosses who divorced at a young age (the ex-husbands turned out to be rotters), and they scraped and struggled and lived beyond frugally to raise their families. so please, a bit of compassion. just because you have the skills and confidence to walk away from jobs that displease you, not everyone feels they have that luxury.

Report this comment as spam or abuse