(June 27, 2020 at 2:38 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: So much for the lie that you live in "Family Love".
The contract amendment that Johan provided says (my commentary in parentheses)...
Quote:It is an operational requirement that the partner of the Childcare Provider (that would be Johan) supports the norms and rules as expressed in the orderly co-operation agreement between Management and Staff and the Rules and Regulations of the Children's Home (seems a reasonable requirement to me) and in no way creates a barrier to the fulfillment of the Childcare Provider as job requirements and not in the Child Care Worker's post requirement.(basically, rein in your husband) Compliance with these procedures and regulations is an operational requirement.(Fair enough, every place of work has rules and regs)
The Childcare Provider's partner does not support it, and it can lead to the operational grounds. (for dismissal or disciplinary action of some sort. An employment contract is supposed to state exactly what is grounds for that)
I don't know if you have any experience drawing up employee contracts, but I do. We started off with a boilerplate we wrote, which we then amended as necessary for a given role. Different roles have different requirements. E.g. If one had to operate a forklift, one had to have the requisite licences to do so. And attend the refresher courses (we provided those gratis).
In all of those hundreds of contracts, never once was a clause needed that single out some external individual for anything, let alone the employees spouse.
You might be moved to wonder why that might happen.