Homeowner Responsibility? Renter's Gardener/Maid Termination Pay

If the renter does not pay the gardener or maid termination pay, is the home owner responsible? I would think not, as the gardener/maid would be the renters employee - and work for the employer (the renter) at multiple rental locations.

However, they want to add to my lease, that I need to include a gardener/maid termination letter at the end of the lease - and I have never heard of such a thing.... and that the end of my lease may not mean that I want to terminate any employees - that is, I may want to take them with me to a new rental...

Has anyone had this experience?

something you should ask spencer to do for you and pay him. he wrote a termination letter to our last maid and recommended the termination pay we should give her.
sounds like the homeowner doesn't want to be stuck with your employee obligations if a problem should arise. seems reasonable.

Pedro wrote:something you should ask spencer to do for you and pay him. he wrote a termination letter to our last maid and recommended the termination pay we should give her.
sounds like the homeowner doesn't want to be stuck with your employee obligations if a problem should arise. seems reasonable.

Thanks - but the termination letter contents is not the question - but rather if the homeowner can put the requirement for one in lease termination. I say no........ as lease termination may not equal employee termination...........you can always take employees with you when you terminate a lease - which I have done. I have also given them termination pay when their services were not needed.

I can understand if the landlord wants to assure himself that his possible obligation to your employee would be terminated by you at the end of your lease with him. It would be something I would l think about doing if I were extending a lease to someone and they had already been there for a long period of time or wanted an extra long lease. I would not want to be responsible for that lengthy of an employment termination package. Its a small point and does not mean that the employee no longer works for you just explain to the employee and pay the money for that time frame.

A lease can include anything the landlord or tenant wants. It is always negotiable. And can always be walked away from if you don't agree to the terms.

solajijic wrote:I can understand if the landlord wants to assure himself that his possible obligation to your employee would be terminated by you at the end of your lease with him.  It would be something I would l think about doing if I were extending a lease to someone and they had already been there for a long period of time or wanted an extra long lease. I would not want to be responsible for that lengthy of an employment termination package.  Its a small point and does not mean that the employee no longer works for you just explain to the employee and pay the money for that time frame.

A lease can include anything the landlord or tenant wants.  It is always negotiable.  And can always be walked away from if you don't agree to the terms.

If I pay the employee termination pay, what incentive is there for the employee to keep working for me? I am not saying the employee would do this - but the employee would have the right to quit. Then I would have paid termination pay for naught.

And I fully believe in termination pay, I just think it should be paid at the end of the employment - not in the possible middle.

So the question stands - has anyone had the experience where the homeowner had to pay severance when the renter skipped out on it.

Yes I do and have. When the tenant skips out if the landlord wants to be sure of nothing coming back on them from the left behind employee the landlord pays off the employee.

On the other scenario I know many people who employ their help on a yearly basis paying them out yearly and beginning a new contract.

Mad_Max wrote:

solajijic wrote:I can understand if the landlord wants to assure himself that his possible obligation to your employee would be terminated by you at the end of your lease with him.  It would be something I would l think about doing if I were extending a lease to someone and they had already been there for a long period of time or wanted an extra long lease. I would not want to be responsible for that lengthy of an employment termination package.  Its a small point and does not mean that the employee no longer works for you just explain to the employee and pay the money for that time frame.

A lease can include anything the landlord or tenant wants.  It is always negotiable.  And can always be walked away from if you don't agree to the terms.

If I pay the employee termination pay, what incentive is there for the employee to keep working for me?  I am not saying the employee would do this - but the employee would have the right to quit.  Then I would have paid termination pay for naught.

And I fully believe in termination pay, I just think it should be paid at the end of the employment - not in the possible middle.

So the question stands - has anyone had the experience where the homeowner had to pay severance when the renter skipped out on it.

The folks who looked after our property hired a housekeeper & gardener.... employed them for 4 years...
Before they moved back NOB they paid all severance pay and advised them we would like to retain their services...
Easy Peezy

Isn't the homeowner responsible for unpaid CFE, water bills, etc which may remain when renters bail? If so, I could see that concept being extended to any leftover obligations for employees.

CheenaGringo wrote:Isn't the homeowner responsible for unpaid CFE, water bills, etc which may remain when renters bail?  If so, I could see that concept being extended to any leftover obligations for employees.

but CFE etc is usually in the homeowners name - and the employee is the employee of the renter, not the homeowner.

So here would be another example - say restaurant a wanted to close and move down the street - and would be renting from a different person/company. Would they really be expected, required to pay termination to all their employees at the old location and then rehire at the new location---

I don't see why it would be any different for a renter that was moving to a different house - and taking the employees with him/her

Why not have the contract say that if the renter will not be continuing to employ the maid, gardener at another property they are responsible for termination payout at the time they vacate the current rental property? That would satisfy the property owner´s need to protect him/herself and leave the renter free to continue accruing severance pay if they wish.

Smucking fart solution!

I think it is employer (the patrón who hired) and location that counts.
Say you moved from Chapala to Jocotepec...would you tell your employee..."now you have to come to Joco, or you can quit"
You said "moved down the street"...the Carretera, Chapala-Jocotepec, is a long steet.
Lady Otter's suggestion seems reasonable.

Lady Otter Latté wrote:Why not have the contract say that if the renter will not be continuing to employ the maid, gardener at another property they are responsible for termination payout at the time they vacate the current rental property? That would satisfy the property owner´s need to protect him/herself and leave the renter free to continue accruing severance pay if they wish.

that is a good solution if it was an option. It isn't.

Some one else mentioned that I could tell the employee to move with me a distance away or quit. There are actually laws in place about forcing an employee to quit. Doesn't work for the employer to do this.

So my original question stands:

If the renter does not pay the gardener or maid termination pay, is the home owner legally responsible?

Has anyone had the experience as a homeowner of having to pay severance for a renters employee?

Mad_Max wrote:

Lady Otter Latté wrote:Why not have the contract say that if the renter will not be continuing to employ the maid, gardener at another property they are responsible for termination payout at the time they vacate the current rental property? That would satisfy the property owner´s need to protect him/herself and leave the renter free to continue accruing severance pay if they wish.

that is a good solution if it was an option.  It isn't.

Some one else mentioned that I could tell the employee to move with me a distance away or quit.  There are actually laws in place about forcing an employee to quit.  Doesn't work for the employer to do this.

So my original question stands:

If the renter does not pay the gardener or maid termination pay, is the home owner legally responsible?  

Has anyone had the experience as a homeowner of having to pay severance for a renters employee?

are you not paying attention? solajijic who is a landlord and was a lawyer in a past life and is a very smart person,answered you a while back.

We had an employee who worked at one location for several years and whom upon termination we paid out in full.  The next winter she went to the returning winter tenants and told them that they owed her a termination pay out for several years.

We took care of it.  However the tenants admit they would have paid it if I hadn't told them the circumstances and fact there is a contract with me personally and not the property per se and that she was paid out in full. They would have thought that since her wages were built into their rent that she was their employee.


If you are a landlord and your renter leaves and does not pay out their own employees it behooves you to nip trouble in the bud and pay out the employee.  If you are a renter and the landlord skys out of town for some reason it behooves you to pay out the employee.

Why?  Because the employees have a long memory and have many family members.  

Mexico is a place where karma works overtime.

Both property owner and employer (renter) are liable. In a labor law suit they sue the place of work (property) as well as employer. This is to prevent name changes and / or erroneous names used to stiff the employees.