Originally Posted by MarinaVanessa:
I am not the OP but I believe this is what you are referencing:
There is already a rule in place that states that the client must pay their weekly rate in full regardless of attendance or reason for absences. This si what the parents chose to sign and so they must abide by their choice to agree to the providers policies. This is in their contract already, not just something that she made up recently.
Again, I think it's an issue of ethics and common sense.
As a parent I would never assume that policy would apply to a situation like this.
Every morning I am required to make sure my house is suitable to provide care. In the case of lice, it wouldn't be suitable, and parents shouldn't be penalized for that.
Unless there was a specific lice policy in place I couldn't imagine being forced (and I'll continue to use that word as that's exactly how I see it as would parents with any sort of budgeted income) to either bring my child and risk exposure or pay someone else to watch them while also having to pay the original providers home, that I would for the time being, deem unavailable until the house and occupants have been cleared of the parasites.
No different than if the provider came down with some other sort of communicable something or other. But I also refuse to charge for time I'm not actually working, so that could be where that line of thinking comes from.