DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am 15 years old and I babysit for a family. I like babysitting for them, and love the little girl, but lately they have started paying me much below minimum wage, like $4 a hour! Until I am 16, I want to babysit for extra money.

I would love to stay babysitting for them, but I don't feel it is worth my time if I don't get paid very well. How can I tell them to pay me more? This is my only job until I can get a real one, so I'm not making as much money as I would like to.

GENTLE READER: Who is?

More to the point, you are not making what you reasonably expect to make. But evidently your employers do not realize that.

Miss Manners understands that you feel funny about mentioning what you charge because it seems rude. But the ban on discussing money matters does not apply to business. If you want to buy something, you want to be told what it costs. The next time these people call, you need only say politely, "I'd love to, but you should know that my rate is..." and give the amount.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I fear this sounds silly, and indeed I consider it so myself, but is there actually any rudeness in not holding a big wedding when one can afford it?

As soon as our engagement was announced, my fiance and I started fielding questions from friends about when and where the wedding will take place, always with the assumption that they would be invited.

The truth is, we will probably go to city hall with our parents and a handful of very close friends as witnesses, then go get celebratory ice cream sundaes. When we try to explain we won't be having a big ceremony and reception, many seem to take offense and consider us cheapskates.

That's the thing, you see -- theoretically, we could afford a giant wedding, but neither of us would enjoy such an event, nor would we consider that good use of our savings. I know it's possible to hold a reasonable, tasteful reception on a budget, but it requires enormous amounts of time and planning, and I must admit that organizing social events makes me terribly anxious and I dread the very thought.

The way I see it, we can either hire someone to plan everything, and spend more than we'd like, or organize it ourselves and thus make ourselves miserable, or have our tiny dream wedding and send our friends a postcard from the honeymoon.

Is it actually rude not to hold a reception? You'd think friends would be grateful to be spared another night of bad catering, not to mention the cost of travel, attire, and gifts!

GENTLE READER-- Perhaps your friends are so overcome with love for you and pleasure in your marriage that they long to witness it. In that case, you might consider a wedding that is big in the guest list but otherwise simple- an afternoon ceremony followed by ice cream sundaes and wedding cake, for example.

Miss Manners does not believe that is the reason you are being importuned any more than you do. Now that weddings so often comprise multiple extravagant events, people have come to regard them as festivals put on for their entertainment. You do not owe them that. Her only addition to your plan is to suggest that you refrain from announcing it beforehand and describe it in your postal cards as an elopement.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: While attending a formal dinner hosted by my boss at his home, I may have committed a faux pas while attempting to avoid one. My sainted mother taught me that manners are to make other people comfortable and to take my cue from the host or hostess when attending events, as well as not pointing out the failings of others.

At the table, the place settings were set with three forks for three courses. When the second course was served, my boss began using the "wrong" fork. Recalling mother's teachings, I followed suit so as not to cause any embarrassment or unease for the host, especially as he was seated immediately to my left. The gentlewoman seated to the right of me gently kicked my leg and whispered that I was using the wrong fork.

It was a difficult moment being caught between using the correct fork to ease her concerns and using the fork as dictated by the host so as to avoid any embarrassment to him. Because it appeared the guest was more concerned about it than the host appeared to be, I chose to use the correct fork and thanked her.

Should I have ignored the host's use of silverware from the beginning to avoid the subsequent problems of kicking and whispering? Or should I have persevered in my use of the fork as dictated by the host?

Alas, there was no hostess who might have broken the deadlock. What does the well-meaning person do when caught in a situation where proper manners may also cause discomfort?

GENTLE READER: What a ghastly dinner party this must have been, with all of you monitoring one another's eating habits. Didn't anyone at the table know how to make conversation?

Miss Manners realizes that people think she lives for opportunities to humiliate someone for the crime that so rattled you and the other guest. It must therefore come as a shock to hear that at dinner parties, she looks into the faces of other guests, not into their plates.

Your well-meant gesture was silly because it assumes that your boss does not know enough about flatware to set his own table correctly, and yet was watching what you did and would have been mortified if your choice of forks was different from his. That would have been a strange combination of ignorance and vigilance.

Of course, you had an example of that in the guest who was checking up on you. As your sainted mother would have understood, that was the greatest rudeness committed at that meal.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: A co-worker has confided in me (and many others) that she is having an affair with a man "who has not yet left his wife." Most people are disgusted, but she seems blissfully unaware. I wish to be nonjudgmental, but I can't tell her this is a good thing. I want to scream that she is a fool and he is scum, but I realize Miss Manners would probably disapprove. I'm tempted to say nothing and just do the eye roll.

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners even disapproves of the eye roll. She doesn't mind your being judgmental, which that most certainly is, but she minds its being expressed rudely. The polite way to show disapproval is to say gently, "I really would rather not hear about it."

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Retaining a father's (ex-husband's) last name for the sake of convenience where the children are concerned seems to be a reasonable/rational enough action. But my experience with this is somewhat different.

My husband's ex-wife resumed her maiden name at the time of her divorce. I am not aware of any difficulties or confusions with the situation of she and her son having different last names. She appeared comfortable, even proud of her decision, even announcing her identify change with vanity plates spelling out her maiden name.

She then remarried and then assumed her new husband's last name. When this second marriage ended in divorce, she decided to revert back and reassume my husband's (and consequently my) last name. He believes that this is a natural course of action, but I disagree. What are your thoughts on this?

GENTLE READER: That what your husband means by "natural" is that this is not worth starting a battle with the mother of his child. Miss Manners' guess is that this still has to do with using the child's surname, even belatedly, rather than with resuming the connection with a gentleman who is now married to someone else.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Two friends plan on meeting for dinner. Which of the following two people is ill-mannered?

One friend arrives at the scheduled time, relaxing at the restaurant as she awaits the other.

She realizes that she has forgotten to bring her cell phone, much less turn it on, in case her friend is trying to reach her. She tends only to use her cell phones in emergencies and so doesn't think about it often. She figures that it's no big deal -- her friend must be running late.

The other friend, a regular cell phone user, is running 10 to 15 minutes late and is very anxious about letting her friend know this. She leaves a message to that effect: "It's five minutes to, and I'm running a bit late, will be there soon" and is very frustrated at not being able to get through on her friend's cell phone. She arrives, apologizes for being late, and then chides her friend soundly for not having the courtesy to turn her cell phone on (or have it with her). Both friends start the evening feeling irritated by the exchange.

In a cell phone world, who should take responsibility for this situation? Is it the first friend's responsibility to be available by cell phone (in case her friend is running late) and is it appropriate that she be shamed for not doing so? Is it the second friend's responsibility to try to be on time and then apologize if not able, taking all the responsibility for the situation?

GENTLE READER: Just a guess, but you got to the restaurant first, didn't you? Then you will be pleased to hear that Miss Manners not only sides with you but can bolster your argument.

Cellular telephones may often be convenient, but they are not compulsory. Keeping it off in a restaurant, so as not to disturb the other diners, is.

: