Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans

Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kalikshama -> Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 3:34:40 PM)
I'm technically, but not practically, an independent contractor, and just got a nice raise. However, I was working hourly, and a few days after I got the raise was informed that I am now salary. So, now it's only a nice raise if I limit myself to 40 hours, which I have been trying unsuccessfully to do. This won't apply to me as I am a manager, an IC, and do not anticipate the threshold would be raised high enough to include me, but I thought it was interesting: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans WASHINGTON — Millions of American workers could qualify for expanded overtime pay under a new push by President Obama to review existing Labor Department regulations, part of his election-year strategy to use executive authority to bypass Congress and focus on middle-class economic issues. Obama plans to direct the Labor Department on Thursday to begin updating regulations aimed at preventing employers from designating lower-paid salaried workers as "managers" or "professionals" in order to make them ineligible for overtime, even though their primary responsibilities are the same as hourly workers, officials said. "The president believes that if you're making $25,000 a year and you're working 60 hours a week, you should be getting paid for the extra hours you work. And that's what this is about," Betsey Stevenson, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, said at a briefing Wednesday. ...Currently, only those paid $455 a week or less — below the poverty level for a family of four — must receive overtime. Advocates are calling on the Obama administration to more than double it, noting that the threshold has not kept pace with inflation. White House officials declined to say what they believed the threshold should be. But Stevenson noted that millions of Americans could benefit from even an inflation adjustment. "There are 3.1 million people who, if the threshold had kept up just with inflation, would automatically be covered by overtime provisions," she said. ...Some states, including California, already have set a higher threshold than the federal government. In California, it is $640 a week and will be boosted to $800 a week by 2016. Illinois follows the compensation threshold set by the federal government, but holds to stricter definitions of the categories that are exempt from overtime. Pro-labor groups also want the administration to clarify the federal definitions of what kind of workers earning more than the threshold can be exempted from overtime rules. Executives, administrators and professionals are currently exempt from overtime. Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute in Washington, said the exemption is particularly "ill defined, basically as doing something important that is not production work." ...As it is now, a window washer who spends 5% of his time supervising two or more window washers and 95% of his time washing windows himself could be classified as an "administrator," thereby making the person ineligible for overtime, he said. Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-obama-overtime-20140313,0,4225344.story#ixzz2vsti5nU6

kalikshama -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 3:44:07 PM)
...YOUNG: So $455 is the current cap. What's the speculation about what the new cap might be? BERNSTEIN: Well, they haven't said. The White House has thrown out kind of a couple of parameters, or goal posts in that regard. Now, it is very important - we haven't mentioned this - this threshold is not adjusted for inflation. So every year, it loses ground, which means that every year, fewer people are protected by overtime pay, or fewer people are eligible for overtime pay, based on this threshold. So if you go back to 2004 - the last time the threshold was raised - and you simply adjusted that level for inflation - for the inflation that's taken place over the decade since then - the threshold would go from something like 455 today to about 550. So $550 a week. That's actually, in my view, an inadequate adjustment. We should do better than that. If you go back to the 1975 threshold - which was, I think, a more reasonable one - and you adjust that for inflation, you'd have something around $970, or around 50, $60,000 a year. So that would mean that people who earn 50 to $60,000 a year - which I think is basically a middle-class wage - would be automatically eligible for overtime if they work more than 40 hours a week, even if they're a salaried worker. YOUNG: Well, in fact, we should say you co-wrote a paper last year asking the administration to do just this, to raise the salary threshold from $455 a week - about $23,000 a year in salary - to raise the threshold so that those people making over $984 a week would get this time and a half. OK. You know, what the argument is, that if companies are forced to do this, they will just start cutting jobs. BERNSTEIN: In this case, that may not be actually what you ultimately hear, at least when people start learning what we're talking about, because they won't be cutting jobs. In fact, they might be adding jobs, in the following way: What this change does - I'm not going to pretend this doesn't raise labor costs, because of course it does. But it only raises labor costs for people who are working overtime. So if you currently have someone who should be getting overtime, but isn't, and that person works for you, you now have a disincentive for them to work more than 40 hours, because it will cost you more than it did before, at least once this new rule is in place. So what we think will happen is firms will decide not to work those people more than 40 hours a week to cut back on their overtime, and instead, to hire more workers at a straight-time wage, just at the base wage, not the time-and-a-half wage. So, in that sense, it could actually end up increasing employment. Economists who have looked at this from both sides of the aisle have agreed with that analysis. http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/03/13/obama-overtime-pay

PeonForHer -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 4:34:30 PM)
At last, Obama is showing his true communist stripes. Oooonly joking. But someone will be along shortly to say EXACTLY the SAME, though without ANY SENSE OF IRONY whatsoEVER. [;)]

MercTech -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 5:45:02 PM)
I'm surprised. Obama is actually trying to do something that will actually benefit people. The trend has been building for over a decade to reclassify a "foreman" as part of management. This has been done for many other job classifications too. An hourly worker can expect time and a half after working forty hours. If reclassified as "management" you get a set salary and many companies require you to put in over 65 hours a week before compensation is increased. How many hours a week do you think you should give your employer for your paycheck guys?

PeonForHer -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 5:52:06 PM)
65 hours a week? Jesus. What is the point of an advanced industrialised society if you have to work 65 hours a week? I read, some while ago, that the average Amazon rainforest dweller works about sixteen hours per week. That's all he needs to do to keep him fed, sheltered, safe and as happy as he needs to be. All I can say is: wow. Makes you think.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 6:50:52 PM)
In NJ, overtime is not affected by salary, only by position. You can't be called "managment" unless you have people who report to you. Of course that doesn't keep many emploers from trying to screw people out of overtime. "Professional" applies only to people such as lawyers, doctors. A nurse, while certainly a professional, is entitled to overtime unless a supervisor. Same withe teachers, electricians, plumbers, and yes the latter two are "professionals," as they are required to be licensed to do their job. Technically, according to the DOL of Nj, full time employees are not entitled to lunch breaks or coffe breaks, only minors get that right. Thankfully, most employers haven't aatempted to deny people that, in fact I would guess most aren't even aware of the details of that law. People need to be able to make a living wage without a college education, because many cannot afford college or it is simply not the right path for them Medicaid provides medical transport for its clients. There are various companies that provide this. The drivers need to have various certifications, such as CPR and basic first aid. They also need to be finger printed and bonded. Lots of hoops for a job that usually pays less than ten bucks an hour, and many are not paid overtime although they work more than 40 hours a week, often much more. Its appalling that there are still those that want to make it more difficult to get paid overtime and refuse to raise the minimum wage.

Lucylastic -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 6:56:19 PM)
The only person who will get me to work 65 hours a week without extra wages is myself Been there, done that, was used abused, fucked around, and taken advantage of. No more

LafayetteLady -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 9:28:30 PM)
I hear that Lucy. I've worked plenty of overtime. In offices, never would even hit 50. Didn't have to thankfully, since I could complete my work in a timely manner. When waiting tables, I probably hit that many with no overtime. Had to to pay the bills.

Lucylastic -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/13/2014 10:14:59 PM)
Ive done lots of "over" time in volunteer places, but I havent worked for anyone else since 2001. But yes, my need was for the bills when I did do it, it certainly wasnt because they deserved my time, my effort or my loyalty

DesideriScuri -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 7:22:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer 65 hours a week? Jesus. What is the point of an advanced industrialised society if you have to work 65 hours a week? Gotta have some reason to increase our health care spend and lower our outcomes. [8D]

kalikshama -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 7:30:41 AM)
quote: Technically, according to the DOL of Nj, full time employees are not entitled to lunch breaks or coffe breaks, only minors get that right. Thankfully, most employers haven't aatempted to deny people that, in fact I would guess most aren't even aware of the details of that law. I always thought there was a federal law requiring lunch breaks when one works over a certain amount of hours in a day, but I guess I was thinking of MA state law. http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/breaks.htm Federal law does not require lunch or coffee breaks. However, when employers do offer short breaks (usually lasting about 5 to 20 minutes), federal law considers the breaks as compensable work hours that would be included in the sum of hours worked during the work week and considered in determining if overtime was worked. Unauthorized extensions of authorized work breaks need not be counted as hours worked when the employer has expressly and unambiguously communicated to the employee that the authorized break may only last for a specific length of time, that any extension of the break is contrary to the employer's rules, and any extension of the break will be punished. Bona fide meal periods (typically lasting at least 30 minutes), serve a different purpose than coffee or snack breaks and, thus, are not work time and are not compensable. http://www.mass.gov/ago/doing-business-in-massachusetts/labor-laws-and-public-construction/wage-and-hour/meal-breaks.html Meal Breaks Massachusetts law states that employees must receive a 30-minute break after six hours of working. An employee must be free to leave the workplace during the break. An employee can voluntarily give up the meal break, but must be paid for all hours worked. Compensation for the 30-minute meal break must be paid if the employee has voluntarily agreed to waive his or her meal break by (1) working through his or her meal break, or (2) remaining on the premises at the request of the employer during the meal break. The break period may be unpaid. Certain exemptions from this requirement can be found in M.G.L. c. 149, s. 101. Praying During Meal Breaks Employees are allowed to pray during their meal break. The meal break is considered the employee's free time.

MercTech -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 8:40:39 AM)
From: http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/breaks.htm quote: Breaks & Meal Periods Federal law does not require lunch or coffee breaks. However, when employers do offer short breaks (usually lasting about 5 to 20 minutes), federal law considers the breaks as compensable work hours that would be included in the sum of hours worked during the work week and considered in determining if overtime was worked. Unauthorized extensions of authorized work breaks need not be counted as hours worked when the employer has expressly and unambiguously communicated to the employee that the authorized break may only last for a specific length of time, that any extension of the break is contrary to the employer's rules, and any extension of the break will be punished. Bona fide meal periods (typically lasting at least 30 minutes), serve a different purpose than coffee or snack breaks and, thus, are not work time and are not compensable.

MercTech -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 3:29:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer 65 hours a week? Jesus. What is the point of an advanced industrialised society if you have to work 65 hours a week? I read, some while ago, that the average Amazon rainforest dweller works about sixteen hours per week. That's all he needs to do to keep him fed, sheltered, safe and as happy as he needs to be. All I can say is: wow. Makes you think. Trust me, most middle managers do not work 65 hours a week. It is just the average contract that a manager does not get extra compensation until he works over 65 hours a week. When I do a contract job I typically work 72 hours a week for 4-6 weeks. That refills the bank account and I have a bit of time to recuperate before doing it again.

KYsissy -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 3:39:54 PM)
A foreman as salary? I call BS. Because a foreman needs to be there when the assembly line starts. Same as the hourly workers. They will get dinged if they are late. I am salaried, i dont't get dinged for being 5 minutes late. On the flip side, i do not get overtime for 16 hour days, or weekends. They are not common but they do happen. For me it all comes out in the wash. But i must say i work for a pretty decent company.

MercTech -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 4:52:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KYsissy A foreman as salary? I call BS. Because a foreman needs to be there when the assembly line starts. Same as the hourly workers. They will get dinged if they are late. I am salaried, i dont't get dinged for being 5 minutes late. On the flip side, i do not get overtime for 16 hour days, or weekends. They are not common but they do happen. For me it all comes out in the wash. But i must say i work for a pretty decent company. Bingo, it is a BS chickenshit tactic but here is the HR nazi rationale: A foreman has people reporting to him so he can be classed as "management" and "not bargaining unit" to take them out of union categories and put them on salary with no overtime pay. Not every industry or company, but I've been seeing this done more and more since the mid 1990s.

Arturas -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 8:26:56 PM)
fr MSNBC's take on this is "Obama is looking out for the Middle Class". Fox's is he is buying votes with something that sounds good but will hurt the economy by losing jobs since companies, in their view, will have to cut heads rather than pay overtime. Here's the real deal. Salaried are well paid or start out taking a pay cut when they move from hourly to salary but will end up being well paid after they prove themselves. They also don't work hours but do tasks, they are task oriented and usually work 40 hours and sometimes work more than forty hours during crunch times. They also receive bonuses if things go well for the business and Obama's impact on my bonus has been negative btw (health care) so he's not making me any money. We (they) also take lunch generally when they want to and even leave early if they are on top of things. It's part of being salaried. Salaried are expected to be professional, educated and there to get a job done rather than clock hours and so salaried are white collar and Foremen never were and are not now salaried. I've not seen any company purposely make an hourly into a salaried employee just to screw them into working more for less, it is not happening because they quit and good employees are hard to find. This is reality and not theory. I'm sure there are exceptions. So to summarize, salaried are rarely worked habitually over 40-45 hours. It happens during crunch time but then drops off and they might work less than 40 hours to "compensate" for a week or so. They get bonuses and time off more flexibly. I'm sure their are exceptions but in middle to large companies this is the way it really is. So, guess the reality blows any theory Obama is going to cost all businesses a lot of money since big businesses tend not to work salaried over 45 hours a week anyway and also he is not going to make anyone a lot of more money in overtime they don't get now as salaried. Unless the exception occurs and it occurs in our bread and butter income producers and employment generators, not Government but small business. Many of these depend on fixed cost employees as lower paid managers and other professionals like the book keeper or Accountant and their margins are slim and their salaries are smaller than big companies but people choose to work there for those salaries in hope of getting in on the grown floor of something that can be bigger for them and they work hard and long for that opportunity OR they like the lower pressure and less political environment of a smaller company and are happy so don't screw with them and their employer, thank you very much I think they will say, I am certain of it. If Obama makes small companies start paying their lower paid salary workers overtime then the obvious happens, they don't hire more people since they cannot afford more people any more than paying overtime and they simply close their doors and many jobs are lost and the owner retires to the Keys or goes back to being a salaried employee in a large corporation and he or she no longer provides jobs. So, given this is true and the timing happens to be right after the ACA fiasco and right before mid-terms, I suspect this is political and I am saddened by that thought and cannot do anything but hope I am wrong about the motives and Obama will be Presidential and I have nothing to worry about. Actually I have nothing to worry about since I do work for a big Corporation and it should not hurt or help me. Least I leave you with the impression all is roses without thorns with my employment, I already have lost my annual bonus several years ago and oh by the way my annual raises also now that I think of it and my big health care organization is dying on the vine and laid off folks and is getting desperate.

RottenJohnny -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/14/2014 9:16:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans ...because he's finally accepted that people really can't afford his health insurance plan??

DesideriScuri -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/15/2014 8:38:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: KYsissy A foreman as salary? I call BS. Because a foreman needs to be there when the assembly line starts. Same as the hourly workers. They will get dinged if they are late. I am salaried, i dont't get dinged for being 5 minutes late. On the flip side, i do not get overtime for 16 hour days, or weekends. They are not common but they do happen. For me it all comes out in the wash. But i must say i work for a pretty decent company. Bingo, it is a BS chickenshit tactic but here is the HR nazi rationale: A foreman has people reporting to him so he can be classed as "management" and "not bargaining unit" to take them out of union categories and put them on salary with no overtime pay. Not every industry or company, but I've been seeing this done more and more since the mid 1990s. Because it's not easy finding good people in the field I'm working in, it was decided that to lure those candidates, my position would get salary + OT. Now, I sure do wish I could get a bit more OT (the starting pay rate was very generous to start with), but I am happy with my position, hours, etc. Fucking crazy how that "free market capitalism" stuff works, innit?

kalikshama -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/15/2014 8:59:33 AM)
I have received lots of raises in the 6 years I've been with my company, but I am just now making the same amount on salary that I earned in 2008 when I was hourly and was paid 40 hours of straight time plus 10 hours a week at time and a half. Unlike hourly workers, salaried workers do get year end bonuses, but those are tied to profit, and didn't always come at year end, or at all.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Obama seeks to expand overtime pay to millions of Americans (3/15/2014 9:17:43 AM)
I have worked both hourly and salaried and there are some glaring "money pits". When I was salaried (three different companies), I was *expected* to be at work 50 hours per week, minimum. I say "be at work" because I was paid for my 30 minute lunch break. Of course, I can count the amount of un-interrupted lunch breaks on both hands (and I'm missing two fingertips). During "crunch times", I was expected to be there for as long as necessary. I remember one snow storm when I was there for 80 hours, straight. After 16 hours, we did a two on/two off type "rotation" with cots set up in the locker room. I left one salaried job (back in the 80s, when new jobs were low-hanging fruit) because when I worked out the numbers, I was making a significant amount less than hourly employees. As a salaried employee (and a driver), I once had a boss tell me that I was required to work over 60 hours a week (which was not what the law said, at the time). This was before the major shake-up in the trucking industry and right before log books became legal requirements, etc. I think one of the problems is that the amount of work Americans have been forced to do just to support themselves has been detrimental to a lot of things. By "amount of work", I am referencing how much of our day is spent at or going to work. I think 1/3 of my day is plenty and any time I work more than that, I deserve to be compensated as "premium time". I believe that working an afternoon to midnight shift is time not spent with my children and is also "Premium" time. Companies don't do this, anymore because they don't have to and it is an abuse (in my view) of their power. Of course, as workers, we don't have much choice because we have to take whatever slim pickin's are available. WallyWorld wins/we lose.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125