unsonny Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 sneaky lil **** WTF!!!!!! http://www.saveovertimepay.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Well it's not exactly coming from an impartial source, and I'll say this--lots of people shouldn't be getting overtime pay. Salaried employees, even low level ones don't get it. Why should a guy making widgets get it for working an hour over 40? Plus it hampers many people from working more hours as the store will take whatever hit in order to avoid it. If it were my proposal, I'd have this be the new rule: If your employer mandate you work over 40 hours, you'd get the overtime pay. If it were voluntary, you'd get normal rates. This way, the business could still get very good turnout for voluntary overtime and employees would get extra hours, but if you were tired and your employer demanded you keep working on a shift, you could get time and a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFanInTX Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by unsonny sneaky lil **** WTF!!!!!! http://www.saveovertimepay.org/ I saw something like this two years ago! Good scare tactic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kameuh Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Ghost, typically I agree with you on these boards, but this time I cannot in good concious agree with your proposal. Now, Im not the most intelligent person in the world, but your proposal has built in abuses. For starters the biggest problem would be structuring work to apper as voulentary, when in fact its required. Where management bonuses are tied to keeping wage expenses low, abuses are bound to occur (ala Wal-Mart) Many less skilled employees depend on the overtime pay to supplement their income. I know when I used to work in a manfacturing facility, the only way to really accumulate any savings was to bust my ass working 60 hour weeks. Despite what the freemarkerters tell you, workers do have rights, unless were talking about China or some other 3rd world nation. Personally, I'd rather not see America revert to such a lowly state all in the persuit of the bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallyG3 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I am a salaried employee who doesn't get overtime. If I didn't like it, I'd go work somewhere else. It is nice when I want to get off early, I just go. I'll take flexibility over OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo da Magnificent Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by Ghost- Daquarium Simpkins Well it's not exactly coming from an impartial source, and I'll say this--lots of people shouldn't be getting overtime pay. Salaried employees, even low level ones don't get it. Why should a guy making widgets get it for working an hour over 40? Plus it hampers many people from working more hours as the store will take whatever hit in order to avoid it. If it were my proposal, I'd have this be the new rule: If your employer mandate you work over 40 hours, you'd get the overtime pay. If it were voluntary, you'd get normal rates. This way, the business could still get very good turnout for voluntary overtime and employees would get extra hours, but if you were tired and your employer demanded you keep working on a shift, you could get time and a half. Some salaried employees do get overtime. I know this for a fact, as I and my co-workers get OT. Question: if on your job, you knew that mandatory OT was paid at one rate, and voluntary OT was paid at another rate - who would volunteer? No one will voluntarily work at straight time, when the person next to them, "forced", gets time and a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan44 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Overtime. What is overtime? As a Trucker, I work up to 70 hours a week (per my log book), and never see any overtime. I get paid a % of every load I pull, so for me to make more money, I pull more loads. Now, what would be sweet is that up to 40 hours, I get my 26%, but between 41 and 70 hours, I get like 35%. But the only way that happens, is that everyone would have to pay alot more for food, clothes, gas, cars ect ect. I know that isn't going to happen, so no overtime for me. I am not complaining, just making a point that not everyone gets overtime, not even union drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I'm a software engineer. Typically we'll estimate the number of hours a project will take and arrive at a start date and an end date for completion. Estimates are just that. Unforeseen challenges crop up that add hours to a project. Other times the customer adds requirements that will also add hours to a project. More often than not, a project's end date will get moved out to accommodate the additional hours. There are times, although rare, when the customer dictates that an end date must be met. Man hours are estimated based on a 40 hour week. Sometimes you can add people to a project to meet an end date when the current number of project employees aren't sufficient to acheive the task in the given time. Other times the work cannot be divided to accommodate additional people on the project. If in order to meet a hard deadline the engineers are forced to work more than 40 hours a week, overtime is frequently paid. I'm currently on a project where overtime is required. So, for the first time in well over six years I'm earning overtime pay. I'm not complaining. I just went out and bought a 2004 Sports Edition 4Runner. I love my job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wicked Wop Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Regardless of what laws the federal government institutes, it will ultimately be up to the employer to set their own overtime policy. I would suspect that most industries where overtime is the norm, will keep overtime rules in place, in order not to face major backlash from their employees. My own personal circumstances, I do not and not required to receive overtime pay. Getting into the profession, and industry I realized early on not to count on it. This probably has alot to do with my seeming lack regard for the subject in general, but also the fact that if I didn't like it, I should have chosen something else to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dexter's Better Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by TheKurp I'm currently on a project where overtime is required. So, for the first time in well over six years I'm earning overtime pay. I'm not complaining. I just went out and bought a 2004 Sports Edition 4Runner. I love my job. When I was consulting I would get straight hourly pay over 40 -- Do you get that? Or is it time and 1/2? I would not mind working 70-80 work weeks when I would get a months salary every two weeks.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Some of you people must live under a fricken rock. whaa whaa I'm a <insert job> and I don't get overtme pay! Do you people really not know why overtime exists? People that rely on factory and construction work or other areas that have historically been abused by business' that want to cut costs by hiring less workers and making the existing employees work double. You don't like it you get fired and for many people there is no where else to go. It was put in place to stop abuse on those that have no other options. It wasn't easy to earn these employee rights and now the GOP is trying their hardest to steal them away while scaring us with security threats. I mean where are the values the GOP pushes? Do they not care about spending time with ones family? It seems that yet again the GOP places the money of big business before what matters to the american people. And what is clear of thier supporters is that yet again if it doesn' affect them then they couldn't give two sh!ts for their fellow americans. Compassionate conservatism has yet again proven itself to be the sham every democrat knows it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butz65 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Like everything else in politics, this issue is slanted depending on the source. From what I've heard, the Bush proposal is directed towards gov't workers and deals with the rules under which certain employees receive double-pay for over-time vs. time and a half. The democrats will tell you that the proposal is aimed at undoing over-time across the world. Similar to the argument raised when the republicans tried to scale back the monolithic Dept. of Education - all we heard is that Congress was going to starve poor children in the public schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Here's my concern: You're a business owner. You pay some part of the health insurance along with various other benefits to your workers. Now you have a project where you stuck with a choice: a) hire more workers which means paying additional benefits or forcing your current workers to work overtime. TO my mind the time and a half was a protection for the workers and the employers. If the business owners NEEDED it done and determined that time and a half was cheaper than a new employee, they could do it. It was a protection for both parties. The time and a half was a disencentive to abuse the right to demand more time. Now, as they consider getting rid of overtime for many I would expect a lot more demanded overtime. I know there is a tendency to say those lazy SOBs should be thankful for any job they get so they should just shut the heck up and do their jobs. To my mind, this isn't a position without any merits. However, have you ever looked at the average hours worked by American workers versus anyone else? "Lazy" doesn't quite fit the American workforce. As a result, I'm okay with protections for the hard working american workforce to prevent exploitation. If it were me and I felt compelled to ease overtime rules, I could see relaxing the time and half rule for a certain amount of time per year. This would protect seasonal employers. I mean come on. If you're a tax preparer, and that's what you're hired to do, is it unreasonable to expect more hours out of you during Feb to April than from June to Aug? I could see saying employers don't have to pay overtime for the first X hours of overtime per year and instead insist on comp time instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman56 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 As with most Republican initiatives, this is just trying to take money out of the working man's pocket and put it in the CEO's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I worked over 80 hours last week. I didnt get any overtime. It probably would have only been 60 if I could break my Extremeskins habit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Dexter, Although some salaried exempt employees get time and a half (lower grade level employees) for overtime, I'm at a level where I get a straight calculated hourly rate for OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfanjoe Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Where I work, overtime is an incentive to work more than our 40 hours. We get time and half for working saturdays and double time on Sunday's and triple time on holidays. If they take away overtime pay we just wouldn't work it anymore. What would be the incentive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenmdixon Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 skinsfanjoe, the unethical employer would say 'the incentive is you keeping your job'. Been there, been told that Before I took the job I am in now, I was a software engineer for a startup in NoVA for 2.5 years. The company paid straight salary without overtime...and employees were expected to work at least 50 hours or more per week to get the job done (less people, more workload, etc.) - a lot of times, for our group, it was 60 plus hours a week at the very least - 10-11 hours minimum a day and part-day on Saturdays were the standard. We were not paid what the going rate was for developers in NoVA, either - it was about 5-10% less - but hey the internet bubble hadn't burst when I took the job...and I was a sucker for the pitch and thought that the product had potential ::sigh:: Anyway, when the bubble burst, there were 3 rounds of layoffs...I was in round 3. The company is still limping along, barely, from what I hear. After I was laid off, I decided to take a break from software development to try to have a 40 hour work-week with a less-stressful job and some additional personal time to reconsider my career path and educational options. :twitch: I still end up working 45 or so hours a week, and I still am underpaid (no overtime pay for those extra hours - no I'm not bitter...:mad: ). But anyway. Isn't the real issue fairness? In the past - heck even now - fairness is not always exercised on both sides. You can't always fault the company, either - have any of you ever worked with slackers at your place of business? Slackers end up costing ALL of us money. It really pisses me off to see people who are perpetually blowing off work (or who are not being assigned work) but getting paid good money for doing just that - NADA. Where are the managers - the GOOD managers? (hah an oxymoron most times...) It would be nice if compensation being paid for work is fair to both parties - keep people employed in positions that pay decently and which will not cause the company to hemorrhage money. Understanding that job positions do not last forever and employees will not stay with you forever - hey there's a concept. Expectations for the job should be set out in advance IN WRITING so there are no questions about what's coming, how much work is involved, what kind of time commitment is necessary, what education/training is necessary for the job and who is paying for it, etc. Employers should not expect workers to give their entire lives over to the company without being compensated in some meaningful way (flextime is NOT compensation if you are not allowed to take it!!!). Workers should not expect employers to fork over compensation that is completely facetious (sure, they'll pay you $100.00 per hour to sharpen pencils and surf the 'net all day long while they pay their janitor minimum wage to clean up the mess you made in the bathroom) and expect employers to pay 100% of the cost of all benefits all of the time. Employers should not be expected to allow your everlasting downtime on the job to continue indefinitely with pay (meaning, intermittent times are fine, but not all the time) - and yes, they should provide GOOD managers - if they don't have them, TRAIN SOME. Sorry all for the ranting. I'm real touchy about overtime issues - when you are told one thing (40 hour work weeks) but end up working another (45-50-60-up hour work weeks) on a regular basis without any sort of compensation except being told that 'you still have a job - that's your compensation' - well, that's just wrong. And it happens way too often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 For all of you compassionate folk that feel that since you work more then 40 without overtime everyone should. Please do us the honor of answering the following..... - Are you bottom level and thus unable to decide how and when you handle your workload? Do you get to make any of your own decisions? Because I work far more then 40 hours some weeks and sometimes I work less then 40. I know what has to get done and I do it because of this I don't get overtime. However if I had some asshat over my shoulder screwing me up and then forcing me to work late or get fired that's a whole other situation. Overtime is there to stop abuse not to cut the work week. I know some of you find it hard to care about...well anyone other then you and yours....but try not to ruin my country and the rights people worked hard to acquire. If you don't like employee rights move to central america where you can work people as hard as you like because they don't have the protection we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Before anyone freaks out look where this form is on? It is one of the biggest unions :doh: One that has already said they will back any democrat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by Ghost- Daquarium Simpkins If it were my proposal, I'd have this be the new rule: If your employer mandate you work over 40 hours, you'd get the overtime pay. If it were voluntary, you'd get normal rates. I agree with that totally. If my employer can make me work 80 hours a week, I should be compensated for it, however, employees shouldn't be milking the system. As it stands, I'm against this proposal. I make salary and I get overtime pay, but I rarely actually work overtime. However, if my employer didn't have to pay me more, I'd probably be asked to stay longer hours for BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfanjoe Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Jbooma, I belong to the UAW. And yes they are bias toward the democrats. They never come right out and say they only back democratic candidates but I've been a member for five years now and I've yet to see them endorse a republican. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rigginsbiggins44 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 That whole website sounds like anti-bush propaganda...... I noticed they never said who the bill would effect exactly, the use of the words, "possibly" and "could" make me think that this whole website is based on fiction rather than fact, it's trying to say that Bush is going to take away your overtime personally, but I hardly believe that to be the case....... Why would the goverment want to take away overtime when they get to tax it at a higher rate and thereby get more money...... "Bush administration proposal to loosen the rules that determine which employees are entitled to overtime pay could cut paychecks for 8 million workers, possibly including police officers, nurses, store supervisors and many others" I have a hard time believing anything this site says..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinamatic Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by rigginsbiggins44 That whole website sounds like anti-bush propaganda...... I noticed they never said who the bill would effect exactly, the use of the words, "possibly" and "could" make me think that this whole website is based on fiction rather than fact, it's trying to say that Bush is going to take away your overtime personally, but I hardly believe that to be the case....... Why would the goverment want to take away overtime when they get to tax it at a higher rate and thereby get more money...... "Bush administration proposal to loosen the rules that determine which employees are entitled to overtime pay could cut paychecks for 8 million workers, possibly including police officers, nurses, store supervisors and many others" I have a hard time believing anything this site says..... If you want to see who the bill effects, click on the links under the petition. It outlines the whole Bush plan. This story ran on CNN like 2 months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I work on commission...I work when I want and get paid based upon my production...I like the flexibilty and the ability to have control over what I earn. The company I work for doesn't pay overtime...if you are not on commission then you are on a salary...if you work more than 40 hours...same pay...if you don't like it....you leave! Overtime is mostly a Union thing now. Private companies are getting away from paying overtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.