New Overtime Law

[P. B. Walker]

Work Longer, Get More Vacation.

This new law sounds pretty damn cool to me, but it's meeting some resistance from Democrats and labor unions. Personally I'd much rather get more vacation. Course, I'm salaried so I'm screwed either way. I get the same if I work 40 hours or 60 hours per week. Anyhoo... here's a bit on how it would work:

The bill would let workers choose paid time off or overtime pay — both at a rate of time-and-a-half. For example, if an employee worked 48 hours in a week, he could choose 8 hours of overtime pay or 12 hours of time off at straight pay.


Employees could accrue up to 160 hours of comp time annually, and companies would have to pay cash for unused time at the end of the year.



What would ya'll rather get? More pay or more vacation?

 

[CatEyes]

Would that apply to salaried employees though?

 

[MissTaken]

Show me the green!

 

[SuprSalor]

For me, Mo' money! I've worked that comp time deal and wound up losing it at the end of the job. Plus, I only work about 6-7 months a year so I work as much overtime as possible (usually around 6 hours per day) so's I get that check up there so I can do more when I'm off. 'Course my job is pretty unusual so its really not relevant for most people.
Take the money and run!

 

[P. B. Walker]

Would that apply to salaried employees though?

Doesn't sound like it. But I may be wrong. I didn't see anything in the article that says if this will affect salaried employees.

 

[CatEyes]

Doesn't sound like it. But I may be wrong. I didn't see anything in the article that says if this will affect salaried employees.

Sounded real good for a second there.

Edited to add:

If it did apply to salaried employees I would definitely take the time over the pay.

 

[Master Control]

Mo money

 

[princess4u]

Doesn't sound like it. But I may be wrong. I didn't see anything in the article that says if this will affect salaried employees.

i believe it applies only to "non-exempt" employees

of which i am one -

and i'll take cash please

i already get more vacation than they want me to use

 

[freakygirl]

More money = more taxes

Trust me.. Mr Freakys employer does this. Overtime is either comp time or overtime pay. It's better to take the time off.

Before Xmas.. Mr Freaky comped over 40 hours of time... his check was only $400 more because of being bumped up into a higher tax bracket. It sucked..

 

[markb325]

*mutters about total illogic*

Ok which ever you do you would get the same pay for the extra 8 hours, whether you to the time off, or you took the time and a half for the 8 hours. Unless you are in a situation like supersalor it comes out the same.

Now if they want to revamp labor laws they need to look into salaried employees I know most of the time the salary takes up for the extra time worked with no problems, but there are some on salary that once they hit overtime, their pay actually drops near or below min. wage.

 

[crappie master]

Ok this isn't an unbiased source, It's from an AFL-CIO e-mail I got the other day.

Subject: Don't Let Them Take Away Overtime Pay





March 27, 2003

The Bush Administration today proposed changing federal
overtime rules and eroding the 40-hour workweek--reducing
overtime protections and cutting the pay of hundreds
of thousands of America's workers.

Overtime pay is important to many working people in
America who rely on it to support their families. Please
take one minute right now to register your opposition
to harmful changes in the federal overtime rules by
clicking on the link below to send a fax to President
Bush and a copy to your senators and representative.



With a failing economy, millions out of work and staggering
health care and prescription drug costs, this is a
burden America's workers should NOT have to bear. The
overtime rules protect workers from bosses who would
impose unbearably long hours if they didn't have to
pay extra for overtime work. Many workers would have
less predictable work schedules because of the increased
demand for overtime work.

Working families struggled for years to win the 40-hour
workweek, the weekend and other job protections like
this. Please register your opposition to this step
backward by clicking on the link below.



The Bush overtime reform proposal,

+ Excludes previously protected workers by reclassifying
them as managers, administrative or professional employees
who are not eligible for overtime pay;

+ Fails to automatically include large numbers of
low-income workers;

+ For the first time, excludes certain middle-income
workers from overtime protections by adding an income
test;

+ Removes from overtime protection large numbers
of workers in the aerospace, defense, health care,
high tech and various other industries;

+ Makes schedules less predictable for some working
moms and dads;

+ Proposes confusing standards for low-income supervisors;

America's workers who are overseas at war deserve a
strong, vibrant economy when they return home.

 

[markb325]

Ok this isn't an unbiased source, It's from an AFL-CIO e-mail I got the other day.

Subject: Don't Let Them Take Away Overtime Pay





March 27, 2003

The Bush Administration today proposed changing federal
overtime rules and eroding the 40-hour workweek--reducing
overtime protections and cutting the pay of hundreds
of thousands of America's workers.

Overtime pay is important to many working people in
America who rely on it to support their families. Please
take one minute right now to register your opposition
to harmful changes in the federal overtime rules by
clicking on the link below to send a fax to President
Bush and a copy to your senators and representative.



With a failing economy, millions out of work and staggering
health care and prescription drug costs, this is a
burden America's workers should NOT have to bear. The
overtime rules protect workers from bosses who would
impose unbearably long hours if they didn't have to
pay extra for overtime work. Many workers would have
less predictable work schedules because of the increased
demand for overtime work.

Working families struggled for years to win the 40-hour
workweek, the weekend and other job protections like
this. Please register your opposition to this step
backward by clicking on the link below.



The Bush overtime reform proposal,

+ Excludes previously protected workers by reclassifying
them as managers, administrative or professional employees
who are not eligible for overtime pay;

+ Fails to automatically include large numbers of
low-income workers;

+ For the first time, excludes certain middle-income
workers from overtime protections by adding an income
test;

+ Removes from overtime protection large numbers
of workers in the aerospace, defense, health care,
high tech and various other industries;

+ Makes schedules less predictable for some working
moms and dads;

+ Proposes confusing standards for low-income supervisors;

America's workers who are overseas at war deserve a
strong, vibrant economy when they return home.

Like you sayed it isn't an unbias report, and over the years I have learned to ignore the AFL-CIO and what ever illogical opinions they form.

 

[CatEyes]

Ok this isn't an unbiased source, It's from an AFL-CIO e-mail I got the other day.

Subject: Don't Let Them Take Away Overtime Pay





March 27, 2003

The Bush Administration today proposed changing federal
overtime rules and eroding the 40-hour workweek--reducing
overtime protections and cutting the pay of hundreds
of thousands of America's workers.

Overtime pay is important to many working people in
America who rely on it to support their families. Please
take one minute right now to register your opposition
to harmful changes in the federal overtime rules by
clicking on the link below to send a fax to President
Bush and a copy to your senators and representative.



With a failing economy, millions out of work and staggering
health care and prescription drug costs, this is a
burden America's workers should NOT have to bear. The
overtime rules protect workers from bosses who would
impose unbearably long hours if they didn't have to
pay extra for overtime work. Many workers would have
less predictable work schedules because of the increased
demand for overtime work.

Working families struggled for years to win the 40-hour
workweek, the weekend and other job protections like
this. Please register your opposition to this step
backward by clicking on the link below.



The Bush overtime reform proposal,

+ Excludes previously protected workers by reclassifying
them as managers, administrative or professional employees
who are not eligible for overtime pay;

+ Fails to automatically include large numbers of
low-income workers;

+ For the first time, excludes certain middle-income
workers from overtime protections by adding an income
test;

+ Removes from overtime protection large numbers
of workers in the aerospace, defense, health care,
high tech and various other industries;

+ Makes schedules less predictable for some working
moms and dads;

+ Proposes confusing standards for low-income supervisors;

America's workers who are overseas at war deserve a
strong, vibrant economy when they return home.

Even if the federal government changed the overtime laws the states laws still rule.

 

[Cheyenne]

The key phrase is the "employees get to choose." I had such an option at the first company I worked at out of college. I banked overtime during the busy months and took extra weeks of vacation during the slow time. One year I had 8 weeks of vacation time off to travel! It was great. I'd love to be able to do that again some day, but it won't be until I retire.

 

[*Eve*]

being salaried sucks

 

[Thrillhouse]

"The bill would allow employers to decide when the time off could be taken.

Opponents say the current overtime law acts as a protection to the 40-hour work week because companies wanting more work from their employees now have to pay premium pay — and often think twice about it."

If I understand it correctly, employers can force more hours of work out of their employees who choose comp time, and then can tell the employee when they can take the time off?

 

[sigh]

Work Longer, Get More Vacation.

This new law sounds pretty damn cool to me, but it's meeting some resistance from Democrats and labor unions. Personally I'd much rather get more vacation. Course, I'm salaried so I'm screwed either way. I get the same if I work 40 hours or 60 hours per week. Anyhoo... here's a bit on how it would work:

The bill would let workers choose paid time off or overtime pay — both at a rate of time-and-a-half. For example, if an employee worked 48 hours in a week, he could choose 8 hours of overtime pay or 12 hours of time off at straight pay.


Employees could accrue up to 160 hours of comp time annually, and companies would have to pay cash for unused time at the end of the year.



What would ya'll rather get? More pay or more vacation?

I'd choose more vacation every time, and since I already accrue more than 160 hours a year, this would be a swift kick in the ass to me. Or am I missing something here?

My company offers to let me buy back my vacation hours every year. I never have any to sell.

 

[crappie master]

"The bill would allow employers to decide when the time off could be taken.



If I understand it correctly, employers can force more hours of work out of their employees who choose comp time, and then can tell the employee when they can take the time off?

That 's how I understand it too.

 

[sigh]

"The bill would allow employers to decide when the time off could be taken.

Opponents say the current overtime law acts as a protection to the 40-hour work week because companies wanting more work from their employees now have to pay premium pay — and often think twice about it."

If I understand it correctly, employers can force more hours of work out of their employees who choose comp time, and then can tell the employee when they can take the time off?

Is this true? I see I need to read up on this. If so, the "employee choice" thing is a bit exagerrated. Somehow I can't see myself getting those eight weeks off you were talking about Chey.

But I'm holding judgement until I study it a bit.

 

[CatEyes]

"The bill would allow employers to decide when the time off could be taken.

Opponents say the current overtime law acts as a protection to the 40-hour work week because companies wanting more work from their employees now have to pay premium pay — and often think twice about it."

If I understand it correctly, employers can force more hours of work out of their employees who choose comp time, and then can tell the employee when they can take the time off?

Of course the employer would have to say when you could take the time off. You couldn't just call up and say, "I'm not coming in for the next 4 weeks". That's how it works with vacation too, it has to be approved. I would think though, that if they knew that at the end of the year they'd have to pay that time out if it wasn't taken they'd try to make sure you took as much of that time as possible.

 

[SuprSalor]

Aye, Having time off is great but ya gotta have the bucks to enjoy that time. What the hell would be the fun in having 2-3 weeks off if you aint got the money to do something fun? 'Course if you only work a few OT hours a week, the taxes will eat that up so the time off is a better way to go in that case. Guess it all depends on an individuals situation.

 

[Thrillhouse]

Of course the employer would have to say when you could take the time off. You couldn't just call up and say, "I'm not coming in for the next 4 weeks". That's how it works with vacation too, it has to be approved. I would think though, that if they knew that at the end of the year they'd have to pay that time out if it wasn't taken they'd try to make sure you took as much of that time as possible.

True. But, going by the way it was worded (Yeah, I know...), it sounds like the employer would say, "Okay, you can have this day off, and this week off, etc." Like it's their choice right off the bat.

 

[crappie master]

Of course the employer would have to say when you could take the time off. You couldn't just call up and say, "I'm not coming in for the next 4 weeks". That's how it works with vacation too, it has to be approved. I would think though, that if they knew that at the end of the year they'd have to pay that time out if it wasn't taken they'd try to make sure you took as much of that time as possible.

I can imagine some employers not allowing more than one comp-time day off at a time (probably have to take it on a Tuesday or Wednesday).

 

[teddybear4play]

When I first read this, I thought the NFL had pulled their heads out of their asses and changed their minds.

But no.

TB4p

 

[crappie master]

True. But, going by the way it was worded (Yeah, I know...), it sounds like the employer would say, "Okay, you can have this day off, and this week off, etc." Like it's their choice right off the bat.

Exactly