Add Reply
Add Comment As A Guest
Close Topic OptionsNew Overtime Laws
New Overtime Laws - Politics, Business, Civil, History - Posted: 23rd Nov, 2016 - 1:25am
Posts: 5 - Views: 1462
New Overtime Laws
QUOTE From the AP:
Aug 20, 8:53 AM (ET)
By LEIGH STROPE
WASHINGTON (AP) - In an unprecedented overhaul of the nation's overtime pay rules, the Bush administration is delivering to its business allies an election-year plum they've sought for decades.
The new rules take effect Monday after surviving many efforts by Democrats, labor unions and worker advocates to block them in Congress and kill them through public and political pressure.
The Labor Department says as many as 107,000 workers could lose overtime eligibility under its new rules, but about 1.3 million will gain it. The Economic Policy Institute, a liberal Washington think tank, says 6 million will lose, and only a few will get new rights to premium pay for working more than 40 hours a week.
Aug 20, 8:53 AM (ET)
By LEIGH STROPE
WASHINGTON (AP) - In an unprecedented overhaul of the nation's overtime pay rules, the Bush administration is delivering to its business allies an election-year plum they've sought for decades.
The new rules take effect Monday after surviving many efforts by Democrats, labor unions and worker advocates to block them in Congress and kill them through public and political pressure.
The Labor Department says as many as 107,000 workers could lose overtime eligibility under its new rules, but about 1.3 million will gain it. The Economic Policy Institute, a liberal Washington think tank, says 6 million will lose, and only a few will get new rights to premium pay for working more than 40 hours a week.
But no one really knows. That makes the issue harder to demonize politically, a benefit - or a problem - depending on the side you take.
QUOTE "I do not see any kind of rush by employers to take away overtime rights," said Bill Schurgin, a labor attorney for the Seyfarth Shaw law firm in Chicago, who represents employers preparing for Monday's change. Critics claim that 6 million workers will lose eligibility is "A red herring."
Regardless, "Nobody should get their overtime pay taken away," said Karen Nussbaum, executive director of Working America, an AFL-CIO organization created for workers unable to join unions.
About 115 million workers are covered by the overtime rules in the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act.
Monday's change is the culmination of decades of lobbying by business groups representing retailers, restaurants, insurance companies, banks and others that have been hammered by workers' overtime lawsuits, many of them successful.
Regardless, "Nobody should get their overtime pay taken away," said Karen Nussbaum, executive director of Working America, an AFL-CIO organization created for workers unable to join unions.
About 115 million workers are covered by the overtime rules in the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act.
Monday's change is the culmination of decades of lobbying by business groups representing retailers, restaurants, insurance companies, banks and others that have been hammered by workers' overtime lawsuits, many of them successful.
But now look at CNN's slant (Which did *not* make the headlines, but is buried deep in the money section):
QUOTE Overtime pay: Not everyone wants it
The overtime debate assumes that everybody wants to earn time and a half. Turns out, some don't.
August 19, 2004: 3:11 PM EDT
By Krysten Crawford, CNN/Money staff writer
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - This being an election year, President Bush last week dusted off an old proposal aimed at making life a little easier for employees who earn overtime pay.
Bush called on Congress to amend the core federal law that gives workers basic rights like minimum wage and overtime. The Fair Labor Standards Act, he declared in a statement, should be revised to give private sector employees who earn time-and-a-half the option of taking compensatory time, or extra time off, instead.
The law currently permits only public sector employees to take comp time instead of time-and-a-half for working more than 40 hours in a workweek.
"American workers need more options and flexibility to arrange their work schedules," said Bush, pointing in particular to the rise of dual-income families.
On their face, flexible work schedules sound innocuous enough. Turns out, the issue is anything but benign.
"Flexibility makes all the sense in the world (And Bush's proposal) has all the right-sounding words," said Thomas Kochan, a professor at MIT Sloan School of Management. But employee advocates, especially labor unions, "Will be strongly opposed."
The overtime debate assumes that everybody wants to earn time and a half. Turns out, some don't.
August 19, 2004: 3:11 PM EDT
By Krysten Crawford, CNN/Money staff writer
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - This being an election year, President Bush last week dusted off an old proposal aimed at making life a little easier for employees who earn overtime pay.
Bush called on Congress to amend the core federal law that gives workers basic rights like minimum wage and overtime. The Fair Labor Standards Act, he declared in a statement, should be revised to give private sector employees who earn time-and-a-half the option of taking compensatory time, or extra time off, instead.
The law currently permits only public sector employees to take comp time instead of time-and-a-half for working more than 40 hours in a workweek.
"American workers need more options and flexibility to arrange their work schedules," said Bush, pointing in particular to the rise of dual-income families.
On their face, flexible work schedules sound innocuous enough. Turns out, the issue is anything but benign.
"Flexibility makes all the sense in the world (And Bush's proposal) has all the right-sounding words," said Thomas Kochan, a professor at MIT Sloan School of Management. But employee advocates, especially labor unions, "Will be strongly opposed."
Underlying the debate over who gets overtime and who doesn't is the assumption that earning time-and-a-half for extra hours worked is a benefit all employees want.
Turns out there's a small, but growing, number of U.S. Workers for whom a fatter paycheck isn't the sole, or even primary, issue.
"I think we take for granted that everybody just wants to make more money," said Robin Ryan, a Seattle-based career counselor and author of several job guides.
Some workers, especially middle-income earners and those who didn't have to track time in prior jobs, view overtime-eligible jobs as somehow less professional than non-overtime positions.
A bigger downside is the loss of workday flexibility, an issue that's of particular concern to dual-income parents and single mothers.
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 
59.5%
Sponsored Links:
Laws Overtime New
Let me tell you how this has affected my Firm, although it is not directly a result of the changes in the law.
I work for a Law Firm. Traditionally, paralegals have been considered skilled professionals, and, therefore, exempt employees, which means salaried not hourly...no overtime pay. Recently, the Department of Labor (Federal) issued a ruling that said paralegals do not require any specialized education or training at entry into the field. (Incidently, my boss agrees that this is true) Therefore, they cannot be exempted under the skilled professionals exception. This ruling is effective August 23, 2004. So, all the paralegals in my Firm are now going to switch from being exempt to being non-exempt. They now must punch in and out, and fill out time cards just like the secretarial staff. For many, this is, in fact, a status issue. People do look at exempt positions as being professional and skilled. That has been taken from these people.
In addition, as has already been mentioned, work flexibility is now gone. The labor laws are clear about when and how overtime must be paid. A paralegal who needs to leave early one day this week, cannot make it up next week because that will put them over the 40 hour limit for that week requiring payment of overtime. Overtime pay isn't going to be authorized as a convenience for the employee, so any time made up must be made up in the same week as it was taken. These are people who have not had to answer to a clock before. They just needed to be sure their jobs were being done.
The other side is that a few people have been routinely working more than 40 hours per week. They will now need permission before doing so. I imagine the Firm will have to give permission or hire additional people. So, those people will see an increase in the money they earn for completing the same amount of work as they did previously.
I am not sure how I feel. I would love to get overtime for the hours I put in past 40. However, I wouldn't like to be tied to the clock. It is nice to know I am collecting the same check each week, even if I leave early to visit a doctor or get a hair cut. 
Edited: tenaheff on 20th Aug, 2004 - 3:43pm
International Level: Diplomat / Political Participation: 320 32%
New Overtime Laws History & Civil Business Politics
Ah, the joys of government interference. By passing laws, they stop the market from working, so competition is decreased, and so is efficiency and effectiveness.
As a salaried employee, I do have overtime pay available where I work, but it must be pre-approved. And that approval has become very rare and hard to get, even for engineers on the plant floor. However, we are expected to put in extra time.
I agree that not having to "clock in" makes for a much more flexible workplace. I really like working the way I do.
But, there is no problem that Government involvement in won't make worse.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
Laws Overtime New
Since California is different from Federal law (so what else is new?) -- overtime is due for work over 8 hours in a day, rather than over 40 hours in a week -- it's slightly different, but can mean that folks working less than 40 hours in a week can still be eligible for overtime if they worked 8.5 hours one of the days in that same week...
In our small firm (less than 20 employees), overtime has to be approved and generally is when necessary. Because everything we do (or nearly everything) is billed to clients, even the partners have to keep time sheets. However, it's not like "punching a clock," and we do have a lot of flexibility with doctor's appointments and so forth. I don't think this new law will affect our company at all.
Roz
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%
Post Date: 23rd Nov, 2016 - 1:25am / Post ID: #
NOTE: News [?]
Laws Overtime New
Judge blocks new overtime rule, postponing potential pay boost for 4.2M workers
A federal judge on Tuesday blocked a new rule from the U.S. Labor Department making make millions more Americans eligible for overtime pay. The decision by U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas indefinitely pushes back the Dec. 1 effective date while he weighs a challenge to the requirement. An estimated 4.2 million workers were to be newly eligible for time-and-a-half wages for each hour they put in beyond 40 a week under the new rule. Ref. USAToday.
TOPIC: New Overtime Laws