BS: new overtime rules

Subject: BS: new overtime rules
From: Dani
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 08:17 AM

With all the real bs going on down here, thought you all might not mind if I picked your thoughtful, mostly left-leanin' brains on this current event. Actually, I'm ESPECIALLY interested in those of you who support President Bush, and how you think these new rules will play out.

I'm having trouble imagining the fallout. I guess it's the old rule about keeping honest people honest. After a quick reading, it looks to me as if many companies are going to be able to re-classify employees to avoid paying overtime, and the government won't be able to do a whole lot about it.

What's your reading?

Dani

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 09:28 AM

Well, fir starters, it was management that lobbied for this overhaul so that in itself should make a statement as to who is most likely ro benefit.

Upwards of 6,000,000 workers *may* be engativelt effected by the new rules and upwards of 1,300,000 workers *may* be positively effected by them. The operative word here is "may".

My first problem with the rule change was the manner in which it was passed. It did not recieve an up and down vote becuase it most likely wouldn'y have held up to close scrutiny and most likey would have been defeated. It, along with many other provisions, were snadwiched into the Omnibus Spending Bill which funds the governemnt. The dems were in a no win situation as they very well remember the fall out from the 1996 (?) Repubs congress "shutting down the governemnt" by not refusing to pass an appropraitions bill just before Christmas. So the dems, with the gun at their head, voted for this bill. BTW, it makes the past dem approprations bills look fiscally responsible when iy come to the amount of pork that was in this bill. BTW, Part 2, this bill is full of regulation and deregulations that lobbiest have been after the repubs to but into place for years. The NRA got a biggie also making the US a lot less safe but that's another issue...

Back to the overtime bill. Another problem I have with it is that noone seems to know what effects it will have in the long run. I dodn't like that kind os legislation. By golly, if they're gonna pass a danged law they everyone should have some idea who will be impacted and to what degree. This is the probably the largest failing of the current repub dominated government. Without checks and balances the lobbies have way too much control and I think we'll see that in this case as well. Since no one seems to know for sure, I'll veture my guess which is based on simple arithmatic. The critics say 6,000,000 (neg. effected) so I'd put the number at half that. The proponants say 1,300,000 (pos effected) so i'll hale that as well>

3,000,000 (neg effected)....minus 650,000 (pos effected)... equals, hmmmmmm, carry the 3 and take away 6, ahhhhh, about 2,450,000 will be negatively effeected after the smoke clears!!!!

BTW, Part 3, lets keep in mind that while the Bush administartion is busy keeping Southern man enteratined with these wars, abortion issues and gay marriage, it is busy running as much of the New Deal they the shreader as it possibly can while it can!

That's my take...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: GUEST,m
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 06:38 PM

This has gone on for years. And years. And . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 07:21 PM

As I understand it (and I only understand a small part of it), the new law means that employers will be able to reclassify a lot of employees from non-exempt to exempt. Exempt employees are not entitled to overtime.

I never understood the distinction in the first place. In one of my previous jobs, I was given the choice, when I was hired, of whether I wanted to be exempt or non-exempt. So I chose non-exempt. It made no difference in the type of work I was expected to do. All it meant was that I had to punch the time clock. After I got settled in, and my employers became confident that I was a conscientious employee, it meant, in effect, that I could set my own hours. The work was somewhat seasonal; work slacks off in the summer. So I would work short hours in the summer and long hours (with paid overtime) in the winter. My employers never complained, and I rather liked the arrangement. I didn't mind the smaller paychecks in the summer; I appreciated having the time off. My employers trusted me to put in the number of hours I needed to get the job done.

But something about this arrangement doesn't seem right. It shouldn't be just a matter of choice, should it? Given the choice, why would anyone want to be exempt?

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 08:12 PM

Bobert's post show the sort of attitude that Governments express that cause people to think that Govt is corrupt. The French Revolution started because of that - but it took hundreds of years of pressure and many abortive attempts by the people to rise up.

So I fear that things will just continue to get worse until they get better...

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 08:21 PM

Sounds like it's time to reinvent the wheel.

Here's how: TALKING UNION

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: Gypsy
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 09:40 PM

nothing new. i had a job, where i could work 60 hours straight, and still not get overtime, because of how the payperiod fell. You either have an employer who is honest, and cares about the worker, or not. There are a million and one ways to screw the average blue collar worker. not the least of which is the 7 hour day, so you are "part time"

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: Scoville
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 09:54 PM

My bosses already bitch about us getting too much overtime. If they stop paying me for it, I will be happy to walk out as soon as I hit 40 hours and leave them to run the place themselves, and find someone who either won't complain or won't expect me to work past what they are willing to pay me.

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 10:30 PM

EXACTLY! When the money stops, the work stops. If people were willing to do that, employers would think twice.

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: Dani
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 09:53 AM

Only there are plenty of people who don't have those choices, who don't have other, better jobs to go to. Jim, I think the government was hoping/planning for situations like yours, where everyone is fair and fairly compensated. But I see my industry, among others, already gearing up for new ways to take advantage of people.

Dani

Subject: RE: BS: new overtime rules
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:17 AM

Nothing new there - and the only way to beat them is by solidarity, as it always has been.