http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/house-republicans-vote-to-change-the-overtime-pay-rule/ar-BBAH2SK?li=BBnb7Kz

I could go along with this if the workers are given the option to either take the overtime pay or take comp time. It is a step back for the every day working stiff if the company is allowed full discretionary power to choose which way they want it. To me it is another attack on the middle class in favor of big business. Once again too much government interference.

Agreed. It needs to be the employee's choice, not the company's.

Don't agree with this, should be either pay regardless, or if there is an option its the employee's choice.

My issue is when its paid time off is it also 1.5 times the hours you actually worked? If you would have got time and a half, would you now get 12 hours off for 8 hours of OT worked?

I am salary so I get no OT, but if I happen to travel/work on a weekend for any reason my boss just gives me (kind of under the table, since comp time is a bad word in our company) a day off to compensate.

So I don't get the 1.5 times that an hourly worker would get, but at least I am not screwed completely.

In the end, can't the company still choose how they want to do it?

Azubuike24;1851326 wrote:In the end, can't the company still choose how they want to do it?

I think that is the point. The company would have final say so. The workers may not have any options of their own choosing.

ppaw1999;1851327 wrote:I think that is the point. The company would have final say so. The workers may not have any options of their own choosing.

Besides where to work, and to not work overtime or not. So plenty of decisions.

I don't really have an opinion either way. I don't get overtime for working more than 40 hours (which I do every week) so I don't feel bad. I would call getting "paid" for every hour worked is compensation enough.

iclfan2;1851328 wrote:Besides where to work, and to not work overtime or not. So plenty of decisions.

I don't really have an opinion either way. I don't get overtime for working more than 40 hours (which I do every week) so I don't feel bad. I would call getting "paid" for every hour worked is compensation enough.

This is what I meant pretty much.

Nobody is forcing you to work your job or work overtime.

Also, in my experience, any company that's really worth working for from an employee engagement standpoint would at least offer a choice.

Azubuike24;1851330 wrote:This is what I meant pretty much.

Nobody is forcing you to work your job or work overtime.

Also, in my experience, any company that's really worth working for from an employee engagement standpoint would at least offer a choice.

This is fine in a healthy labor market with equal distribution of work. However, we haven't had this since the tech bubble and even then it wasn't that great of a market for anything outside of tech. Employees don't have unlimited options to leave their job if they don't like that they are being screwed over by their employer.

The reality is, people continue to bible thump and vote in Republican politicians who actively implement policy against their own economic interests. It's really embarrassing and sad how brainwashed a substantial percentage of our population is.

Some people are forced to work whatever job they can get. Some places have mandatory overtime. A low skilled uneducated worker is probably making close to minimum wage. That person would most likely opt for the overtime pay. It is hard to realize what other people circumstances are without living them ourselves. I dislike government regulations because in most cases one size does not fit all.

ppaw1999;1851334 wrote:Some people are forced to work whatever job they can get. Some places have mandatory overtime. A low skilled uneducated worker is probably making close to minimum wage. That person would most likely opt for the overtime pay. It is hard to realize what other people circumstances are without living them ourselves. I dislike government regulations because in most cases one size does not fit all.

Yes but these people are poor so fuck them. MAGA!

They are still getting paid for each hour worked, isn't that the main thing? It isn't like they are being "used" by the company.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

iclfan2;1851340 wrote:They are still getting paid for each hour worked, isn't that the main thing? It isn't like they are being "used" by the company.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here's how it will work: Company gives PTO, either caps it(some states) and doesn't allow you to take paid vacation, and doesn't pay out if you get fired(some states).

It's a cost cutting measure for the company. This was done for the benefit of corporations, not for the employees.

Oh, unions are going to looooooooove this.

Here is a summation of the bill by legal experts as well as a link to read the full text of the bill that was passed yesterday.
https://tmlawgroup.wordpress.com/2017/05/04/new-overtime-bill-in-a-nutshell/

To some of the points being debated here:

1) employees have a choice of comp time if offered by the employer. Employers cannot make employees take comp time.
2) comp time is issued by employers at time and a half.
3 ) employees may accumulate up to 160 hours of comp time.
4) comp time or the cash value of such must be paid out by the employer by Jan 31 every year.

I have said this before...stop listening to disingenuous politicians and news sources.
This is yet another example where you can test your news source for its honesty, accuracy, and integrity.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/hr-1180-house-passes-bill-would-change-overtime-pay-rules-n754226

Which news source do you choose to believe?

[h=4]Where do the Democrats stand?[/h][FONT=&quot]They really don't like this bill. Many progressives in the House argue that the proposal would chip away at protections for hardworking Americans and undermine the Fair Labor Standards Act.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The measure, among other rules, would give employers the final say on when comp time can be used. In other words, House Dems fear, your boss could conceivably kick the can down the road on money you earned putting in extra hours.[/FONT]

Of course they don't like this bill because it takes labor/ workers away from the Progressive narrative that only they thru the government represent them and will take care of them. Already stung by labor deserting them at the polls over their stalling of pipeline projects and coal, Progressives are worried more will flee the plantation.
NBC's reporting on this isn't awful, but you can see the spin pretty easily.... giving weight to Dems unsubstantiated claims that this "chips away" at protections for workers, and "undermines" the Fair Labor Standards Act, all the while deemphasizing that the choice is the workers and that comp time must be paid or compensated by Jan 31 each year.
Of course, the employer has the "final say", as they must have as any one vaguely knowledgeable about running a business understands. Employees cannot take time off willy nilly... the smooth operation of the business is paramount. For example, if you work in an accounting firm, taking comp time off during the height of tax season might not be possible.
Another of Progressives disingenuous "objections" is the claim that employers can defer compensation by "kicking the can down to road." Seriously, how long do you think it'll take before employees figure out that an employer is jacking them around? As long as the employee has the choice ( and they do) this is a non issue.

This is nothing more than a scare tactic, raising the bogey man, anti capitalism Progressive narrative that all employers are all evil creatures and can't be trusted.