Obama plans to expand overtime eligibility for millions of workers

[Sun Devil 92]

Nothing. If they agree to that up front.

What's screwed up is taking the decision away from them.

What is also screwed up is the President of the United States Of American sticking his nose into the business community telling them what to do (please add the stupid paid leave onto the list.....then you'd have to be paid for hours you DON'T work).

He can't do his job as it is (we certainly should not be paying him).

Neither can either the House or the Senate (or them).

It is the job of the Government to establish Labor Laws

That is what is being done here. Labor laws need to be clarified as to who is "management" and who gets overtime

And where does it say that ?

Are you just playing stupid or are you actually that stupid?

I'm sorry...it's tough to understand you when your head is up your ass.

No, I'm serious

That was a purely ridiculous question. What were you thinking?

No it isn't. And if you haven't thought about....you should.

I am not for hands off labor oversight.

The federal government isn't the ones to be doing it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sure it is, since business won't be fair.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

RW, not much of us is born with a golden spoon in our mouths, we take the shit jobs, work our ass off and we are paid back with our references from our past bosses.

That's how it works to move up.

Hard to believe how you have sold out...If I am a good boy, management will take care of me

You work for compensation. If you work the time, you deserve to be compensated for it. It is not the workers responsibility to give free labor to ensure the company makes a profit

Then don't let the door hit you in the a$$

-Geaux

There is no such thing as free labor. That concept is simply f

RW, not much of us is born with a golden spoon in our mouths, we take the shit jobs, work our ass off and we are paid back with our references from our past bosses.

That's how it works to move up.

Hard to believe how you have sold out...If I am a good boy, management will take care of me

You work for compensation. If you work the time, you deserve to be compensated for it. It is not the workers responsibility to give free labor to ensure the company makes a profit

Then don't let the door hit you in the a$$

-Geaux

Correct.

I give you reponsibilities.....

You have as long as you'd like to fullfill them.

If you want to take long lunches and work a little over.....be my guest (BTW: Managers will appreciate now having to punch a clock when it comes to taking lunch or going to the dentist).

If I give you 60 hours of work solid on a regular basis...you'd be stupid not to quit.

 

[Geaux4it]

 

[JakeStarkey]

Geaux has no idea what is socialism.

 

[rightwinger]

It is the job of the Government to establish Labor Laws

That is what is being done here. Labor laws need to be clarified as to who is "management" and who gets overtime

And where does it say that ?

Are you just playing stupid or are you actually that stupid?

I'm sorry...it's tough to understand you when your head is up your ass.

No, I'm serious

That was a purely ridiculous question. What were you thinking?

No it isn't. And if you haven't thought about....you should.

I am not for hands off labor oversight.

The federal government isn't the ones to be doing it.

Of course they are

Been doing it for 100 years. Remember the mines before the federal government cleaned them up? The states couldn't do that

 

[Dragonlady]

You've never heard of 'passing on the cost to the consumer' I take it

That's why you're a liberal with a limited understanding of economics

-Geaux

Just think of how cheap goods and services could be if workers didn't have to be paid at all.

And think of the profits!!!!

 

[hortysir]

I support Obama on this issue. I've seen too many mid-level managers forced to work excessively long hours with no overtime, including one of my wife's brothers. Too many senior managers and owners take advantage of the low overtime threshold to force mid-level managers, and even some higher-level managers, to work excessively long hours so the company can avoid hiring another associate manager.

My wife's brother is the general manager of a nice, elite restaurant in Denver, a restaurant that's doing very well. The owner requires him to work 60-70 hours a week with no overtime because he's paying him just over 60K. The owner won't hire enough assistant managers and so the assistant managers end up getting burned out from 60-plus-hour work weeks and quit and go elsewhere. The owner could easily afford to just hire another assistant manager, but he prefers to force the mangers to work draconian hours. My brother-in-law is looking for another general manager position with a larger chain because he's tired of having no personal life.

So I'm with Obama on this one.

I understand that managers are expected to work extra during a crisis or to meet a tight deadline. But to expect low paid middle managers to work continuous 60-70 weeks just because of bad planning is abusive.

The carrot to middle management is...if you want to get to upper management, this is what you have to do. The fact is that only one on ten actually gets that promotion

The thing is, with the restaurant chain I work for, assistant manager payroll is calculated into the daily labor percentage. So, as business slows down, we're expected to send cooks and dishwasher home and run the boh alone.
They abuse the he'll out of it. There are days (Thursday night most lately) where I'm the only person SCHEDULED for the boh.
That's how I spend my 67hr work week, rather than allow a $11/hr cook to get 28.05 hours.
So, hell yea, I hope I can fuck em for some OT

 

[CowboyTed]

But it will cost more if you can't use some of your employees as slave labour...

Listen, Profit is the Almighty... We should treat people like sh*t because it is profitable...

There is no need for fairness as employers are deities of the Profit...

I know some are going to say that is is worshiping Greed. Greed is just a parayer to Profit...

These are just sacrifies to Profit...

 

[SwimExpert]

There is nothing socialist about the change.

Geaux has an extremely limited vocabulary and understanding.

In a consumer economy, the more money the working consumers have to spend, everyone, including owners, are better off.

You've never heard of 'passing on the cost to the consumer' I take it

That's why you're a liberal with a limited understanding of economics

-Geaux

The cost of paying a fair wage? Paying for overtime is a fair wage

Yes, that is how it is supposed to be

Let's do the math...

If as lefty Jake retorts, paying employee 'A' more money equates to more cash flow into the machine. Say you made an extra $1/hr for an hour OT, so now that you have the extra cash, you decide to go get that Bacon Burger you might not have purchased before the OT.

But wait, I just raised the cost of said burger $1.25.

See what I did there? The LIV thinks he is getting ahead but in actuality, he's just as stupid as he was when Barney Frank set him up to take a loan he couldn't afford to buy that dream home.

In summary, Employee 'A' purchased a burger that was still cost prohibitive even with the OT

-Geaux

Wow, that was......special.

*Imagined, made up numbers, pulled out of your ass for no other reason than the fact that they are convenient to [try] to make your point
*Insanely simplistic approach, to the point of obliteration
*Complete abandonment of the actual circumstances

Can you please be quiet? Someone's going to read your bullshit and think it's representative of us actual real conservatives.

 

[Papageorgio]

I work salary, I'll put in 50-60 hours a week, I don't care about the overtime, I work and like my job and enjoy what I do. This won't effect me but I am worried about a day when it will.

I hope I'm retired when that day comes.

 

[SwimExpert]

This is something that was long overdue.

Obama plans to expand overtime eligibility for millions of workers - Yahoo News

This is stupid. It's never going to pass the House. And I have a hard time believing that Obama thinks it has a snowball's chance in Hell. More than likely, it's a fluff maneuver to try to fuel the base. The sad thing is that too many Republicans are going to be up in arms against it for all the wrong reasons. Personally, I'm not opposed to increasing it, though I also don't think it's worth being a priority.

There are two things that are true

1 - Businesses will just adapt, and change their pay strategies to maintain the same bottom line. Don't want to work for $25k a year salary and put in the overtime? Welcome to $8/hr with paid overtime. And after a few months, welcome to $8/hr with no overtime, after someone else is hired to fill in part time.

2 - Businesses that abuse low salaries for low level positions or line level "managers" suck anyway, and don't deserve any protection. If you're running a business with such razor thin profits that you have to abuse $23k salaries, then you suck as a business person and I have no sympathy for you. Get the fuck out. Go out of business, go bankrupt, lay off all two of your employees. Send them my way....I'm hiring at the moment.

 

[hortysir]

I work salary, I'll put in 50-60 hours a week, I don't care about the overtime, I work and like my job and enjoy what I do. This won't effect me but I am worried about a day when it will.

I hope I'm retired when that day comes.

I miss the days when I was able to say what you just did.
I love my career.
I just don't like that being used against me

 

[SwimExpert]

Workers, don't ever let the employers freeload off you.

That is the real problem, of course. Workers have been letting employers freeload off them for so long, and to such monumental degree, that a great many employers are drowning in an entitlement complex. And even for those who aren't, the market has become so suppressed by employees who can't be bothered to advocate for their interests that it's just too easy to say "fuck it, I'll just pay shit wages because I can always find a ton of idiots who will put up with it."

 

[Redfish]

This is something that was long overdue.

Obama plans to expand overtime eligibility for millions of workers - Yahoo News

and the price of everything you buy will go up. businesses will lose sales and have to reduce employment. How exactly is it better to be laid off than working?

 

[Geaux4it]

There is nothing socialist about the change.

Geaux has an extremely limited vocabulary and understanding.

In a consumer economy, the more money the working consumers have to spend, everyone, including owners, are better off.

You've never heard of 'passing on the cost to the consumer' I take it

That's why you're a liberal with a limited understanding of economics

-Geaux

The cost of paying a fair wage? Paying for overtime is a fair wage

Yes, that is how it is supposed to be

Let's do the math...

If as lefty Jake retorts, paying employee 'A' more money equates to more cash flow into the machine. Say you made an extra $1/hr for an hour OT, so now that you have the extra cash, you decide to go get that Bacon Burger you might not have purchased before the OT.

But wait, I just raised the cost of said burger $1.25.

See what I did there? The LIV thinks he is getting ahead but in actuality, he's just as stupid as he was when Barney Frank set him up to take a loan he couldn't afford to buy that dream home.

In summary, Employee 'A' purchased a burger that was still cost prohibitive even with the OT

-Geaux

Wow, that was......special.

*Imagined, made up numbers, pulled out of your ass for no other reason than the fact that they are convenient to [try] to make your point
*Insanely simplistic approach, to the point of obliteration
*Complete abandonment of the actual circumstances

Can you please be quiet? Someone's going to read your bullshit and think it's representative of us actual real conservatives.

A real conservative? Where in the hell have you been hiding?

-Geaux

 

[SwimExpert]

A real conservative? Where in the hell have you been hiding?

In a place called "reality." For you, it's a galaxy far, far away.

 

[Geaux4it]

A real conservative? Where in the hell have you been hiding?

In a place called "reality." For you, it's a galaxy far, far away.

Wow. That was deep....

-Geaux

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And where does it say that ?

Are you just playing stupid or are you actually that stupid?

I'm sorry...it's tough to understand you when your head is up your ass.

No, I'm serious

That was a purely ridiculous question. What were you thinking?

No it isn't. And if you haven't thought about....you should.

I am not for hands off labor oversight.

The federal government isn't the ones to be doing it.

Of course they are

Been doing it for 100 years. Remember the mines before the federal government cleaned them up? The states couldn't do that

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

[SwimExpert]

I support Obama on this issue. I've seen too many mid-level managers forced to work excessively long hours with no overtime, including one of my wife's brothers. Too many senior managers and owners take advantage of the low overtime threshold to force mid-level managers, and even some higher-level managers, to work excessively long hours so the company can avoid hiring another associate manager.

My wife's brother is the general manager of a nice, elite restaurant in Denver, a restaurant that's doing very well. The owner requires him to work 60-70 hours a week with no overtime because he's paying him just over 60K. The owner won't hire enough assistant managers and so the assistant managers end up getting burned out from 60-plus-hour work weeks and quit and go elsewhere. The owner could easily afford to just hire another assistant manager, but he prefers to force the mangers to work draconian hours. My brother-in-law is looking for another general manager position with a larger chain because he's tired of having no personal life.

So I'm with Obama on this one.

What you describe here is absolutely true, but once again the onus needs to be on the employee to take responsibility to establishing favorable compensation agreements. Once upon a time it was an understood fact of doing business: if a position was salaried it was for more or less 40 hours a week; if the position would regularly require 50 hours then the salary would increase to pay for 50 hours; if the position would regularly require 60 hours then the offered salary would be adjusted appropriately to pay for 60 hours, etc. Flexibility by employees to put in extra hours when times were tough turned into expectation by employers for you to do it all the time.

I just started a new job last week, and already I can see the writing on the wall that my boss is going to be all too willing to start abusing the shit out of my salary. I'll be putting a reality check on him rather soon here. We agreed to a flexible 40 hr/wk position. I will happily work a 50-55 hour a week position if that's what he wants, I will require a new pay scale to reflect the expected time. If he doesn't want to that, he can pay the new assistant I up hire.