Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
ExactlyWhile that looks good on the surface, I'd bet that the reality will be different.
Employers, for the most part, do everything in their power to keep expenses to a minimum. One expense that they can reliably control is labor costs. If that proposal would go into effect, I can see employers cutting hours to anyone covered by that proposal. They might hire extra employees to cover the shortfall, but those positions would be part-time, no benefits and lower wages. 20 hours at time and a half plus associated benefits vs. 20 hours at 80% (or less) and no benefits is a no-brainer for the average employer.
Alternately, the employer may just decide to let those hours go unstaffed, and thus make the job harder on those actually working.
Without an explanation you are just noise.Obama and the rest of you fools don't know a Damn thing about reality, if you think they will end up with more money, I got a bridge to sell ya.
Lol how does that explain the million of people already working over time?While that looks good on the surface, I'd bet that the reality will be different.
Employers, for the most part, do everything in their power to keep expenses to a minimum. One expense that they can reliably control is labor costs. If that proposal would go into effect, I can see employers cutting hours to anyone covered by that proposal. They might hire extra employees to cover the shortfall, but those positions would be part-time, no benefits and lower wages. 20 hours at time and a half plus associated benefits vs. 20 hours at 80% (or less) and no benefits is a no-brainer for the average employer.
Alternately, the employer may just decide to let those hours go unstaffed, and thus make the job harder on those actually working.
I see that's why you are in the dictionary under the term "A fool is born every minute "Without an explanation you are just noise.Obama and the rest of you fools don't know a Damn thing about reality, if you think they will end up with more money, I got a bridge to sell ya.
Lol how does that explain the million of people already working over time?While that looks good on the surface, I'd bet that the reality will be different.
Employers, for the most part, do everything in their power to keep expenses to a minimum. One expense that they can reliably control is labor costs. If that proposal would go into effect, I can see employers cutting hours to anyone covered by that proposal. They might hire extra employees to cover the shortfall, but those positions would be part-time, no benefits and lower wages. 20 hours at time and a half plus associated benefits vs. 20 hours at 80% (or less) and no benefits is a no-brainer for the average employer.
Alternately, the employer may just decide to let those hours go unstaffed, and thus make the job harder on those actually working.
Who says Obama doesn't care about the working class? Can you picture any GOP candidate doing this?
Obama proposal would make 5 million more eligible for OT - Yahoo News
I just see people taken off of salary and put on hourly with a pay cut.Who says Obama doesn't care about the working class? Can you picture any GOP candidate doing this?
Obama proposal would make 5 million more eligible for OT - Yahoo News
This seems like a reasonable action to me. I think the salary threshold is a bit high, but not too far over the top. I would have pegged the threshold at about 40K-45K, but overall I think this action is a reasonable move.
Most of them are hourly employees, and businesses have long been able to factor that into their budget. O's proposal would automagically make employers pay overtime to salaried employees who have never been paid OT. Like I said, it looks good in principle, but implementing it would cause rapid unbudgeted payroll increases that employers would have to scramble to absorb. Bad things tend to happen when a company is hit with unexpected costs - things such as closings, layoffs, a cut in hours, and higher prices.Lol how does that explain the million of people already working over time?
Thanks - I had overlooked that possibility. It's probably even more likely of a result than what I came up with.I just see people taken off of salary and put on hourly with a pay cut.
What you're saying is pure speculation. It could happen for some workers, but to assume it would cause some major shift is unrealistic.Most of them are hourly employees, and businesses have long been able to factor that into their budget. O's proposal would automagically make employers pay overtime to salaried employees who have never been paid OT. Like I said, it looks good in principle, but implementing it would cause rapid unbudgeted payroll increases that employers would have to scramble to absorb. Bad things tend to happen when a company is hit with unexpected costs - things such as closings, layoffs, a cut in hours, and higher prices.Lol how does that explain the million of people already working over time?
Thanks - I had overlooked that possibility. It's probably even more likely of a result than what I came up with.I just see people taken off of salary and put on hourly with a pay cut.
