Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With the Fed easing off their QE infinity some inflation has to be injected into the system.
No better way than to raise wages which in turn raise prices.
So he proposes to take managers off yearly salary and make them hourly wage workers instead ?
I would consider that a demotion.
Sure they work some extra hours just like any other exempt employee.
But I wouldn't venture to say they are working 60 hour weeks.
We have three salaried managers. They are paid for 40 hours per week.
They usually work about 35 hours and seldom work overtime.
They would lose money if they were not salaried.
So he proposes to take managers off yearly salary and make them hourly wage workers instead ?
I would consider that a demotion.
Sure they work some extra hours just like any other exempt employee.
But I wouldn't venture to say they are working 60 hour weeks.
In the first place, I don't think he has any authority to do such a thing. Executive orders are supposed to apply only to government agencies, or government employees. He cannot issue executive orders that mandate how private businesses run their affairs (only Congress, through legislation). Of course, he doesn't give a damn about the Constitution, or separation of powers (as a "Progressive"). Progressives find that our government, as founded, functions too slowly, and it is difficult to get things done. They are right — that was intended. The founders were trying to guard against people like Obama and "Progressives" acquiring too much power, and the government becoming tyrannical, just as it is under Obama.
That is the real danger of Progressivism. They wish to tear the Constitution up. It is a stumbling block for their agenda. That's why they ignore it as much as possible. There attitude is, "So, file suit. Let the Supreme Court decide." That isn't the right attitude. All laws should reconcile with the Constitution before they are passed. Then, if something comes up, it can be challenged.
And the typical conservative whining continues.... Yes, Obama has the authority to change the classification, just like Bush before him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
In the first place, I don't think he has any authority to do such a thing. Executive orders are supposed to apply only to government agencies, or government employees. He cannot issue executive orders that mandate how private businesses run their affairs (only Congress, through legislation). Of course, he doesn't give a damn about the Constitution, or separation of powers (as a "Progressive"). Progressives find that our government, as founded, functions too slowly, and it is difficult to get things done. They are right — that was intended. The founders were trying to guard against people like Obama and "Progressives" acquiring too much power, and the government becoming tyrannical, just as it is under Obama.
That is the real danger of Progressivism. They wish to tear the Constitution up. It is a stumbling block for their agenda. That's why they ignore it as much as possible. There attitude is, "So, file suit. Let the Supreme Court decide." That isn't the right attitude. All laws should reconcile with the Constitution before they are passed. Then, if something comes up, it can be challenged.
I too am in a results driven profession. I get tasks, I get deadlines, and I produce results. Shockingly, I can post on one screen while watching an hourglass on another, and still produce the results my employer demands well within the time they demand it.
The other thing to consider is most exempt employees are accessible 24/7 nowadays thanks to smartphones, laptops, etc. In many cases, it would be difficult for employees to keep track of all their time.
I'm not talking about the least valuable 40% of workers, or the middle or the average. The average worker is a slacker with a lousy attitude and poor customer skills and too frequently illiterate or unable to figure. On the other hand, people who make a point to be more valuable to employers are generally doing well.
The 1968 minimum wage was obviously too high.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
