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.
Option A- 2 29 hour workers can work 60, total, hours with no benefits paid
Option B- hire 1 employee at more than double the cost, pay benifits, and require 20 hours overtime. Still costs more.
I think most business owners will opt for A.
Not necessarily. Most PT jobs are at a much lower skill level, with higher turnover, than most FT jobs. Quite simply, you can't get two, or even 3, competent part-timers to do the same job as one FT professional.
Option A- 2 29 hour workers can work 60, total, hours with no benefits paid
Option B- hire 1 employee at more than double the cost, pay benifits, and require 20 hours overtime. Still costs more.
I think most business owners will opt for A.
When the number of part time jobs exceeds the number of available part time employees, the laws of supply and demand will drive wages up. And the part timer will likely not be as proficient or efficient as the full timer so 1/2 + 1/2 often does not add up to 1. Plus, the part timer has less invested and is more likely to turn over as they will be gone the instant they can find a full time position with benefits.
Why is it that everybody in the US freaks out (specially news media) when laws are passed to protect workers?
This law is the most logical thing that has ever been done.
The current salary threshold for overtime is badly out of date, says Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute. The last time the overtime threshold was significantly raised, in 1975, $23,660 covered a full 61 percent of salaried employees.
Since then, two big things have changed. For one, inflation has risen while the threshold has not. Today $23,660 is below the poverty line for a family of four. Only 8 percent of salaried workers qualify for overtime with the level set so low.
Because in America head of companies include the guy who gets paid purely to see how to save them money. They will find a way to screw workers for this law, that I can promise you. Just like they did with insurance, they fired full time and hired part time. Then you had to find two jobs to support yourself and still had no insurance. We are not a socialized society, we are the lone capitalist and that applies to our welfare.
That's pretty much the way I would expect it to play out. The current salaried people who would fall below the new wage threshold, and have to be re-classified as Non-Exempt, may not end up getting much, if anything more.
Take a professional or administrative person in an office setting. They are currently paid a salary of $40K per year, and they regularly work over 40 hrs. a week to accomplish their assigned tasks or projects within the requested time frame. But as a Non-Exempt hourly employee, their hours have to be tracked closely, and they are not authorized by management to work over 40 hrs. per week. They are under pressure to complete their assignments without working any overtime. When they were Exempt, they could work all the extra hours they needed to complete their tasks. Management didn't care; they weren't getting paid for those extra hours.
I think the winners will mostly be the currently Exempt people who fall below the new wage threshold, whose pay gets bumped up above the new wage, so they can remain Exempt.
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.