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.
I was under the impression that a business whose sales are strictly in-State, were not engaging in interstate commerce.
For example, and independently-owned pizzeria, whose revenue is derived from products that are sold only in person from a single location, or locations all in one State, would qualify as a business not engaging in interstate commerce. The fact that some of their vendors or suppliers are located or headquartered out of State, would be irrelevant. But then again, I'm not an authority on such matters.
If indeed interstate commerce is defined as you describe, then yes, virtually every business in the country, from the Fortune 100, to the smallest local mom-and-pop, is engaging in interstate commerce.
Even if the business fails to meet the enterprise coverage test, individual coverage applies to any employee whose work affects interstate commerce. Congress and the DOL have defined “interstate commerce” more broadly than the title might suggest. Obviously, a route driver who moves products across state lines is involved in interstate commerce. However, the definition also would include employees who load, unload, or use those products arriving from out of state. Employees who take payments from customers who are out-of-state, or who process payments that come from out of state banks or credit card issuers would be engaged in interstate commerce, too. There are some limits to this. A local construction company whose employees buy all necessary building supplies from the local contractor supply store and who otherwise never leave the state are not engaged in interstate commerce. Their retail purchases of construction materials though the local supply store will not trigger coverage, even though the store might have had the supplies shipped in from out of state. The connection to interstate commerce must be at least a bit more tangible than local retail purchases.
The standard IANAL applies of course, but that is a pretty low bar. Just about everybody orders something from across state lines. Even if you are a local carpenter or pizza shop, you better not have ever ordered anything from Amazon (tools, parts) or some other internet vendor.
My question is directed towards those who have a knowledge of the retail environment, as little if anyone will be affected by this in professional positions. Matter of fact, I'm going to go ahead and suggest that basically everyone affected by this is in retail management.
How are employers going to accommodate the changes? They can't replace these level workers as technology doesn't offer an alternative for assistant and store managers. They can either increase their pay, or reduce their hours to 40 and hire an additional manager.
I think you have the basic reality of the impact the updated overtime rules change.
Either employers will pay a person above the threshold of I think $47,000, pay workers overtime, or give them fewer hours. It's a win win.
I really don't understand business opposition in terms of pretending that this will be bad for the workers this change impacts.
Unpaid overtime is a scam. We don't pay you overtime. You are a professional. You're not a professional you are a sap. What if everyone works the overtime? Can they promote everyone? Once again you are a sap.
Then your boss comes to you with two hours work at 4:45 PM. so you work to 7:PM. Has anyone noticed that these people that take the bait also come in at 10 AM?
Forty seven thousand a year. Make it $75,000. That's when you're talking fairness.
Yup!
In a business where the clients are billed hourly and the employees are salary, they have the employees work unpaid overtime while still charging an overtime premium rate to the clients. It's a rip-off to the employees.
And this BS about if you are salary you don't have to work 40 hours for the week is nonsense. If you feel you could complete your work for the week in only working 20 hours, the employer won't go for it while you continue to get paid a full salary. They want you there regardless. And employer's knowing it won't cost them more money to have an employee work overtime will give employees work very late in the day saying it must be done today or by tomorrow morning. It is totally bogus and abusive.
The standard IANAL applies of course, but that is a pretty low bar. Just about everybody orders something from across state lines. Even if you are a local carpenter or pizza shop, you better not have ever ordered anything from Amazon (tools, parts) or some other internet vendor.
Fishbrains is right, it doesn't take much to engage in interstate commerce. For example, a pizza shop also likely has phone service from Verizon or one of the other Baby Bell phone companies who have headquarters in another state. The reason someone is making a point about this is that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, thus allowing it to set overtime pay rules that affect the entire country.
My question is directed towards those who have a knowledge of the retail environment, as little if anyone will be affected by this in professional positions. Matter of fact, I'm going to go ahead and suggest that basically everyone affected by this is in retail management.
How are employers going to accommodate the changes? They can't replace these level workers as technology doesn't offer an alternative for assistant and store managers. They can either increase their pay, or reduce their hours to 40 and hire an additional manager.
I suspect many will reduce hours and either make due with less in the way of services or hire part-timers. This is not going to end well.
In a business where the clients are billed hourly and the employees are salary, they have the employees work unpaid overtime while still charging an overtime premium rate to the clients. It's a rip-off to the employees.
And this BS about if you are salary you don't have to work 40 hours for the week is nonsense. If you feel you could complete your work for the week in only working 20 hours, the employer won't go for it while you continue to get paid a full salary. They want you there regardless. And employer's knowing it won't cost them more money to have an employee work overtime will give employees work very late in the day saying it must be done today or by tomorrow morning. It is totally bogus and abusive.
This is precisely what my last employer did. Any change or test that was over a set number of hours had a contract drawn up stating the work is to be performed at whatever rate an hour. For emergency changes, complicated changes, or anything that was time sensitive, the assigned analyst for the client was often working after hours and on weekends - of course without any compensation. Meanwhile, the clients get charged an exorbitant rate, and the only person seeing any benefit from that was the owner.
You're also right that even if the work is technically done, your butt is expected to be in the seat. There are very few people that are able to say "the work is done, I'm out of here." No - you just get more work, or do something to bide time and appear busy.
Location: Stuck on the East Coast, hoping to head West
4,640 posts, read 11,940,392 times
Reputation: 9887
This is going to be devastating for those in the restaurant management industry. Owners will pick one guy and pay him salary and then limit wages for everyone else. Salary guy gets abuse and the rest get crappy pay.
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.
This is going to be devastating for those in the restaurant management industry. Owners will pick one guy and pay him salary and then limit wages for everyone else. Salary guy gets abuse and the rest get crappy pay.
As if the "rest" are not already getting crappy pay...
Glad to see it happening.
THe new overtime pay will improve work life balance for most employees.
I really hate seeing people being taken advantage of overtime with no extra pay
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.
