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.
What the bill would do is end long-standing labor law by allowing private-sector employers to offer compensatory time off in lieu of time-and-a-half pay for overtime. If it became law, there are some workers who would prefer payment and some would prefer comp-time. However, there is nothing to stop an employer from discriminating against those who prefer payment by cutting their overtime entirely. Nor would employers face any penalty if they forced unpaid overtime on workers who fear losing their jobs if they object.
So, instead of paying workers for additional hours, paying comp-time effectively adds to the company's profits as it shifts the liability of the comp-time to the future -- which, according to the bill, can only be used at the employer’s convenience.
How does this help families again? It adds flexibility to employers not families. Fortunately, it won't make it out of the Senate.
Comp time is nothing new. Many, perhaps most, public safety employers (municipal police, fire, and EMS services) utilize this.
Now, I haven't read the bill, but how is comp time itself a bad thing?
What the current law says is that employees working overtime are entitled to extra money and if they work more than x hours (45?) a week they are entitled to time-and-a-half. The new bill doesn't mandate pay but makes it at the discretion of the employer to give comp-time in lieu of pay. That's a bad thing as no employer would opt to pay extra if they don't have to.
Worse, the comp-time can't be used at the discretion of the employee. The employer decides.
What the current law says is that employees working overtime are entitled to extra money and if they work more than x hours (45?) a week they are entitled to time-and-a-half. The new bill doesn't mandate pay but makes it at the discretion of the employer. That's a bad thing as no employer would opt to pay extra if they don't have to.
As I already pointed it, this is currently being done (and by the government itself, no less). Most agencies I'm aware of, including the one I worked at when I was a cop, paid overtime at time and a half or as comp time, depending on a couple of factors.
The private sector employer I currently work at pays wages that are FAR above standard wages, and has insane fringe benefits, including still offering a pension package in addition to 401k contributions. Clearly, this costs them a lot of money that they wouldn't have to spend. Why do you think no employer would continue to pay OT?
What the current law says is that employees working overtime are entitled to extra money and if they work more than x hours (45?) a week they are entitled to time-and-a-half. The new bill doesn't mandate pay but makes it at the discretion of the employer to give comp-time in lieu of pay. That's a bad thing as no employer would opt to pay extra if they don't have to.
Worse, the comp-time can't be used at the discretion of the employee. The employer decides.
You don't own a business do you? It's pretty clear from your lack of comprehension.
With Obamacare, the chance of an hourly employee getting 40 hours, let alone OT, is falling rapidly. It's a moot point.
Wrong again.
Part-time employees can count toward the 50 full-time employees limit in Obamacare. According to the Congressional Research Service:
“The number of full-time employees excludes those full-time seasonal employees who work for less than 120 days during the year. The hours worked by part-time employees (i.e., those working less than 30 hours per week) are included in the calculation of a large employer, on a monthly basis, by taking their total number of monthly hours worked divided by 120.”
The CRS even provides a nice example:
“For example, a firm has 35 full-time employees (30+ hours). In addition, the firm has 20 part-time employees who all work 24 hours per week (96 hours per month). These part-time employees’ hours would be treated as equivalent to 16 full-time employees, based on the following calculation:
20 employees x 96 hours / 120 = 1920 / 120 = 16″
Thus, large companies can't just switch everyone to part-time to skirt Obamacare.
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.
