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.
Yeah, let's keep pretending that. If someone is working 50+ hours a week, chances are they don't have time to go out looking for a better job. But let's keep blaming the workers who basically have no leverage in 2015, right?
I was working 49-57 hours a week when I applied for my current job.
Unverified accusations are just that. If the post office is doing something illegal no law is going to change that.
Why wouldn't their union address that?
It's not illegal for government workers. Government workers have separate overtime rules that allow them to be paid in "comp" instead. Similarly, in an "emergency situation" they can be required to work indefinitely without pay if declared an essential worker. For example, during federal shutdowns if you are not furloughed because you are declared essential, you also do not get paid for your first 40 hours worked, much less your overtime.
This is part of law, not contract negotiations, so the unions are legally barred from touching it. Federal, State, and Local government can pull off a surprising number of abuses of their own workers through passing law instead of contract negotiations. (I am basically stuck at my own employer because they passed a post-employment restriction law that bars employees involved in any bid scoring from working anywhere in the region for 12 months, punishable by a fine equal to 12 months pay at their new job or their previous job, whichever is higher. Since I scored a bid several years ago, before the law was passed, I have to either move away or sit out for 12 months. Moving away is not an option for my family, so I have to stay here until I can build up 12 months saving. My employer followed up the post-employment restriction law with a 10-year wage freeze 2 days later. I'm sure they were not the slightest bit connected.)
It's not illegal for government workers. Government workers have separate overtime rules that allow them to be paid in "comp" instead.
Which as I said earlier I would love to have but that in no way supports the idea that people are working for free.
I don't understand why this would be O.K. for a government worker but not me.
Quote:
Similarly, in an "emergency situation" they can be required to work indefinitely without pay if declared an essential worker. For example, during federal shutdowns if you are not furloughed because you are declared essential, you also do not get paid for your first 40 hours worked, much less your overtime.
This is part of law, not contract negotiations, so the unions are legally barred from touching it.
I don't understand why this would be O.K. for a government worker but not me.
...
They get paid. It just might be delayed.
Comp sucks. You don't want it. First, it is one to one, not one to one-and-a-half like overtime. Second, it is "use it or lose it" with no requirement to allow you to use it. Our comp policy, a very common one, is that you have two pay periods to use it or lose it. During the 2008 floods, I worked 140 hours in one work (yes, 7 straight 20 hour days); so even if I took the entire next pay period off I still would have had 20 hours of comp left over. Of course, what actually happened is that the entire office worked those hours and we still had flood recovery, so I got to use 8 hours of that 100 hours of comp time.
At the federal level, Congress often opts to pay essential employees working in an emergency situation later by passing a separate measure authorizing pay, but without that authorizing measure they do not get paid. At the state and local level, essential employees are almost never paid in an emergency situation.
Comp sucks. You don't want it. First, it is one to one, not one to one-and-a-half like overtime. Second, it is "use it or lose it" with no requirement to allow you to use it. Our comp policy, a very common one, is that you have two pay periods to use it or lose it. During the 2008 floods, I worked 140 hours in one work (yes, 7 straight 20 hour days); so even if I took the entire next pay period off I still would have had 20 hours of comp left over. Of course, what actually happened is that the entire office worked those hours and we still had flood recovery, so I got to use 8 hours of that 100 hours of comp time.
This is a common problem. The argument goes "this is our policy and I don't like it so no one else should be able to......".
I know how it works. I would rather have the extra time off than the extra money.
Quote:
At the federal level, Congress often opts to pay essential employees working in an emergency situation later by passing a separate measure authorizing pay, but without that authorizing measure they do not get paid. At the state and local level, essential employees are almost never paid in an emergency situation.
This IMO is going to be minor compared to the catastrophe known as $15/hour minimum wage. THAT is going to destroy the economy, we cannot sustain that.
Here's the problem, we raise the minimum wage to $15 and then the people who currently make $15 need a raise, and then those people need a raise ... and now payroll costs are skyrocketing. Many businesses are already operating on pretty thin profit margins, imagine what this is going to do? I don't even want to think about how bad this will hurt the economy
I wonder how all those people working at McDonald's are going to feel when their workplace shuts down because while it's true that McDonald's (the corporation makes billions) 95% of locations are independently owned and operated and cannot handle the increase in payroll that this would cause? Enjoy your $15 an hour because soon you will be making ZERO.
Maybe these 45 year old's with 3 kids working at McDonald's should either 1) [the most optimal solution] not have had kids in the first place, 2) look for a better paying job, 3) get a higher education degree and get a better job. I don't get why people cannot grasp that. If I was working at McDonald's there is no way in heck I would want to become a parent. I would either forgo kids or get a better job. It's simple really.
I too wonder why so many people, who appear to have a brain still can't understand what is about to happen. Fast food type of jobs and many retail jobs were meant for people entering th work force, college and high school kids or people looking for part time or second jobs. All one has to do is visit a country like Canada and check out the prices at a fast food restaurant or anything else for that matter. Of course, raise mim wage, raise everyone's salary and no one gains a darn thing. I wonder how many of those workers realize they can easily be replaced by a machine. Sure, the machines cost a lot, but they save money over the long run and the higher wages go, the more people that will be affected.
Some 30 years ago I remember working first as an assistant manager and later as a manager as much as 60 to 70 hours a week. Got no additional pay for all those hours over 40. Dividing my pay by hours worked showed I was making a measly hourly wage. There was no union for management. Yet the CEO took home big extra bucks. That was not right.
I don't think there is a person in the country that doesn't think CEOs are over paid, but these new laws are not going to change that. All they are going to do is hurt those they are designed to help.
What you are saying is like our son who signed a baseball contract out of high school in the 80s. He was taken in the 6th round and got a huge bonus of $25,000. Today, there are players that are taken in the 15th to 20th round that won't sign for less than a milion. Who is being hurt? Not the pro teams, not the kids that sign but the public. An average family can not afford to attend a sports event anymore unless they save for a long time or it is their once a month family outing.
I prefer to have these workers income increased by resetting the Federal deductible for income tax at 50 grand or so. Make up the taxes "lost" by increasing the tax on the top 1% or so.
Instead of one 50 hour per week manager companies will switch to two co-managers working 25 hours per week. Simple.
No, they wont, they will just make sure everyone only works the 40 hours they are supposed to.
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.
