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.
A federal judge on Tuesday blocked an Obama administration rule to extend mandatory overtime pay to more than 4 million workers from taking effect, imperiling one of the outgoing president's signature achievements for boosting wages.
U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant in Sherman, Texas, agreed with 21 states and a coalition of business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that the rule is unlawful and granted their motion for a nationwide injunction. It was to take effect Dec. 1.
The rule would have doubled to $47,500 the maximum salary a worker can earn and still be eligible for mandatory overtime pay.
The states and business groups claimed in lawsuits filed in September that were later consolidated that the drastic increase in the salary threshold was arbitrary.
Mazzant, who was appointed by President Obama, held that the rule runs counter to the federal law that governs who is eligible for overtime. The law does not allow the Labor Department to determine eligibility based only on salary levels, Mazzant said.
Lots of abuses with the salaried positions but on the other hand one size does not fit all. Suppose I have a position that requires no skill but a warm body be present 24/7. I could for example offer a 3 day shift; 8 hours of work each day and minimal hours for whatever reason I need them there. The employee can spend the rest of the day playing Xbox, sleeping or whatever. 3 days off before their next shift..... That may not be for everyone but there is a lot of people that would not mind that schedule at all.
I can cover that position with two employees. If I have to pay them overtime I'm just going to employ more people. and they can all come in 5 days a week for their 8 hour shift.
Lots of abuses with the salaried positions but on the other hand one size does not fit all. Suppose I have a position that requires no skill but a warm body be present 24/7. I could for example offer a 3 day shift; 8 hours of work each day and minimal hours for whatever reason I need them there. The employee can spend the rest of the day playing Xbox, sleeping or whatever. 3 days off before their next shift..... That may not be for everyone but there is a lot of people that would not mind that schedule at all.
I can cover that position with two employees. If I have to pay them overtime I'm just going to employ more people. and they can all come in 5 days a week for their 8 hour shift.
I am an IT contractor. I get paid for my time, not what I do.
You are an in dependent business man, who happens to be a contractor. Maybe, you want to seek out gigs that pay you for result, not hours. I only say that because for 10 years I was a consultant. Not coder, or sys admin. I got off the time clock, so to speak, after I realized my clients were paying for a certain result. I rejiggered my contracts based upon mutually agreed upon results. It was very freeing. That all said. To each her own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm
I am an IT contractor. I get paid for my time, not what I do.
I am an IT contractor. I get paid for my time, not what I do.
If that is what you expect that is fine, the point is there is others that want to work minimal hours of actual work and play Xbox the rest of the time if they get three days off in a row.
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.