Poll of the Day > Republicans pass bill to allow companies to not have to pay employees overtime

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/02/news/economy/overtime-pay-bill-passes-house/index.html
---

So basically you still get paid... you do realize that the way government currently taxes your overtime, you basically get paid the same as if you weren't working overtime hours anyway

Looks like they welched on allowing employees to be fairly compensated for their time

OhhhJa posted...

So basically you still get paid... you do realize that the way government currently taxes your overtime, you basically get paid the same as if you weren't working overtime hours anyway

Your tax rate doesn't go up by 1.5x because you work outside of a normal pay scale, they aren't tied together.
---

Payed time off rather than overtime? Sign me up.
---

The problem with having extra time off is you have to fit it in with the other members of your staff. Having more money at least removes the bureaucracy of having to making everything fit to your liking.
---

OhhhJa posted...

So basically you still get paid... you do realize that the way government currently taxes your overtime, you basically get paid the same as if you weren't working overtime hours anyway

Yeah. It's just like winning a lottery. But you worked to win that lottery.
---

Paid overtime ensures shit still gets done and everyone's compensated for it.

If you give people time off in exchange for extra hours worked, then by the end of the year all your production is going to grind to a halt because everyone needs to cash all of that out.

IMO it might be better to mix the two. You get extra time off for extra hours worked but if you don't use it by the end of the year, it gets cashed out at 1.5x your payrate (so you can't carry over overtime PTO earned year-to-year).
---

Zangulus posted...

Solid Sonic posted...

The problem with having extra time off is you have to fit it in with the other members of your staff. Having more money at least removes the bureaucracy of having to making everything fit to your liking.

This is a large component. Almost everyone who works here puts in a large volume of overtime. Most people work 55 or more hours a week. That's 30 hours of PTO a paycheck.

Like hell theyre going to allow everyone to burn that much time off.

That's a poorly run business. You all must be real happy.
---

Solid Sonic posted...

IMO it might be better to mix the two. You get extra time off for extra hours worked but if you don't use it by the end of the year, it gets cashed out at 1.5x your payrate (so you can't carry over overtime PTO earned year-to-year).

That's basically how my company deals with it.

We get paid at 1.5x if we choose to get it paid out in cash. We get it at a 1:1 ratio of we choose to have time off.

But we can carry it over year to year. If it gets high enough, they'll insist some of it gets paid out though. I'm not sure what the threshold for that is though, since I'm at over 300 hours of banked time and they haven't forced me to take it yet <_<
---

So if i work more i just get more time off?
---

Also, if they want to allow employers to do this, there really needs to be stipulations that allow the worker to actually take the time off.

No point in accumulating all that bank time if the company never let's you use it (and presumably just pays it out at a 1:1 ratio when you quit).
---

my company is kind of crappy. we can't take certain days off and if we get fired we dont get our pto or vacation paid.

So if this law passes, i can work overtime and then get fired the next week and not get paid for it.
---

I guess it comes down to the line of work on whether or not the overtime pay or paid time off is better. In my engineering office it is rare to have any time off conflicts with other coworkers so the paid time off might be more ideal. I have never been turned down for my vacation requests.

In retail, restaurant, or other service work that paid time off might not get used the way the employee want to use it. I assume though holiday pay is still 2x? What if some worker is doing overtime during a holiday? Is he/she going to get even more paid time off?
---

So I know Erik won't know this but this is like, already a well established thing for salaried employees.

Often times when we consistently work more than 40 hours for whatever time period, in my industry it's usually up until/after a major tech deployment, we get comp days. We're salaried, so overtime doesn't really exist. But the business recognizes that their employees are being over worked and compensates them by giving them X amount of days off on top of their regular paid time off.

Most of the people I've worked with prefer it this way. I do too. Most of the companies I've worked for have said that employees are far more effective if they're made to take time off rather than just be paid for the time they would have taken off. Otherwise they get burnt out.
---

Smarkil posted...

So I know Erik won't know this but this is like, already a well established thing for salaried employees.

Often times when we consistently work more than 40 hours for whatever time period, in my industry it's usually up until/after a major tech deployment, we get comp days. We're salaried, so overtime doesn't really exist. But the business recognizes that their employees are being over worked and compensates them by giving them X amount of days off on top of their regular paid time off.

Most of the people I've worked with prefer it this way. I do too. Most of the companies I've worked for have said that employees are far more effective if they're made to take time off rather than just be paid for the time they would have taken off. Otherwise they get burnt out.

Sorry, but just because salaried people don't get paid OT that doesn't make it ok to fuck over hourly employees.
---

Erik_P posted...

Sorry, but just because salaried people don't get paid OT that doesn't make it ok to fuck over hourly employees.

Yeah, getting fucked so hard by the mean old corporation. Forcing you to take a vacation and be happy and shit. Or more aptly the big old mean corporation having the option to give you vacation time OR pay you overtime.

Those dastardly meanies.
---

If you're working a job that consistently has you banking PTO you are likely to find it difficult to actually use the PTO before needing to have your hours paid out 1:1, rather than getting that sweet time and a half to begin with.
---

Smarkil posted...

Erik_P posted...

Sorry, but just because salaried people don't get paid OT that doesn't make it ok to fuck over hourly employees.

Yeah, getting fucked so hard by the mean old corporation. Forcing you to take a vacation and be happy and shit. Or more aptly the big old mean corporation having the option to give you vacation time OR pay you overtime.

Those dastardly meanies.

I don't think you actually read the article.

The measure, backed by Republicans, would let employers give workers paid time off instead of time-and-a-half pay the next time they put in extra hours. The vote tally was largely along party lines, with no Democrats voting in favor of the bill. Six Republicans also voted against it.

They aren't saying you get a vacation instead of working OT. They're saying instead of paying you 1.5x for OT anything over 40 hours will be paid out of your vacation hours, so you lose vacation. Which means you can't take actual time off later on.
---

Erik_P posted...

The measure, backed by Republicans, would let employers give workers paid time off instead of time-and-a-half pay the next time they put in extra hours. The vote tally was largely along party lines, with no Democrats voting in favor of the bill. Six Republicans also voted against it.


They aren't saying you get a vacation instead of working OT. They're saying instead of paying you 1.5x for OT anything over 40 hours will be paid out of your vacation hours, so you lose vacation. Which means you can't take actual time off later on.

Lol how are you getting that out of that statement?
---

Zangulus posted...

Doctor Foxx posted...

If you're working a job that consistently has you banking PTO you are likely to find it difficult to actually use the PTO before needing to have your hours paid out 1:1, rather than getting that sweet time and a half to begin with.

Not to mention a lot of states allow Limits on PTO accrual. And everything over that is lost.

Yep I ran up against a limit at one job that had me working 15+ hours above full time every week. Couldn't take time off. Or if I did I'd be in a bigger OT hole than before trying to play catch up.

But that employer was good. They paid extra for any hour past the 35 hours weekly or past 8 hours in a day. I just couldn't manage to take time off and had to have it paid out. Would have been much better just getting time and a half to start. Instead I got the hours 1:1 in a lump payment that was heavily taxed.
---

Smarkil posted...

Erik_P posted...

The measure, backed by Republicans, would let employers give workers paid time off instead of time-and-a-half pay the next time they put in extra hours. The vote tally was largely along party lines, with no Democrats voting in favor of the bill. Six Republicans also voted against it.


They aren't saying you get a vacation instead of working OT. They're saying instead of paying you 1.5x for OT anything over 40 hours will be paid out of your vacation hours, so you lose vacation. Which means you can't take actual time off later on.

Lol how are you getting that out of that statement?

You actually think they'll give you more PTO instead of whatever the standard is for that company? No, they're going to take it out of your PTO. And even if I'm reading this wrong, you're still getting paid less.

That's the whole fucking point.
---

Erik_P posted...

You actually think they'll give you more PTO instead of whatever the standard is for that company? No, they're going to take it out of your PTO. And even if I'm reading this wrong, you're still getting paid less.

That's the whole fucking point.

You are reading it wrong. It gives you extra paid time off, the ability to accumulate additional PTO.

But you're also correct, they don't have to pay you any extra. It's only to save the employer money.
---

Zangulus posted...

You're ignoring the issue of not GETTING the PTO you've earned that way due to scheduling conflicts or other corporate rule structures that aren't covered under this supposed bill.

Not to mention the drop in pay. Simply being able to sit at home while my work backs up isn't going to make me happy or well rested. Nor is it going to give me the option of making extra money to do things short of taking a second job.

But this is just giving the company the OPTION. I would assume a well managed business would understand the limited amount of time that their employees has to take time off. Your business for instance, I would guess, would say, "Ok we can't afford to have Zang out of the shop for an extra week, so we'll just pay him PTO"

I'm not saying it's perfect. But I think giving businesses an option is a good thing. I believe as a skilled employee they wouldn't want to make you mad.
---

Huh

If the company I work for does this I'm going to have over 7 weeks off a year.

I like that.
---

Smarkil posted...

Your business for instance, I would guess, would say, "Ok we can't afford to have Zang out of the shop for an extra week, so we'll just pay him PTO"

But that screws Zang out of what would have been overtime pay of time and a half. Instead he has to bank hours and have them paid out at the regular rate at a later date. The employee loses if the employer takes the option away and can't actually offer the time off.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

But that screws Zang out of what would have been overtime pay of time and a half. Instead he has to bank hours and have them paid out at the regular rate at a later date. The employee loses if the employer takes the option away and can't actually offer the time off.

Again, it's just an option. If I had already hit my PTO accrual cap and they asked me to work overtime I'd just say "Hey, I'm already at my cap can I just get overtime?".

I know people like to think of businesses as these evil things, but the majority of employers in the US are considered small businesses. Sure, you might get have a hard time negotiating around this shit at Walmart or something, but those giant businesses typically have no-time off policies anyway.

And is it really 'screwing' someone out of something when it's something they shouldn't expect to have anyway? Overtime is exactly that - working more than the average amount you should expect to be working. Zang is the exception in that he essentially gets to choose the amount of overtime he gets. Most people have rare instances of it.

Link for the average amount of overtime by industry. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t18.htm
---

Smarkil posted...

Again, it's just an option. If I had already hit my PTO accrual cap and they asked me to work overtime I'd just say "Hey, I'm already at my cap can I just get PTO?".

If you're at your cap why would you ask for more PTO that can't be saved and just be paid out rather than being paid the hours at a higher rate?

Unless you mean you'd ask for time off when your employer is currently asking you to put in extra hours. In which case good luck.

Smarkil posted...

I know people like to think of businesses as these evil things, but the majority of employers in the US are considered small businesses.

The majority of employers may be, but are the majority of employees working for small or large businesses? Small businesses don't necessarily have more employee friendly policy anyway.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

Smarkil posted...
Again, it's just an option. If I had already hit my PTO accrual cap and they asked me to work overtime I'd just say "Hey, I'm already at my cap can I just get PTO?".

If you're at your cap why would you ask for more PTO that can't be saved and just be paid out rather than being paid the hours at a higher rate?

I meant request overtime, not PTO.

Doctor Foxx posted...

Smarkil posted...
I know people like to think of businesses as these evil things, but the majority of employers in the US are considered small businesses.

The majority of employers may be, but are the majority of employees working for small or large businesses? Small businesses don't necessarily have more employee friendly policy anyway.

Yes, the majority of employees in the US are working for small businesses.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristie-arslan/five-big-myths-about-amer_b_866118.html

But large businesses only employ about 38 percent of the private sector workforce while small businesses employ 53 percent of the workforce. In fact, over 99 percent of employing organizations are small businesses and more than 95 percent of these businesses have fewer than 10 employees. The reality is that most Americans are employed by a very small business that has little in common with the tiny sliver of the business demographic represented by corporate America.

It depends entirely on what you mean by 'employee friendly'. But your accomplishments are far more likely to be recognized and businesses are more likely to treat you as a valued employee. It's a pretty common understanding that you'll be treated better under a small business as you're not just a 'number' but a face that the boss has to look into.
---

"Unlimited paid overtime" = "we could pay you more for this work but you make us more money for those first 40 hours."

I thought this was already a thing. It's called being salaried.

If I understand it correctly, paid vacation leave is not required across the States, right? I don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth too much but politicians being politicians, regardless of party, I have a hard time believing they always have the common people's well being in their hearts. By giving folks paid vacation instead of overtime pay could this indirectly be an attempt to fight against future bills that would required paid vacation leave across the States?

McMorris statement of

I don't think there's anything more powerful than giving them more control over their time so that they can make the best decisions for themselves and their families

got me wondering why paid vacation time isn't a standard thing along with jury pay being a standard thing as well.
---

Zangulus posted...

Not all salaried employees get comp time like that.

This is an asinine thing to say because it implies that some do which was the whole point.

Smarkil posted...

Yes, the majority of employees in the US are working for small businesses.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristie-arslan/five-big-myths-about-amer_b_866118.html

Hmm, Statistics Bureau disagrees

https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/econ/g12-susb.pdf

In 2012, large enterprises employed 59.9 million people (51.6 percent of all employees), very small enterprises employed 20.4 million people (17.6 percent), small enterprises employed 19.4 million people (16.7 percent), and medium enterprises employed 16.3 million people (14.0 percent). See Figure 1.

Additionally:

The share of employment at large enterprises has increased steadily since 2004 (see Table 2). In 2004, 49.1 percent of employees were employed by large enterprises. By 2012, 51.6 percent of employees were employed by large enterprises. The employment share of small enterprises decreased from 17.9 percent in 2004 to 16.6 percent in 2010 and 2011, before rising slightly to 16.7 percent in 2012.

Smaller businesses may offer more face time, but often have fewer resources available that could be used for compensation and employee benefits. Not that big employers are all that focused on employees.

It would take nearly 79,000 very small businesses (at minimum) to employ the same number that Wal-Mart does
---

Zangulus posted...

Don't forget that A lot of very Small Businesses are exempt from a lot of labor policies.

Yuuuuuup. The number also includes people that are private consultants operating under a business license and contractors.

People that do that often work for other companies at the same time.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

The number also includes people that are private consultants operating under a business license and contractors.

Ah yes, the typical argument that Uber keeps using. Personally, normal taxis wouldn't be so bad if they were at least convenient to use. Having to call for one only to find out said driver doesn't accept credit despite the dispatcher saying he does is a pain in the arse.
---

@Zangulus

i work in texas. also if i get fired or quit i don't get a PTO or Vacation check. i got to make sure i use up both before i quit.
---