Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

New FLSA Rule blocked by Federal Judge

Posted on 11/23/16 at 1:12 pm
Posted by Weekend Warrior79
Member since Aug 2014
16367 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 1:12 pm
FLSA Rule blocked by Federal Judge

Judge Mazzant placed a preliminary injunction on the proposed rule, simply preserves the existing overtime rule, until the court has a chance to review the merits of the case objecting to the revisions to the regulation.
Posted by NoSaint
Member since Jun 2011
11278 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 1:47 pm to
my company has already put all the scheduled changes on hold in response.
Posted by Serraneaux
South of 30a
Member since Mar 2014
19630 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 1:49 pm to
Thank god. However, we spent a lot of time and money meeting with labor laws to get an initial plan in place for the 12/1 deadline.
Posted by LSUEEAlum
Member since Oct 2013
797 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 2:16 pm to
There was a thread earlier on the political board. My wife was told yesterday she was getting a $5200 per year raise because of this. If her company takes it back she said she's quitting. Lol.
Posted by Serraneaux
South of 30a
Member since Mar 2014
19630 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 2:53 pm to
That sucks. We decided to not just give raises to get people over the threshold.
Posted by Lsut81
Member since Jun 2005
80124 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 4:27 pm to
Day late and a dollar short.... Ruling should have taken place weeks or months ago. A lot of companies invested tons of time and money into this bullshite legislation.
Posted by matthew25
Member since Jun 2012
9425 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 9:56 pm to
I fail to see how companies spent a lot of money on lawyers to comply with this rule. My company spent very little money when George Bush raised the threshold about 10 years ago.
Posted by Serraneaux
South of 30a
Member since Mar 2014
19630 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 11:07 pm to
That's impossible. Threshold was last raised in 1975, not 10 years ago. Get a clue. Labor lawyers helping form a brand new policy for OT that didn't exist before must be cheap.
Posted by matthew25
Member since Jun 2012
9425 posts
Posted on 11/23/16 at 11:47 pm to
Google is your friend. In 1975, the Ford administration raised the salary threshold (though not enough to fully account for inflation), but for 29 years after, no further adjustments were made, even though inflation rendered the salary threshold obsolete. The last adjustment, made 10 years ago by the Bush administration, raised the threshold to its current, insufficient level.

Apology accepted.
Posted by matthew25
Member since Jun 2012
9425 posts
Posted on 11/24/16 at 12:46 am to
Hope you and your mother had a good time getting drunk last night and playing Clue. More info for those on our northern border without most of their teef:

In its final rule, the Bush DOL raises the minimum weekly salary level required for exemption (where this requirement applies) to $455 per week, or $23,660 per year. This is a $300 per week increase from the current minimum salary requirement of $155 per week established nearly 30 years ago

Hope you didn't pay a high-priced labor lawyer for advice. But, you probably did.
Posted by Serraneaux
South of 30a
Member since Mar 2014
19630 posts
Posted on 11/24/16 at 8:13 am to
Sorry, but 2004 rule did absolutely nothing.

We had everyone salaried and let people come and go as they please as professionals. After the new ruling we had to form new policies, figure out a way to track time (do we get a new time tracking system?) with it being intrusive to new non exempt employees, figure out who can authorize and how the process was going to work, figure out who will just get a raise, re-word all job descriptions so the language will at least pass the duties test, ask two different sets of lawyers what was the minimum we could do for all of it. We ended up going with a plan that tried to minimize OT, didn't promote or raise salaries for a lot of people, and didn't invest in a time tracking system, because we felt things would change and we wanted to see how it was going to impact us before we spent any more money and time.
Posted by Lsut81
Member since Jun 2005
80124 posts
Posted on 11/24/16 at 9:42 am to
quote:

I fail to see how companies spent a lot of money on lawyers to comply with this rule


A lot had to analyze pay scales and job descriptions to see if people fell into the requirements of the rule... For a large organization, that isn't an easy task.

They then had to make whatever changes necessary to adhere to or avoid the requirements and update any corresponding policies and procedures around time and labor.
Posted by matthew25
Member since Jun 2012
9425 posts
Posted on 11/24/16 at 9:52 am to
Well then, the 2016 rule does little also.

We have 2300 employees, nearly 500 are not paid OT (they are exempt from OT). Run a spreadsheet of the 500 salaries. Which employees are over $47,600 and which are under. Make a management decision to pull up those within, say, 10% of $47,600.

It's not that difficult if you graduated a 2-year college. But I can see how you would have trouble.
Posted by Serraneaux
South of 30a
Member since Mar 2014
19630 posts
Posted on 11/24/16 at 4:21 pm to
I'm going to start calling you simple man.
Posted by Serraneaux
South of 30a
Member since Mar 2014
19630 posts
Posted on 11/24/16 at 4:23 pm to
Being exempt involves more than just making over the threshold. Of course, you already didn't know that. :(
Posted by reb13
Member since May 2010
10905 posts
Posted on 11/26/16 at 2:36 pm to
There are also exemptions that have to be interpreted and I deal with a lot of similar size companies (<5,000 employees) that have massive sales forces that have to be brought under the new guidelines.

Typically, I see it's the sales or production managers who are under the threshold and analysis has to be done to determine whether they can cut the workforce and give each manager more responsibility or move all to hourly.

But sure it's not rocket science but imagine the above analysis for a multinational company or a manufacturer with 800 sites in 50 different states. It's not as straight forward.
Posted by CaptainPanic
18.44311,-64.764021
Member since Sep 2011
25582 posts
Posted on 11/27/16 at 1:55 pm to
It seems like the Administrative Exemption could apply to most businesses, but the block was a huge win. Luckily, we didn't waste much time prepping for it.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram