- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Over employed - learned this term on Reddit
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:27 pm to SouthPlains
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:27 pm to SouthPlains
quote:
Motherfrickers in here arguing that you must give a full 40 hours of work per week to your employer or else it’s *insert made up legal claim* while posting on the OT in the middle of a work day.
Was just about to say this.
Tens of thousands of posts on TD during the work day, talkin about time theft.
0
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:28 pm to Chasin The Tiger
quote:
I know someone working 2 IT positions currently. They made over 500k last year and are a top performer at both jobs with 20+ years of experience. I have no problem with it. Companies will lay you off in a heartbeat. Gotta protect yourself and your family.
No one said you couldn't work multiple jobs. What's happening in this subreddit is people are LYING to their employers about their jobs.
Collecting multiple salaries.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:28 pm to dgnx6
quote:
I wish we could do this.
The only thing stopping you from working multiple jobs simultaneously is your ethical obligation to your employer? Maybe tell your boss to give you more work if you want to work more. You might even get promoted.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:28 pm to Oates Mustache
So at what point do these “incidental pauses” in the aggregate amount to not giving “full time” to an employer.
If someone is waiting 2 hours for another project to hit their inbox, why would you have an issue with them doing other work for another company on other company equipment?
If someone is waiting 2 hours for another project to hit their inbox, why would you have an issue with them doing other work for another company on other company equipment?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:28 pm to dgnx6
quote:
I'm not shitting on people, I wish we could do this.
I'm just stating that you lying to your employers will most likely lose you the job from all of them.
Same. I'm arguing that it's clearly wage theft, not that I agree with it. If we truly had a revamp of the typical work day, I think people would be surprised at the number of hours it takes to get things done efficiently.
Frankly, I'd rather them say, work 4 hours a day, or half the week, then the rest is yours, assuming you get the work done.
My time is more valuable to me than the money.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:29 pm to dgnx6
How are they lying to their employers? It's not their business. Last I checked, my salaried position doesn't require that I work 40 hours a week for them.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:31 pm to dgnx6
quote:
He lost all of his jobs because he was lying to them.
Damn, was he arrested and/or sued?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:32 pm to dgnx6
quote:
If you are using that work computer to complete work for another company, yes.
I'm convinced you can't read
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:33 pm to Artificial Ignorance
Larry Leo is “over employed”.
FACT!
FACT!
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:33 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
What law? You said that it's wage theft to work for 2 hours and then "do something else" without I guess telling your employer that you don't have anything to do.
What law is on the employer's side regarding fraud/theft if you work two hours a day, don't say anything about being short on work, and then watch movies the rest of the day while being available whenever someone calls or emails?
In Louisiana, R.S. 14:67 defines theft as taking anything of value, including wages (services), by fraudulent representation.
If you’re paid for 40 hours/week but knowingly work 10–15 and hide that fact, you’re misrepresenting your service to obtain pay.
That’s not “being efficient,” it’s theft under Louisiana law. Scale and intent matter, taking a lunch break isn’t fraud, but systematically doing personal work for most of the day while letting your employer believe you’re working is.
And again, I'm not saying I agree, read what I've posted after that. You can go search case after case if wage theft, employers are very successful against employees in these cases.
The law is written in a way that intentionally benefits the employer.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:35 pm to Oates Mustache
If you're a salaried employee, it's highly unlikely anywhere in your employment contract you are required to work 40 hours a week.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:35 pm to Chasin The Tiger
quote:
How are they lying to their employers? It's not their business. Last I checked, my salaried position doesn't require that I work 40 hours a week for them.
And this right here is the nuanced part of it. Some employers may not have concrete, written agreements or contracts with their employees, but the bigger ones do.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:35 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
The only thing stopping you from working multiple jobs simultaneously is your ethical obligation to your employer? Maybe tell your boss to give you more work if you want to work more. You might even get promoted.
Well currently my options would be to get a night job. Because I'm physically on a job site. I can't be two places at once.
This post was edited on 8/8/25 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:36 pm to dgnx6
quote:
I'm just stating that you lying to your employers will most likely lose you the job from all of them.
There is not a single person who has disagreed with this.
It's when you started going on about it being "illegal", that you got pushback.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:37 pm to Artificial Ignorance
quote:
Pathetic if you ask me.
Now the OT shits on people for working too much.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:38 pm to Epic Cajun
quote:
It's when you started going on about it being "illegal", that you got pushback.
That was sourced from the DOJ and department of labor.
You are pushing back on the government. Not me.
Oats post and literal statute and gets downvoted.
I'm sorry, but you guys are just wrong.
This post was edited on 8/8/25 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:38 pm to Oates Mustache
quote:
If you’re paid for 40 hours/week but knowingly work 10–15 and hide that fact
Give me an example of hiding that fact? Is just saying nothing hiding it? Are you legally obligated to request more work if you are folding a load of laundry because you finished what's been assigned to you?
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:39 pm to Oates Mustache
quote:
If you’re paid for 40 hours/week but knowingly work 10–15 and hide that fact, you’re misrepresenting your service to obtain pay.
How do you define "work" when you are a salaried employee? Part of my job as a salaried employee is being "available". I'm not an hourly employee, I don't have to document my hours in order to be paid.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:42 pm to dgnx6
quote:
That was sourced from the DOJ and department of labor.
There are instances where it "can" be illegal, for instance, if your employer bills your time out to a client for your "working" hours, then that is fraud if you aren't actually working those hours.
But being a salaried employee, and just not working a full 40 hours a week for your employer isn't in itself illegal.
Posted on 8/8/25 at 1:44 pm to Epic Cajun
You know what, I actually need to revise my comments for Louisiana after looking at case laws. The Louisiana Supreme Court says that general theft cannot be applied to labor. BTW, this has been a great discussion, especially as I sit here and heave my lungs off. 
State v. Gisclair
Annotate this Case
382 So. 2d 914 (1980)
STATE of Louisiana v. Clyde A. "Rock" GISCLAIR.
No. 65504.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
April 7, 1980.
Michael S. Fawer, Matthew H. Greenbaum, New Orleans, Jean E. Williams, New Orleans, for defendant-relator.
William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Pat Quinlan, Asst. Attys. Gen., for plaintiff-respondent.
DIXON, Chief Justice.
Between November 1, 1974 and July 1, 1975, Clyde A. "Rock" Gisclair, the assessor *915 for St. Charles Parish, was assisted in the renovation of his camp by several employees of the parish assessor's office. This work was performed during regular working hours and the only pay that the employees received was their salaries from the state. On June 3, 1977 the defendant was charged with two counts of theft[1] in violation of R.S. 14:67 and one count of public payroll fraud in violation of R.S. 14:138. The defendant, having waived his right to a jury trial, was tried by the trial judge and found not guilty on the charge of theft and public payroll fraud. Instead, he was found guilty of unauthorized use of movables: the services of state employees, in violation of R.S. 14:68, a responsive verdict to a charge of theft according to C.Cr.P. 814(A)(23). The defendant filed a motion for a new trial, urging that the verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence in that the trial judge's finding of guilt was based on a misinterpretation of R.S. 14:68. The motion was denied on January 26, 1979, and the defendant was sentenced to pay a fine of $100.00. Defendant's application for writs was granted to review his conviction.
The defendant was originally charged under the theft statute, R.S. 14:67, which provides:
"Theft is the misappropriation or taking of anything of value which belongs to another, either without the consent of the other to the misappropriation or taking, or by means of fraudulent conduct, practices, or representations. An intent to deprive the other permanently of whatever may be the subject of the misappropriation or taking is essential."
He was found guilty of unauthorized use of movables, R.S. 14:68, which provides:
State v. Gisclair
Annotate this Case
382 So. 2d 914 (1980)
STATE of Louisiana v. Clyde A. "Rock" GISCLAIR.
No. 65504.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
April 7, 1980.
Michael S. Fawer, Matthew H. Greenbaum, New Orleans, Jean E. Williams, New Orleans, for defendant-relator.
William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Pat Quinlan, Asst. Attys. Gen., for plaintiff-respondent.
DIXON, Chief Justice.
Between November 1, 1974 and July 1, 1975, Clyde A. "Rock" Gisclair, the assessor *915 for St. Charles Parish, was assisted in the renovation of his camp by several employees of the parish assessor's office. This work was performed during regular working hours and the only pay that the employees received was their salaries from the state. On June 3, 1977 the defendant was charged with two counts of theft[1] in violation of R.S. 14:67 and one count of public payroll fraud in violation of R.S. 14:138. The defendant, having waived his right to a jury trial, was tried by the trial judge and found not guilty on the charge of theft and public payroll fraud. Instead, he was found guilty of unauthorized use of movables: the services of state employees, in violation of R.S. 14:68, a responsive verdict to a charge of theft according to C.Cr.P. 814(A)(23). The defendant filed a motion for a new trial, urging that the verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence in that the trial judge's finding of guilt was based on a misinterpretation of R.S. 14:68. The motion was denied on January 26, 1979, and the defendant was sentenced to pay a fine of $100.00. Defendant's application for writs was granted to review his conviction.
The defendant was originally charged under the theft statute, R.S. 14:67, which provides:
"Theft is the misappropriation or taking of anything of value which belongs to another, either without the consent of the other to the misappropriation or taking, or by means of fraudulent conduct, practices, or representations. An intent to deprive the other permanently of whatever may be the subject of the misappropriation or taking is essential."
He was found guilty of unauthorized use of movables, R.S. 14:68, which provides:
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News