- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: What are employers doing for the new FLSA law?
Posted on 11/16/16 at 12:04 am to Breesus
Posted on 11/16/16 at 12:04 am to Breesus
quote:
The problem with this is if you suddenly go from 40,000 a year as a manager of a small cafe to $15 an hour think about how hard you get fricked with vacations and leave. Instead of getting paid tour salary you now do not get paid for time off and you cannot make that money back up because of overtime pay.
I agree with most of the other stuff you've said in the thread but you are incorrect here. Plenty of people on hourly get PTO, Sick leave, Vacation, etc. and it is not that difficult to avg the costs of that in. You don't have to be on salary to get benefits.
The changes are certainly going to happen, but in reality the salary threshold is pretty low I don't think its going to affect that many people below the threshold that routinely work more than 40 hours a week. I definitely agree the law is BS though.
I'll be honest that while I agree the law is BS if you have someone that is making under the threshold that works over 45 hours a week, as a manager or owner you are a jerk. Its one thing to work your butt off for good money, but if your company requires people to be working 50-60 hours for under $45,000 thats horrible. You are basically taking that job they thought they were hired at $18-20/ hour and actually paying them $12-14/ hour. That's a big difference.
Now, the one area this affects and may suck is seasonal work like bars, restaurants, service industry, etc. Where managers may work 50-60 hours during the season and then work 30-40 outside the season.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 12:06 am
0
Posted on 11/16/16 at 5:39 am to 13yearvet
I work for a Fortune 250 company and we went WAY too far in moving people's exemptions statuses around. 35% of our people used to be non-exempt and that number is moving to 81%. It has more to do with the DOL "duties test" than the pay range. Regardless, it's already been a management nightmare and will be for the next 60-90 days until the dust settles.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 5:56 am to 13yearvet
I own 4 stores and a big Outdoor power service center.
Only people on salary plus bonus are store managers and service managers . They are well above the minimum payscale.
Assistant Managers and below are hourly plus bonus.
Only people on salary plus bonus are store managers and service managers . They are well above the minimum payscale.
Assistant Managers and below are hourly plus bonus.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 5:56 am to ATXTiger64
quote:
my employer wants me to clock out when I lay down for a nap on the couch (never given proper sleeping accommodations usually a couch in a common area or a recliner for 5-7days at a time) because in his eyes I am not "providing a service." Even though I am required to stay on location and am usually woken up to answer questions and provide support.
Dept. of Labor says this:
"Waiting Time:
Whether waiting time is hours worked under the Act depends upon the particular circumstances. Generally, the facts may show that the employee was engaged to wait (which is work time) or the facts may show that the employee was waiting to be engaged (which is not work time). For example, a secretary who reads a book while waiting for dictation or a fireman who plays checkers while waiting for an alarm is working during such periods of inactivity. These employees have been "engaged to wait."
On-Call Time:
An employee who is required to remain on call on the employer's premises is working while "on call." An employee who is required to remain on call at home, or who is allowed to leave a message where he/she can be reached, is not working (in most cases) while on call. Additional constraints on the employee's freedom could require this time to be compensated."
Same publication talks about meal breaks, rest breaks, etc. LINK
Posted on 11/16/16 at 6:21 am to 13yearvet
The dumbass GM where I work qualified in the 'Highly Compensated Employees' category, dude got a fricking 19K/yr bump.
I about lost my shite. Dude is being overpaid by about 50k/yr now. It's lunacy at it's finest.
I about lost my shite. Dude is being overpaid by about 50k/yr now. It's lunacy at it's finest.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 6:29 am to ThatMakesSense
quote:Unless you're him.
It's lunacy at it's finest.
It's all about perspective.
As to the OP's question, a way around this is to convert currently salaried employees to hourly without their knowledge. Simply make up their punch-in & out times every week. Just a few keystrokes and you're there.
I agree that for employees below ~5-10% of the number, just go ahead and raise them to it.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 6:30 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 6:37 am to soccerfüt
quote:
Unless you're him.
I guess. The company I work for is all about the HCE, everyone else can suck a dick, basically.
All assistants that were on salary last year, were forced to go hourly in advance of this.
Say for instance a 40k/yr employee...$19.23/hr..was dropped to $17/hr, but with the guarantee of working 50-55 hrs during the busy season to adjust back to their original 40k/yr salary.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 6:46 am to Twenty 49
quote:
Twenty 49
Yep, I've read through the PDFs...and IMO I would consider what I'm doing as "engaged to wait." However my employer doesn't see it that way. He claims there is a lot of "gray" area and doesn't want to pay me the full 24 because he would more than likely have to pay me more than I make on the day rate and salary style of pay.
Unless I'm interpreting it wrong, which is possible...I am not a labor law expert.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 6:47 am to TigerFred
quote:
I will wait for the fines
they will never come,
Trump waives this one off.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:41 am to ATXTiger64
Depends...are you standing on the promises or are you sitting on the premises?
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:42 am to ATXTiger64
A visit to the local department of labor will remove all the grey color with a quickness. They love taking down the evil business owner. It's sickening how they relish the job.
But some of these chintzy owners that don't keep up with the law and damn near abuse their people actually need to be put straight.
But before proceeding, I'd advice an exit strategy consisting of another job offer while you document the time periods you were required to be waiting on work.
But some of these chintzy owners that don't keep up with the law and damn near abuse their people actually need to be put straight.
But before proceeding, I'd advice an exit strategy consisting of another job offer while you document the time periods you were required to be waiting on work.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 7:44 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:47 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
And where salaries and hourly are working together, they''all know who makes less than $47460 or whatever it is. And the salaried ones will get dumped on because no overtime.
Yup. Well said. A big problem of this new law. Hourly employees can't get overtime and salaried employees are working more than ever and getting more work dumped on them.
also, lots of jealousy and division because it is obvious who makes what. Typical Obama stuff.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:05 am to ATXTiger64
There are a lot of firms that handle FLSA work for the same reason employers should not jus say to hell with the new rules: you can get attorney's fees.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:15 am to Breesus
It also protects employees who are put on "salary" but then are abused on hours.
For example: I worked for a local restaurant years ago as an assistant gm and was put on a salary of 27k plus productivity bonus, but no benefits. My standard work week was supposed to be 50 hours, but in reality, ranged from 60-80 hours. Ever short staffed? Manager has to cover.
The employers knew that they could work me at whatever schedule they wanted without having to compensate me for the extra time because I was "exempt" and they sure as hell took advantage of that. Only stayed 6 months at that pace before moving on. The person who replaced me demanded that they be put on hourly and subsequently never worked more than 50 hours a week.
Sure, there will be ripple effects and a lot of people will be screwed because of it. But, don't act like it has zero benefit either.
For example: I worked for a local restaurant years ago as an assistant gm and was put on a salary of 27k plus productivity bonus, but no benefits. My standard work week was supposed to be 50 hours, but in reality, ranged from 60-80 hours. Ever short staffed? Manager has to cover.
The employers knew that they could work me at whatever schedule they wanted without having to compensate me for the extra time because I was "exempt" and they sure as hell took advantage of that. Only stayed 6 months at that pace before moving on. The person who replaced me demanded that they be put on hourly and subsequently never worked more than 50 hours a week.
Sure, there will be ripple effects and a lot of people will be screwed because of it. But, don't act like it has zero benefit either.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News